RolStoppable said:
The statement is over a decade old, so a Google search turns up way too many dummy results to dig for a quote. But if what I've said was wrong, then kowenicki or someone else would have already pointed out what a crazy theory it is. The original Xbox was a colossal failure (lost around $4 billion over the course of four years), so something much bigger than gaming had to be at stake to justify another Xbox. |
You aren't really defending your opinions that great. Your first response to justify your opinion;
"It's not tripe. First I explained why Xbox came into existence and then I explained why it should come to an end."
Like that statement justifies your opinion. It doesn't. Your opinions and presumptions are also written as fact, another thing I disagree with.
Then you try and justify your opinion by saying that because kowenicki hasn't pulled you up on it, it must be correct. I'm sorry but it doesn't work like that. Kowenicki actually made some good points on this thread and if he wants to stand your corner for you and explain why I should acknowledge your opinions as plausible, I'll be happy to listen. I'm not against the possibility that your opinions could be right, I'm against opinions that don't make sense or have very little reasoning.
Then you come up with another wild claim, "The original Xbox was a colossal failure (lost around $4 billion over the course of four years), so something much bigger than gaming had to be at stake to justify another Xbox."
Again please explain further, you're looking at things from only one perspective. By your reasoning Sony should of packed up shop and left the console business in 2010 after huge losses. Sometimes you have to look at the long game. How much of that $4B loss is due to Xbox live and being a front runner in online connected consoles? That's just an example of betting big to reap the rewards in the future. MS aren't afraid to take big gambles.
