Jesus you again? I'm getting the feeling this is turning into a who can get the last word in.
i'm going to go over each of the points of your last post and hope you really can keep up with what I'm saying. Because I'm really tired of arguing with you. This isn't a case of who's right or wrong. It seems to be turning into a "who's got the bigger brain or balls" or pissing match. That's the vibe I'm getting off of you and as I've stated before. I don't care. But here we go:
1. My point is that you have a HABIT of making proclamations and predictions WITHOUT doing the most basic fact-checking. (While attacking others for supposedly questionable statements and predictions. Glass houses, you know?)
-Here you go with those assumptions. As I explained before in previous post. It was blind speculation based on an assumption. Since you seem to be so good at going back and copying and pasting my post. Start with my very first one and work your way forward, and tell me exactly who did I in fact attack unprovked. For the sake of ending this arguement I'll help you out. All my venom came from a quote that I thought was directed at me calling me a fanboy. Not once in any of those early initial post DID I COME AT ANYONE UNTIL hello217 told me to go back under my bridge implying I was a fanboy.
2. Here are some MORE examples of your inexcusably sloppy research, taken from your most recent argument on the subject so you can't complain.
Example 1:
If another franchise (we can only take the first 2 that came out on the same system) sells 14.88 to a user base of 15 million
: : You say Xbox has sold 15 million to date. US sales are at 16m and WW sales are at 24m so I assume you mean US only even though normally if people don't mention anything specifically it would be WW.
: : You say Halo series on Xbox (not 360) totals 14.88m. But wait! That's (6.43+8.45=14.88) WORLDWIDE TOTALS! You can't have accidentally added all three games up for US because that's (4.91+6.67+5.23) 16.81m. No, you applied WW game sales to US console sales.
*sigh* Hey genius I go those numbers from HELLO217. THE INITIAL PERSON I WAS ARGUING WITH. I was using his numbers HE PROVIDED (it's all right there in this post). Against the poin the was making. Not too mention what did I say about homework? You should be able to answer this question since you're reading, studying, an copying and pasting my post like you're getting a letter grade at the end of this discussion. Again READING AND COMPREHENSION.
3. But the main point of my post was that those games would not cause a major spike increase to the Ps3's sales to all of sudden make it leap and nearly triple it's sales output in the manner of their respective leads.
: : I don't know what exactly you mean by "manner of respective leads", but the PS3 is selling in the neighborhood of around 150k per week WW. In 1 year of 150k/wk we would have 7.8 million in sales, not your 3-4 million projection, and that's not even counting the holiday spike which every console gets. Triple that would put the PS3 somewhere near 30m by 2009 and I don't think anyone here was predicting that.
Let's put it in simple terms you may understand: If we begin a conversation and you initially say something that's off base and completely wrong. But immediatly based on the correction of me or others retract that statement and admit your mistake/failure/whatever and move on to the next point. But you continue to make the same damn mistakes on other numbers. That makes you ignorant and completely off base and missing the point. Which is exactly what you're doing here. You have disregarded many points of my post as well, such as the fact that comparing attach rates for a 24-million-selling console to a 100-to-120-million-selling console is treacherous ground and allowances have to be made for the different circumstances.
