By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
crissindahouse on 04 October 2012
Edit Thread
Jay520 said:
drkohler said:

Did it ever occur to you that XBox had a one year headstart in NA and 15 months (2 holiday periods) in Europe? That is lots of games bought while zero PS3 games were bought. Your table simply shows that more XBoxes are out in the wild for a longer time than PS3s.

2.) Tie ratio in Japan: I have seen several estimates on how many of the early PS3 were bought for Blu-Ray only and the estimates varied from 30% to 70%. Still PS3 "sells more" than XBox because absolute numbers count, not some irrelevant "tie number".

3.) Also who cares about "tie rate?"

4.) Certainly not game manufacturers.

5.) If you believe the revenue numbers here, you'll see both consoles sell the same amount of sofware (actually PS3 is alittle ahead of XBox).

1.) For all the software sold during the 360's headstart, there was also hardware sold. So the tie-ratio should be even with the rest of the 360's years. Your argument is invalid.

2.) Anecdotes, no facts

3.) Caring is subjective.

4.) Unsupported assertion

5.) Wait for Manufacter's official numbers.

 

All I'm seeing is opinions and unsupported assertions. Can someone disprove my argument with logic and facts?

number 1 isn't invalid. 360 owners own their console much longer as ps3 owners on average and with that they had more time to play through plenty of games. if you think it makes no sense you also say someone who bought a ps3 last week has to have as many games as someone who bought a 360 in 2005.

2.  why do you want facts when you have no own facts except a ratio and make a full thread out of it? i mean, that's funny, you have no facts but people have to disprove them with facts, otherwise you just say "no facts"