By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
impertinence on 08 October 2013
Edit Thread
Seece said:
impertinence said:
I don't think any console has sold $2 billion games. Or do you mean what platforms have supported a game that brought in more than $2 billion in revenue? Or are you talking about $2 billion in total software revenue for the platform? I don't understand this question I guess. What is obvious to all (most?) is that no company can touch Nintendo when it comes to selling software.

Having an agenda does not mean being a fanboy. It means that facst are cherry picked and framed to support a specific conclusion, while not having an agenda means looking at the facts and then let that determin the conclusion.

Wrong. I am basing Nintendo's home console success on their entire history of making home consoles and relating that to the video game market as a whole. You are the one who wants to disregard this, and forget about that. As you will remember, you are the one who wanted to bring the artifical split of home consoles and everything else into the discussion. Why? Because it fits the narrative you are trying to build, also known as pushing an agenda. Anyway, no matter how you want to slice it, there is no rational way to deny the fact that Nintendo is the king of this industry.

edit: some spelling mistakes corrected

I'm not talking about Nintendo's overall place in the industry, I agree they are top dog. This thread is about WiiU, home console, and Bethesda talking to Nintendo about their home console, you said Nintendo shouldn't listen to Bethesda because they're amazing or w/e so I point out that when it comes to home consoles (which is what this is all about) they're not undisputed. Neither Sony or Nintendo is, but if you have to pick one it's Sony, they will have the top selling home consoles, and the PS2 which sold 2 billion games (more than double any Nintendo system ever).

It takes a whole load of factors to become undisputed, it's you who is in fact cherrypicking to get to that conclusion, not me.

Well, I was talking about Nintendo's overall place in the industry and how it makes Bethesda look when they venture to put forward advice to the undisputed King of Videogames. You felt it was prudent to prune down the point to only cover home consoles though, and also to prune it further to only cover the three generations where Sony has had a home console on the market. That is the very definition of cherry picking, but whatever. The point still stands.

You seem to put a lot of emphasis on how many units of Software was sold on the PS2, but a VAST majority of those 2 billion games were not made or published by Sony. A quick look at the list of top selling games ever should be enough to make it abundantly clear that your argument needs heavy cherrypicking to even be worth considering. And even then it's quite clear that Nintendo is the only reasonable pick for the crown, but the whole argument is artficial as Nintendo is undisputably the King of Videogames (note, not "the KIng of sixth Generation hardware sales")  and as such Bethesda (the knave of videogames) looks like tools when trying to tell Nintendo what they should be doing.