The strongest and more expensive console will win this generation, it never happened before.

[Torillian]

Samus Aran said:

Torillian said:

MS's company has to split its resources across software development as well as Xbox, Sony has to make TVs, why don't we include those?  Simple, because it's not about being fair to a company it's about something measureable that we can define.  Handhelds are just as relevant to a question of who won a console generation as Windows or Vaio Computers.  It's not about what's fair, it's about what applies to the question and is measurable.  

it isn't "who was the biggest success story"? the question is "who won the console generation" which is again defined by the only numbers we are actually given to base success off of for consoles.  In that sense, yes, the Xbox was 2nd in its console generation while GC was last.  

Says who? Fans on a gaming forum? Sorry, I don't agree with that.

I include handhelds because they're dedicated gaming platforms. TVs and operating  systems like Windows are not. Look up the definition of console btw:

"A video game console is a device that outputs a video signal or visual image to display a video game. The term "video game console" is used to distinguish a console machine primarily designed for consumers to use for playing video games in contrast to arcade machines or home computers. It includes the home video game consoles, the handheld game consoles, the microconsoles and the dedicated consoles."

The question of this very thread is about consoles, and we both know that that is in reference to home consoles and does not include handhelds.  I'd be curious to check the last time you tossed out this argument and see what the thread was about.  I'd be surprised if the question was not clearly worded as "what console won ____" not "what company won ____", but you always get it back to this shit every time.  I could set my watch by it.