“Sorry but it's blatantly obvious that the PS3 will overtake the 360's lifetime sales and it was just as obvious last year.”
This is it, this was my entire point. This was the exact statement. Nothing more, nothing less. Everything else I said was in support of this.
Me: The 360 has been on the market longer and it has little more to gain from price cuts, new models, peripherals or services.
You: There is still great demand for the 360, yet it has little to gain from price cuts and new models? Are you really under the illusion further price cuts wouldn't stimulate 360 sales? Especially considering it shares most of PS3's library? Nonsense.
Me: Every Boxing Week and New Years sale since December 2010 has seen the 360 on sale for $130 or less. Price really isn't that much of an obstacle to 360 adoption. Also, you misinterpret "little to gain" as "wouldn't stimulate". little =/= nothing. The 360 has little to gain from further price cuts when compared to the PS3 = fact. Price is a bigger obstacle for the PS3 than the 360 = fact. The PS3's entry model is more expensive, therefore a price cut will benefit it to a much larger degree = fact.
You: I personally have never seen the Xbox 360 for $130. The cheapest I've seen is $150 during Black Friday. Those tend to disappear quickly. Eitherway, those are a very limited amount. In case you're under the illusion everyone is getting a 360 at that price.
Me: Wow, you are getting shafted. I live in Canada where everything is more expensive, I thought it was a very safe bet that your 360 sale prices were at least as good if not better. It doesn't change the fact that the 360 is cheaper though and will gain less from continued price cuts.
You: Kinect allowed the 360 to maintain strong sales without relying on massive price cuts. If the 360 S included a price cut, the sales gap would be even bigger. It seems clear to me that MS cares more about profit than having a bigger userbase than PS3.
Me: Since when was profitability a point of this discussion?
You: Since when is profitably a point? If 360 prices went down, sales would go up but profits would be down. Therefore its a valid point. Same goes for online play. Gold accounts push people away from the 360, but its still significantly more profitable to charge even if you end up with smaller userbase.
Me: My entire point is that the PS3 is bound to overtake the 360 in sales. I'm not talking about the profitability of the 360's hardware or Live service. Microsoft's profits are unrelated to the original point I made.
You: PS3 getting the lead over the 360 is not much of an achievment. When was the last time the 360 had a price cut? MS is basically handing the lead to Sony. Yet Sony just can't seem to do it, its embarassing really.
Me: Since when was the importance of the PS3 outselling the 360 a point of this discussion?
You: People don't care that PS3 is going to overtake the 360. It was expected before this gen began and its laughable how long its taking. Its just a silly, meaningless victory for Sony and its fans. Ultimately, the 360 was a huge leap forward for the Xbox brand. PS3 on the other hand was a lot of mistakes.
Me: Again, I absolutely couldn't care less about the Xbox brand or the actual importance of the PS3 outselling the 360. I stated that the PS3 outselling the 360 was an eventuality, nothing else.
Pot: My post wasn't poor, but your logic and comprehension... lets just avoid the personal attacks.
Kettle: Personal attacks, you mean like "you're under the illusion" or your statement here about my logic and comprehension.
Speaking of comprehension. Again, after already repeating myself unnecessarily before. The only purpose of my post was to emphasize the fact that the PS3 is going to outsell the 360, worldwide LTD.
I didn't bring anything up about how important this is. I didn't mention a word about profitability. I never addressed benefits to brands, hypothetical situations or anything else. The only point that I have made is the fact that the PS3 is going to outsell the 360. The only reason why I have provided evidence or made any statements whatsoever was to support this single, direct, articulate point. Why do i have to spell this out for you? Why do I have to break every sub-point down as simple as possible? This shouldn't be necessary Mr. Puggsly. The point of a forum discussion is to read what another poster states and either agree or disagree and support your claim with evidence. Let's start again shall we?
The PS3 is going to eventually outsell the Xbox 360, in terms of LTD, global hardware sales, before the discontinuation of the each system. I feel confident in making this assertion based upon the facts that the gap stands at only 2 million units, the PS3 is currently outselling the 360, the PS3 is more expensive and stands to benefit more greatly from the next round of price cuts.
*This is where you either agree or disagree and support your claim with RELEVANT evidence that refutes my claim.*
Why couldn't you just do this to begin with?
