"PS3 Domination" the coined phrase

[Final-Fan]

Bursche said:

ssj12 said:

Final-Fan said:

ssj12 said:
Many people on this forums are posting about the "PS3 domination" and how it was supposed to start with game X, then apparently game Y, then game Z. Well the basic idea of the "PS3 domination" is to give customers a reason to buy the PS3 and move consoles. Domination, heck just sales matching, can only happen if product 1 starts selling better and beter slowly then product 2.

The phrase was coined because of the sales boost for PS3 sales due to a game that was released.

Now "PS3 Domination" started when the console was released as it sold a large amount of consoles, Wii domination started when it was released, 360 domination started when it was released. Now with 3 consoles on the market the word domination has been abused because the market cant easily be dominated but it can be won.

Each game released adds more value to the console. More game, more customers. The more quality games the better. Games like Motorstorm, Ninja Gaiden Sigma, Warhawk, Heavenly Sword, Uncharted, etc. have all improved Sony's stance in world market.

The more reason customers have to purchase a console/product the better that console/product will "dominate" the market.

Sony is improving upon gamer's wants for games. This will allow them to "dominate" or win over more and more of the global market.

I'm hoping this solves the whole "PS3 Domination" on these forums at least.

ssj12 said:

Avinash_Tyagi said:
dom·i·na·tion (dm-nshn) n.
1. a. Control or power over another or others.
b. The exercise of such control or power

Only DS and Wii have this

The DS yes, the Wii even though it is selling insanely well I will say no. The Wii doesnt control over 50% of the market. Once it does yes thats total domination but I seriously am doubting it will happen or if it does it will last very long.

Now Like I said through my whole editorial, if you want to call it that, the word domination is misused quite a bit. The word specifically should never be used till console X controls 50+% of the market.

You appear to have completely reversed position. Was your OP supposed to be satire? If so, I'm afraid it's far too subtle for the Internet.

What I said isnt a reversal at all. Its one in the same.

Nintendo is dominating the handheld gaming market but its just as easily lost as it was to have gained. The reason why both industries are labeled as handheld wars and console wars. They fight for market share and win or loss they will fight the war to the end of the generation so it is not a true dominations even of they dominate 50+% of the market as it is quite easily to lose that and have another console/handheld/product take control.

This is not like last gen that any competitor will dominate anyone else. It will be a close race, a hard fought war.

Youre mixing up the term "domination" and associating it with the majority. Domination is the plurality of it. Whoever has the most marketshare in the end, with the most units sold, is dominating. While dominating has too strong of a tone for a very close race, you can call what the war is now dominating, or at least it will become dominating. Nintendo has come from behind and the margin between it and its competitors is increasing everyday. It is dominating.

(emphasis added by me)
I agree with the "plurality" basis of Bursche's definition. But that is irrelevant to the following:

Observe the bolded portions of your posts, ssj12. In your first post, you say that the 360 "dominated" at its release -- despite the fact that it was not competing with any other current system. But I suppose it had 100% of the next-gen market, and so fits the second post's definition of 'Console A dominates when it has X>50% marketshare'. But then you say that the Wii "dominated" at its launch as well even though at the time it was starting from 0% marketshare! And you also say that the PS3 "dominated" when it had really good sales even though it has not had either 50% marketshare or 50% of sales!

It seems clear that the first post interprets "domination" to mean "sells really well" or "sells better than the competition". The second post defines "domination" explicitly to mean "Console A has achieved and is maintaining over 50% marketshare." How do you reconcile these to mean the same thing?

On another note, I myself would define "domination" to mean "has a great deal more marketshare than any competitor" or "is selling a great deal more than any competitor". So, even if the Wii fails to achieve 50% marketshare (I believe it will succeed), 48% marketshare vs. (let's say) 28% and 24% is definitely "domination". And even if you disagree with that, surely you would concede that that scenario would be very far from "a close race"!