By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
JimmyDanger on 03 January 2013
Edit Thread
Hynad said:
JimmyDanger said:
It seems to me fron the posts in here - that most 360 fans could care less - while most PS3 fans think it's a significant milestone.

Me? If either outsell the Wii, which I doubt will happen (at least for the next 3 years at the very soonest) - that's big news. If either get second place, without the winner being displaced - who cares?

The horse that wins the race is the most important - each way bets pay for a place outright - not a different value for second and third There's winners - and placegetters.

The Silver Medal is only important in small countries that never win gold. Although Usain Bolt getting Silver in an event he's previously dominated would probably be more newsworthy than whoever won gold.

The Sony Nation (and their athlete PS3/Usain Bolt) is surely successful and large enough to be going for gold, and seeing anything less as a failure.

If stealing second place - right at the death - is significant, and indeed (as I have read in other threads) cause to celebrate - then the Sony Nation must be smaller and less successful than I thought, as - judging by the posts in here - they'd think it was a pretty, pretty, pretty big deal.

Your point would be valid if sales were indeed like a race. Which they are not. If people adopt your product and it sells, you get market share, make profit and in turn you win.

Your stance on the matter, as concealed as you tried to word it, is no different from those you point a finger at.


My stance on the matter is clearly stated in the second paragraph. It's there - no concealment. Read it again.

And sales - like it or not - are indeed like a race - as you seem to have agreed with in your post  (quoted - If people adopt your product and it sells, you get market share, make profit and in turn you win.).  Which basically means that whoever sells the most wins. Although runners can leave the field/join the field at any time, until it's effectively a one horse race.

PS2 sold many years after it's competition bailed out - but it was winning when they left and remained winner.  It'd won the gold and still kept running. Ditto the SNES (when Sega had gone on to the Saturn -  SNES was leading) - the PS1 (when Sega had gone on to the DC - PS1 was leading). There's only two horses left in this race now (as Nintendo have moved on to the WiiU) - and unless someone displaces it (Wii) for first place overall - any "victory" is hollow. And if when the PSOmni/XboxInfinity launch - if whoever is left at market is still running third - well - it's not a victory at all. Be that Xbox or PS. Like I said - the Wii won. Unless someone outsells that while there's still another competitor on that track (ie. Sony or MS haven't moved to the next gen) - that's the victory.

Maybe MS and Sony fans should shake hands and say - "well we both got our arses handed to us by Nintendo. Good Game. The winner is now in another castle." rather than this "I'm less of a loser than you, or maybe in the next 12 months I will be less of a loser" retarded debate. It seems desperate - from both sides.

As for finger pointing - in my post that you quoted - did I block quote someone and reply directly to points someone made? Or just give an overview of how the general tone of 200+ posts, and general observations of how things appear to look from my perspective?