Wow, just wow.
This entire thread was like one big exercise in missing the point.
Statements like this:
"The 360's userbase on Nov 19th, 2006 might have been balanced out by the fact that all the games still selling on the system but released prior to Nov 19th weren't being counted. "
Are why Legend couldn't win this debate. I mean WTF? How in the hell does comparing games released in the same period "balance" the significantly larger install base at the beginning of the comparison? That doesn't even begin to try and make sense, it is just flat out wrong....very very wrong. God I hope that was a moment of brain fart and he doesn't actually believe that.
This analysis couldn't really be much simpler. You have the 360 which is getting a very large investment of resources over the period in question, and it is producing the most revenue. Then you have the Wii which is getting a marginal investment at best which is producing a very respectable amount of revenue. The comparison is not all positive 1 way or the other. And the real problem is that the factor that matters most (investment yield) is unavailable for comparison.
There is so much more to say, but its not really worth it.
 |
| To Each Man, Responsibility |