Okay using the exact numbers lests deal with math and actualities. Not allowances. If I have a console that has 120 million people that bought the system. Out of those 120 million a gaming franchise sells 44 million total as a franchise. That means that about 37% of said systems install base has purchased the game or into the series. If the competing system has 24 million systems sold and out of those 24 million systems sold, a franchise sells roughly 14 million games to the install base on the competing system. That means the franchise on the competing system has sold to around 62% of the franchise base. Now we can argue peoples purchasing habits (which would be purely on speculation because there's no true way for either of us to guage that, or allowances or what have you) But if you're telling me that those numbers don't give a hint to which franchise sells better on their respective systems to their systems fanbase. Then there' no helping you. Please stop the maddness. Now I've used your numbers to prove the point. And we're arguing in terms of game sold. I can't help what the numbers say. They are there. I'm dealing with the actuals of what's in front of me. So now you're bringing things like allowances into the equation to try and prove your point. Where I'm just using the numbers. When to me it doesn't matter, not to mention I've backed up what I was saying and trying to get across with support for my arguement. And through it all my point was THESE GAMES COMING OUT IN THESE RESPECTIVE FRANCHISES WON'T CAUSE A MAJOR SALES INCREASE IN SYSTEMS SOLD. Yes I threw out a number to say triple increase in sales. That was as response to people saying SONY WILL DOMINATE!!! Which to the best of my guestimations as in my opinionit would have to do dominate the the 360 and the Wii. Key phrase in that previous sentence MY GUESTIMATIONS AS IN MY OPINION.
4. There is nothing wrong with the state of not knowing something, but you are PRETENDING to know things when you quite clearly do not. I don't know if nobody ever told you this, but throwing out bullshit numbers and correcting them only when you get caught is not a valid technique for building a solid argument. I know it's easier to make the other guy do all the footwork, but damn, back up your arrogance with SOME facts that can't be shown to be wrong in 30 seconds.
I'm sorry I missed the part where I came on this site and threw out a bunch of nonsense and told everyone that they should believe me just because I said so? I didn't bring numbers into the arguement or even start the arguement (intentionally anyway). The people who originally were attacking me did (hello217 in case you missed it). The numbers I used that were wrong (and not out of this world wrong) were numbers TO THE BEST OF MY PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE ON THE FLY.(of 100 million systems to 15 million systems sold which to the best of my knowledge is in the same ballpark of 120million and 24 million if we're making blind guesses). I also seem to miss the part where I said those were irrefutibly concrete?
Next, so admitting that you're wrong is pretending to know things? Wait and when someone pointing out that you're obviously wrong. Manning up and saying yep you got me is pretending. I don't know if anyone ever told you this. But when someone admits that they were wrong. And gives the reason for their being wrong on not doing the research themselves. But acknowledging that fact,after it is brought to their attention regardless of the time frame (30 sec. or 30 days). Well that's called an admittance,it can even in some situations be called a humble one. Again reading and comprehending, and now unerstanding context.
5. P.S. I had thought you implied that I was in middle school or had equivalent maturity/intelligence because: Instead of being quick to throw around secondary lunchroom buzzwords like, ignorance lies, stupid, or try and label someone a fanboy. Maybe you should've scrolled down and read more? If you meant "secondary" to mean "second-rate" or some other thing, I'm sorry for misinterpreting your statement. In my defense, it's easy to get a false positive on condescension in a post dripping with the real thing. Out of curiosity, what DID you mean by "secondary" here?
I meant secondary as in niddle school, but not saying you were in middle school. Just meaning you're trying to throw those words around with the intent of making me seem foolish without taking the time, consideration or care to actually try to digest my points without jumping down my throat. So I could see where you thought I was calling you immature directly.
Now I'm officially done with you. You're pretty much just acting like an extreme asshole with this nonsense who's trying to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt why you're right and I'm wrong. I mean for serious, what do you get kicks out of cutting and pasting for the sake of arguing?
Anyway in closing, my fault next time I want to post something on a prediction/sales analyzation/heavy speculation forum on the internet, I'll be sure to explain my every thought process, and go indepth with the most up-to-date real hardline facts that I can find. I'll be sure to explain every painstaking detail, context of speech, and sentence structure that is running through my mind, as well as provide footnotes, cliffnotes, and power points detailing my every view. My bad.
And before you ask yes that is meant to be condescening. My bad I don't like people coming at me as assholes seemingly for the sake of being an asshole, and as they say "if the shoe fits". Well you know the rest... Wait you probably don't so I spell it out for you: "wear it."
www.talkxbox.com - It is what it is!
