| URNotE said: If anyone remembers the ps2 launch, when it was released, it was said that it was too much money, there were no games, no online play, and the dvd player was not needed. But in the ending times of the years of PS2 (before PS3), it was said that the price was perfect, it had the best selection of games, there was online play (which was good enough for the era), and the dvd player was well liked by everyone who had one. Now we are in the age of the PS3, where it is again being said. The PS3 is too much money, there is no games, the online play sucks, and the blu-ray player is not needed. I will ask anyone who reads this post to please reply with your answer to the question: Is this not an example of history repeating itself, and do you think that the end result will be the same? Its all up to the people to determine weather the PS3 is sucessfull. More-so them then Sony. Think about it. |
Yes. Exactly right. It IS all up to the people to determine whether the PS3 is successful. The people made the PS2 successful by buying them in droves. The people are making the PS3 a failure by leaving them on the shelves.
In all your post you talked about how the situations were the same for the PS2 and the PS3 (which is completely false, but I'll go with you on this). You then contradict yourself by talking about the one thing that is NOT the same between the two respective launches, that is, the people's reaction to the console. The truth is the PS2 performed well at launch, whereas the PS3 died as soon as Christmas was over.
So what does this show? It shows the people have chosen. They have chosen Wii.
Help! I'm stuck in a forum signature!
