| DKII said: It's fair to ignore the PS2 because every winning console has sold well for years after the new wave of systems for released, and none of them ever had any impact on the outcome of the newcomers, so discussing whether or not it was the "right move" is a moot point--obviously it's the right move, that's why everyone's always done it. |
You really don't think the success of past Nintendo products has had "any impact" on the sales outcome of the consoles released after them?
I would disagree with that, and point you to a concept called "brand loyalty".
I'm not predicting the future here by any stretch, but I definitely don't think you can ignore the fact that there are roughly 120,000,000 PS2 owners out there. Even if you subtract ALL the Wii, 360 and PS3 owners... There are still about 60,000,000 potential customers... and they all bought Sony at least once before. I don't think you can discount that. (I think the GTAIV sales comparisons will be interesting considering there may be some brand loyalty with that franchise previously being tied to the PlayStation brand... We'll see.)
And "everyone" does not do the same thing of supporting their last console. That's kinda what this post is about; Sony's model of supporting the past consoles for as long as the public seems interested. I mean, it is easy to understand why a company would not want to "compete" with it's new product. Typically business do not support older products for very long. Sony seems to have something working going against that trend.
Someone above questioned if Sony had planned it this way or not, I would point to the fact that God of War II came out after the release of the PS3... So I think they planned on it... maybe it is doing better than they predicted... But they never planned on dumping it completely.
Gamertag: X freestyle X
