EMAA up

[NYANKS]

Immortal said:

Torillian said:

True, it's just one of the reasons, but Metallicube has said time and time again he thinks that it makes the numbers unfair.  And with this I disagree, because being available in more areas is just Sony utilizing their resources like MS making XBL or Nintendo making games that sell like gangbusters or having a dedicated fanbase.  Is it unfair that Sony's machine is the most expensive?  no, because that's Sony's fault, just like it is Nintendo's and MS's fault that they haven't expanded out into more countries for distribution.

That's not exactly the same thing. The reason Sony gets to have those markets is because of its other markets (TVs and stuff) which give it distribution methods and brand recognition over there. That's an advantage given to them because of something non-gaming. It's something Nintendo and MS couldn't get unless they felt like throwing money down a black hole.

For fanboyish purposes, where we compare consoles against each other, that should be considered an unfair advantage since the advantage is rooted in something else that the company does, not gaming.

Of course, when we're actually doing unbiased analysis, it doesn't matter where the hell or why the hell it sold, it just did. But that's not what we're doing, :P.

All 3 companies got started and made money doing something unonvolved with video games, even Nintendo if I'm not mistaken.  You talk about throwing money down a black hole.  Without the insane amount of money made by Windows, MS might not have been able to even penetrate this market.  I'd say their biggest advantage is money, which is largely not from games.  I think a large amount of Nintendos fortune comes from an employee, not sure where that stands, but being responsible for like 40% of their success (arbitrary number for lolz) is a big advantage.  Sony, they have diversity, which is mirrored in their consoles funnily enough imo.    They have those advantages, it's totally fair.