dharh said:
Cheebee said:
dharh said:
Cheebee said:
kojero said:
Oh, let's not forget to look at the numbers for PS2... it still sells today, and it's been in the market for over 10 years now. For you Nintendo fanboys, sales figures for DS is not there yet.
And it's not really a competition between Nintendo or Sony. Nitendo is targeting females with the DS and younger and casual gamers on the Wii, because they know hard core gamers are for Xbox360 or PS3. A comparison between the three would be like comparing Bottled Water to the rivalry between Pepsi and Coke. |
Lol, sorry but I just have to reply to this... You do know that while PS2 has sold around 134 million LTD in over a decade, DS is actually close to beating that with roughly 124 million sold LTD in around half that time (5 years)? ...Right?
|
It's hard to tell if this is really good or not. The DS should ultimately double PS2 sales if it want's to boast itself over the PS2. It's a handheld, whereas the PS2 was an expensive console. I wonder if the DS will even be selling 5 years from now.
|
Honestly... you're saying you're not sure if it's a good thing for DS to be the best- and fastest selling games machine in history? Please. -_-' Some people seem to want to spin everything. Yeah sure, if DS doesn't sell at least 270 million (double that of PS2) it won't be as successful as the PS2! You actually believe that, then? Come on, man, that's, just... weird. XD By your logic, PSP's HW sales would be the worst failure in the history of gaming, 'cos it's only sold 55 million.
Whether or not DS will still be selling 5 years from now is irrelevant. Fact is, by then it'll already have passed the PS2 by a LOT. What's more, it's been highly profitable for Nintendo from the beginning. Who cares if it'll sell for 5, 10 or 15 years, as long as it's highly successful and profitable? We all know the PS2 has sold as long as it has because PS3 didn't live up to expectations. If PS3 had been a raging success from launch (as predicted by a lot of people), PS2 would've died off much sooner, and PS3 would've taken its place.
|
I don't really believe in the same failure/win crap the everyone else seems to believe in. The DS can't be a failure at this point, nor really can the PSP be a failure. I was merely saying that when comparing the PS2 vs the DS, one should look at what each type of game device the two things are. Of course the DS sells faster than the PS2 did, its a portable device. The question i'm asking is, is it selling as fast a portable device _could_ or is lacking something that would make it sell 3 times faster than the PS2. By my logic the PSP certainly isn't matching the potential curve.
Or to put it simply, everyone else is all goo goo impressed about DS sales, i'm not. I'm merely more interested in how its doing, how will it be doing in the future, will it have a 10 year life span, etc. Also we should keep a keen eye on the difference between the DS and the DSi, which imo are two different devices.
|
Hmm, well, people's opinions differ, I guess. 
If you're not impressed by DS sales, then that's fine, but I'm quite sure you're about the only person on earth who thinks so.
Of course there's a difference between handhelds and consoles, but the difference not THAT significant. Imo, when a machine's topping the sales charts week after week, month after month and year after year it's really irrelevant to question whether it *could* sell more. Of course it could, if people had more money to spend, if there were even more quality games for it, if there wasn't an economic crisis, if babies could play it, if developers would start making games for the thing exclusively... But those are all irrelevant and nonsensical.
Are you also unimpressed by PS2's sales? 'Cos you should be, you should ask the same questions about that one, yes it's sold fine, but what would have to happen for it to sell 3 times as much? Could it? Could it top 300 million? Come on.
