Shouldn't success be measured by the games?

[Erik Aston]

Legend11 said:

I'm not talking about success from a business standpoint but from a gamer's.  A gamer's view of a successful console should be based on it's game library not how many copies said library and console sold.  If a fantastic game sells 100,000 copies or 10,000,000 copies it doesn't change how good the game is.

You're just de-valuing the word "success." What succeeded if you enjoy the games you purchase? YOU did. You made a good purchase. We already have phrases like "I am satisfied with my purchase" if you want to talk about "a gamer's view"; you don't need to render meaningless the phrase "the console is successful."

The age-old example is the word "gentleman." "Gentleman" originally meant "land-owning male." At some point, someone decided "Shouldn't gentlemanliness be measured by character?" There were already plenty of words to describe good character, so all that happened was gentleman became a useless word.

In light of this, one wonders why you want to challenge the meaning of "success" at this moment in time.

Of course, customer satisfaction is part of establishing a strong brand, and that leads to success for a game or a console. But its only one factor leading to success, and we measure the totality of all such factors with sales and profitability numbers.