By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Mr Puggsly said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:


"Sony relies more on on 3rd parties to push their hardware than 1st party. "

This was your point. I just dubunked it. 

Feast your eyes upon the opitomy of being dependent on third party, Microsoft. Microsoft has paid more third parties to make more second party for them than first party in the current gen. They've paid for far more third parties exclusives and timed exclusives than Sony. To not understand this is to put the blame in the wrong place.

You debunked nothing.

MS and Sony both rely heavily on 3rd parties to push their hardware. Did you think I was saying that's exclusive to Sony?

But bear in mind 360 did sell more exclusive software than PS3.


Have you ever thought that half the reason for the sales is because MS got half of the active Sony gamers to switch sides? Yeah, I guess not. I've spoken about this before. Look at Microsoft and Sony's numbers last gen and a good chunk definitely came from last generations PS2 crowd that transfered over (me being one of them at the beginning of the generation) when MS had the head start. Microsoft sells more because they are a better direct marketing entity not because of their ip output. Xbox Live gave them an edge  with multiplayer games but somewhere during the end of the generation it leveled out for games like COD. The majority of those gamers majorly buy multiplayer so they are loyal to no flag.

Sonys sales are everywhere for exclusives because they spread their exclusive count so thin. People cannot afford every game they make. They need to do what MS did and slim down the list, but instead of allowing third parties to deliver the bulk of their offerings like their first party studios accomplish this with back up from second and third party.

If those gamers switch back the numbers will also change.