| gergroy said: well, if you are looking at why hardware sells are important, the reason is that the more hardware a console sells, the more software they can sell. When comparing it to competing hardware, more hardware means more software sells over a competitor and a great chance of exclusive games. Being in first place is great for securing more games that people want to play. This generation was a bit different from previous generations, as there was a generational gap in hardware performance between one of the three big competitors. This meant that most games ended up getting made on the two higher performing systems as combined they had a greater market share then the leader. It is my belief that this is why the hardware sells ended up being as close as they are. The graphical gap helped catapult second and third place consoles into striking distance of the leader. Now, since hardware sells are all about software, does it matter if ps3 hardware overtakes 360 after next gen systems have launched? Depends on what kind of person you are. If you only care about how your favorite platform did in respect to other platforms then it matters a great deal. From everybody else's perspective... not so much. All the console manufacturers have released viable gaming platforms that have all achieved pretty significant levels of success. Nintendo surged back into dominance with focusing on changing the way people play. Microsoft drastically increased their market share and created a huge brand name for themselves in america. Sony fought back after a horrible start to have massive legged system. All have reasons to be happy.... |
yes i see where your coming but from 90 million units to 85 million, it really doesn't matter, both will have the same exclusives and then it all becomes about profit, sony fought back but remember they shouldnt have been there in the first place, the ps2 sold 160 million units and was the most dominate console of alltime, i doubt they have any reason to be happy since there bleeding money.







