eugene said:
Ok, the PS3 matched a system that had virtually no international presence outside of Amercia, no killer game until a year later with Gears of War, and whose previous system was outsold by 100 million units. Im sure Sony had a higher bar to reach than to merely match Xbox's first year. And note: Xbox's second year killed PS3's first year and in reality, that matters more. |
Well just as you said :D
1.) They were the ONLY "next gen" console on the market for an entire year.
2.) During it's second year it pushed numerous "AAA" status titles out pushing it into overdrive to squash PS3's userbase, while the PS3 didn't release ANY big guns till almost a year into it's life, even then it only released 1 title. (Ratchet and Clank).
3.) The PS3 was $500 and $600 dollars with no games.
4.) Ask yourself honestly, who will have a better second year? How about a third year? The Playstation brand is like a locomotive engine, it really is. They are so slow out of the gates sometimes, but man once it takes off they keep drilling it pretty hard. Microsoft's put out some pretty good software for there second year, but as you stated they don't have much support outside of America, and that will only come back to hurt them in the end. There getting there, but it's definitely a slower process than they want it to be. I really do think SONY has a much higher chance to get a substantially better second year.
From 0 to KICKASS in .stupid seconds.
