MaulerX said:
dsgrue3 said:
MaulerX said:
pezus said:
MaulerX said:
Personally, if for some miraculous reason either the 360 or the PS3 end up outselling the Wii, then I would never say that either of those consoles "won" the generation. Fully knowing that everyone is now focused on the Wii U. Sure, it will matter to some and perhaps to some degree. But the same will hold true when the next PS/Xbox come out. |
It's just a fact though that if they would pass the Wii, they sold more than the Wii...
|
Oh but of course. But would you say they "won the generation"? I'm pretty sure if you ran a poll most people would logically say that the Wii won this generation even if it got outsold after the next generation started.
|
If you polled them today, they would agree. If you polled someone 10 years from now, the final results would be reviewed and a "winner" declared based upon sales. It is a difference between opinion versus fact. The sales are the facts.
|
That's the thing. If the clear rule is how much a system sold (even if it overlaps several generations) then fine, I would never argue that. But there doesn't seem to be a clear rule. Plenty of people seem to believe that if a new generation starts, then technically the old generation ends. In a hot dog eating contest, if you happen to eat a few extra dogs after the time limit expired, then more power to you, it still doesn't count for the purpose of what's being judged.
|
This isn't a hot dog eating contest. It's an endurance race that persists so long as there are sales. I think there is incredible amount of ambiguity as to what constitutes a rule in regard to this, which is why sales and as ironmanDX said market share, brand awareness, and profit are all good measures of success.
