thismeintiel said:
Yours is an if that could never happen. Mine is one that could happen if Sony chose to have it happen. That fact is Sony has way more supply. My point was some think the launches are on the same level, when they are not. And I'm not worried at all about Sony being on top. They were for the PS1 and PS2 era and never got lazy with releasing quality games for their players. Nor did they just drop support to give 100% to their new console. They would do the same this gen, even if they end up 20M+ ahead of the One. Personally, I think MS has brought more negatives to the console business than they have positives, so I wouldn't really mind if it became an only Sony/Nintendo biz. |
Maybe SEGA could return to bussiness *-*
And I'm favorable about the phrase "A scenario where Sony dominates is best for the industry"
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."