BenVTrigger said:
pokoko said:
The PS3 passing the 360 doesn't actually matter. It will just underscore that the PS3 sold more units in less timewe r l than the 360. We already know that, though. The PS3's rate of sale is significantly higher than the 360's already, edging past it in total sales doesn't really mean a lot. Neither Sony nor Microsoft will get a trophy for finishing "2nd" or "3rd". Those are fan metrics, for the most part. The truth is that they will finish virtually tied in terms of total units sold.
Those who will really be affected by this are the ones who continuously talked about the PS3 finishing third in this generation. I've heard that said so often, for so many years, intended as an insult. It's amusing to watch those people back-peddle now by claiming that it doesn't matter.
For the record, I think it's going to be hard for the PS3 to pass the 360. It's going to have to accomplish most of its sales early, as the numbers are probably going to drop a lot near the end of the year (assuming reveals). |
While its true PS3 has sold at a faster rate its also true if you compare launch to launch the PS3 is also declining at a faster rate than the 360 did
|
Hey, I'll definitely give credit where credit is due. Kinect was a game changer. That the 360 came from never winning a full year to beating the PS3 in 2011 mostly because of Kinect and that's pretty impressive. It gave Microsoft a substantial boost. However, without Kinect, would we even be having this conversation now? Anyone else think the PS3 would likely have passed the 360 in 2012? Or that 360 sales would have dropped a lot faster without it? Of course, they did release Kinect, so that's immaterial now, but all factors have to be understood when analyzing something.
