FACTS vs. FICTION – Volume 1

[Torillian]

johnlucas said:

OK. I got a lot of replies to send out so let's go down the line.
Starting with Torillian.

Torillian said:
The fact that the most powerful system in a generation has never won does not preclude it from happening in the future. You can make all the lists you want, but unless there's some iron clad reason that the most powerful console in a generation can't win then it's just an interesting little factoid.

Fact is that the current sales trends point towards PS4 winning this generation, and basing your predictions on what ifs and hopeful scenarios is a recipe for disaster.

That almost sounds good, Torillian. It's a plausible counter-argument.
But I could find fault with the "just because it never happened before doesn't mean it can't happen in the future" argument in the following statements.

 

Just because a man couldn't fly by just flapping his arms before doesn't mean that man can't fly by just flapping his arms in the future.

Just because men couldn't get pregnant before doesn't mean that men can't get pregnant in the future.

Just because all empires fell before doesn't mean all empires will fall in the future.

Just because people can't walk through walls today doesn't mean that people can't walk through walls tomorrow.

Just because the wheel shape is best for rolling now doesn't mean the box shape can't be best for rolling later.

 

There ARE some things that are IMPOSSIBLE.
Even though many things in life were once thought to be impossible & were proven NOT to be, doesn't mean that there are no impossible events.

I take you back to what I said under that Strongest Console NEVER Wins topic.
If it was all about power then THE PC, THE PERSONAL COMPUTER, would be the ONLY platform around. There would BE no consoles.
They don't put PC games behind the shelf or behind the shop counter like they do console games.
Many PC developers have migrated partially or entirely to consoles to make their games.

Yeah yeah I know you're gonna throw out that recent report about PC gaming being bigger than console gaming.
But if that's the case why can't PC games sell prominently in retail? Why have they gone virtually all-digital?
Why are PC game unit sales consistently lower than console game unit sales?
Why are PC developers like Bethesda, Infinity Ward, Crytek, BioWare, & the like not treating the PC as first priority in game releases?
Why aren't they porting to consoles? Why would they bother even making games on the consoles in the first place?
Why bother with consoles at all if PC's where the real money's at?
Why are PC gamers consistently complaining about PC versions of games getting gimped because of console parity?

The only reason that report happened the way it did is because ONE of the Three Console makers have underperformed.
That one being the BIGGEST one: Nintendo. And the cause of that underperformance: the Wii U.
As Wii U turns around it goes back to the normal hierarchy.

The VERY FACT that CONSOLES EVEN EXIST prove my point.
The Videogame Console should not exist today.
And they WOULD not exist today if it wasn't for Nintendo with the Famicom/NES in the 1980s.
PC's have been modded to use all the game controllers the consoles use.
PC's no longer are bound by that solitary one-person monitor now that we can hook a computer game display onto the TV set & gather around.
The prices of decent gaming rigs have come down considerably & are somewhat affordable.
So why do consoles still sell? Why?

The PC can do gaming & everything else you want. It is ALWAYS the most powerful platform available by default.
And it is the most customizable platform available by default.
Online is free & can be maintained by the players themselves for decades to come.
It is such a useful platform IN gaming & BEYOND gaming.
So why do consoles still sell? Why?

All that power means a hill of beans, that's why.
That's why those PC developers left the PC behind & thoughtlessly went to recreate a PC-like market on the consoles—specifically the ones with weak 1st parties that they could push around.
The only one who prominently sells PC games the old-fashioned way on a store shelf is Blizzard.
And EVEN THEY have put some of their games on console!
Blizzard is the only one who truly works from the PC as a market & sells by retail.

Another proof of what I say is the fact that one of the most consistenly high-selling console games last year & early this year was freakin' MINECRAFT!!
A game with blocky SNES/N64 style graphics. A port from PC that is the ANTITHESIS of hardware power.
Notch made his money solely by PC at first & STILL he went to the weaker consoles to make even more.
A low power game that makes EVEN MORE money on a lower-power platform.

POWER DOES NOT SELL CONSOLES.
And the PS4 is not winning this generation.

If the XBox One is able to make people forget about their E3 2013 fiasco IN A YEAR & overcomes the PS4 in America already, then PS4 is already in trouble.
When PS4 was outselling XBox One & Wii U COMBINED for months at a time & now has to fight for top sales spot in America, it's not a good sign for PS4.
ESPECIALLY when they don't have Japan on their side.

What I wrote isn't just a factoid, it's a FACT.
John Lucas

No, John, it's a factoid, there are good reasons for every other thing you used as an example, you haven't given any such good reasons that the most powerful console can never be the winner other than it hasn't yet happened and power isn't the end all be all for console gaming.  I could give you all kinds of logical reasons that a man flapping his arms won't fly (weight being the largest one, there's a reason birds' bones are hollow), people can't walk through walls because of interactions and repulsions between the electrons in their matter and that of the solid object, the box shape isn't best for rolling because all of it's points are not the same radius from its center, all empires fall in the future because given enough time everything decays and dies even institutions, men can't become pregnant because they don't have the necessary sexual organs to harbor children.  

These all have reasons other than "that's how it's always been" and most of the things you stated have had thousands of years of proof, you're going off of something that hasn't even been proven for a hundred years and saying "that's how it's always been and therefore I don't need any other reason".  What reasons you've come up with are for why power isn't the reason consoles exist and isn't going to make the difference between one console winning and another losing, and I agree with that.  What you haven't proven is why having power is such a detriment that the most powerful console couldn't possibly win.