I think Microsoft will release an xbox console every three years.

[S.T.A.G.E.]

Snoopy said:

LudicrousSpeed said:

1. You just said Sony "ushered it into the industry" so yeah, it does matter if they actually ushered it in or in this case, if another company did it. The difference is instead of saying Sony "ushered it into the industry" the correct way to say it would be Sony followed Nintendos lead :)

2. No they didn't. I remember them saying it applies to all three of their consoles when the PS2 and PSP were still going. The Vita didn't qualify because it didn't sell well enough. Long story short, they'll support consoles so long as there is money to be made. You can dress it up as some sort of grand plan of consumer support and longevity, the simple truth is it's just money. Also, the 360 already existed when they started touting this 10 year plan, so you're 0/2 here :(

3. Sony adopted what Nintendo had been doing when Sony entered the industry. They didn't create anything. I know this clashes with your narrative, but it's reality. You really could have shortened your entire reply to "the dollar is the bottom line". It also answers your Xbone question.

4. Oh ok so money doesn't matter to MS and they could have just ended the gen sooner and put out a new console but just wanted to "keep pressure on Sony" even though they were both getting beaten badly by the Wii. It's funny because in other threads you say MS is so desperate to get a leg up on Sony yet here instead of launching the 360 successor earlier which would have really put pressure on them they instead continued to support the 360 even though who cares about revenue it's Microsoft. Do you really believe some of these zany MS theories you post?

I find it funny when Sony fans in general tell me MS is doom when xbox has been making Microsoft a profit for a while now. Not only this, but the fact some how Sony who is losing billions of dollars a year are just "fine".

Who ever brought up doom?