archbrix said:
You sound quite defensive there...
Regarding your first paragraph, yes, it is possible. The SNES had big games releasing in '94 (DKC, Super Metroid, Super Street Fighter 2) and '95 (DKC 2, Yoshi's Island). As you can see from the chart, FY '93 and '94 were the biggest years for the SNES with over 11m each year. So with price drops and even more games, 4.4m in FY '95 and 5.8m in '96 are certainly possible.
As for your second paragraph, I honestly can't remember what big games the PS1 had after MGS in '98 other than Final Fantasy 8 and 9, but what I do remember was that the PS1 was difficult to find in the St Louis area during the holiday of 2000 (whereas the N64 was everywhere), so it's not far fetched that the dirt cheap PS1 was, at the very least, not drastically outsold in FY '01 by the massively hyped PS2. So my point still stands: It's the exception, not the rule, that a brand new console can beat an established console at its cheapest price with an amassed library of games.
Now, the information on that chart could very well be inaccurate, but it's not a surprise that someone who thinks himself to be infallible would inherently dismiss anything that opposes his views - even in the face of logic.
|
