dbot said:
dschumm said:
I always find this arguement frustrating. The PS2 and PS3 don't exist in bubbles serperate from each other. Same as the Wii and PS3. Wether you like to believe it or not some people have purchased the Wii and because of the have delayed or canceled plans to buy a PS3. Same with PS2. Some people who went to the store specifically chose to get a PS2 instead of a PS3 and now are probably not buying a PS3 any time soon. I think that huge PS2 sales are HURTING Sony not helping.
I would make the arguement that the portables are competing with the PS3 as well to some extent(see Japan). But I am not going to waste anyone's time convincing them of that.
Most PS2 consumers are either replacing a broken PS2 or are late generation purchasers, who wont be selecting a system until long after the war is over. They will wait unitil the one of the wii/ps3/360 is under $150 and has the lion's share of the games produced.
Stop repeating Sony's talking points. I agree that Sony had a better year than people wanted to give them credit for but 2007 proved that last generation's influence isn't going to decide anything.
|
I am not aware that I am repeating any "talking points". I have been hesitant to post on this site because it seems as though any pro-sony or pro-ms comments are immediately dismissed as being "fan-boys". I assure you that I am not a fan-boy. Personally, I think the Wii's sales should be compared solely to the PS2's sales (standard definition and sub $300) and the 360 to the PS3 (high definition and higher price points). |
Why on earth would you not compare two competing products? The higher price point does not put the other consoles in a different market. If it did we would compare 360 Core sales to 360 Premium. I would bet your average consumer does not want to buy more than one game console in a generation. As a result any console sold by your competitor can be viewed as a bad thing for all competing consoles.
