Shouldn't success be measured by the games?

[Kasz216]

Legend11 said:

It's getting annoying to see consoles being bashed based on sales while the games themselves seem to be largely ignored. To me a console is a success if it has a great library of games and I really question "gamers" who appear not to think that way. The Xbox 360 has a great existing library and has more than enough great games coming in the next couple of years to be considered a success. Even the critics calling it a shooter box will find it increasingly harder to ignore all the rpgs, strategy, racing, sports, and adventure games as well as unique games such as Viva Pinata and Banjo Kazooie 3 either on or coming to the system.

As for those bashing it because they "hate" Microsoft because of their practices, have you ever known any company with a monopoly to act any different? Nintendo during the NES days locked in some developers so they couldn't make games for any other system and also did other questionable things.

Anyways it's likely that this post won't make much of a difference but even if one or a few people start making quality posts instead of bashing systems based on sales then it will have been worth it.

On a video game site yes.

On a video game sales sight, no.

Still, that's not how it goes. After all most people see the N64 as a grand failure. Yet it had the best 3 games of the generation on it.

At the end of the day sales are the only real metric we have that's based on something tangible.