I flew too close to the 1TF sun and my Switch wings melted.

[zorg1000]

curl-6 said:

zorg1000 said:

Im not saying they arent important, im saying that you are giving graphics too much credit.

Heres my evidence, Gameboy vs Game Gear/Lynx, PS1 vs N64, PS2 vs GC/XB, GBA vs N-Gage, DS vs PSP, Wii vs 360/PS3, 3DS vs Vita. Multiple examples from the last 30 years where the weaker device not only won, but dominated.

Power didnt all of a sudden become the most important factor for the gaming market in the last 3 years.

PS1 and PS2 were the most powerful consoles in the world when they came out and were still power-competitive with later rivals like N64 and GCN. On the other side of the coin we have the SNES beating the weaker Genesis and both beating the weaker Turbografx-16, PS1 and N64 both beating the weaker Saturn, PS2/GCN/Xbox all beating the weaker Dreamcast, 

In the end, I think we'll just have to agree to disagree. Thanks for the discussion and cheers for keeping it respectful.

@bolded, doesnt that kinda contradict what you said about PS4/XBO earlier? If PS1 & PS2 were able to beat N64 & GC/XB by being power competitive than how is power the reason PS4 is beating XBO?

If we have a handful of examples of most powerful devices winning and less powerful devices winning than that shows power is not the reason for winning/losing and is instead dependent on the overall appeal of the device, a combination of software, features, price, marketing, etc.