Kasz216 said:
goforgold said:
jarrod said:
goforgold said:
jarrod said:
| goforgold said:
was Sega able to support the Dreamcast?
|
Uh, yes? Sega released more Dreamcast games than Sony has PS3 games...
|
which is exactly why Sega is JUST a software manufacturer now.
hint: just releasing game doesn't mean you can support your console
|
If Sega had lost as much money on Dreamcast as Sony has on PS3, there wouldn't be a Sega today. What you're saying here follows little logic, a product like PS3 would immediately have bankrupted almost any "games only" company, possibly Nintendo even. Are you saying Sony is literally "too big to fail" or something? ;)
|
no I'm not saying they're too big at all, any amount of fuck up can destroy the entirety of Sony, it's just ps3 loses don't come within an inch of a mile of that amount of fuck up lol
|
I don't see how you come to that conclusion. The PS3 has lost Sony more money then the Dreamcast... and was at a more advantagous position. The PS3 was a much bigger screwup then the Dreamcast starting off. The only difference was, Sony was a bigger company and able to shrug through it. Even when this generation is done... the PS3 likely will have lost Sony more money then the Dreamcast.
|
that was the point of the enitre debate.
and I totally agree with everything else
