| DélioPT said: .... |
Again you claimed 3DS could never outperform the GBA while I pointed out GBA had a monopoly in its era unlike the 3DS which battled competition as well as mobile, your response was to use the PSP which was a competent competitor which actually backed my point as PSP would have beat out GBA in that region going by that performance and had GBA had to fight such a platform from launch it may have numbers similar to 3DS now.
I highlighted that 3DS and Vita repesenting the whole portable market had increased over GBA because you kept banging on about how mobile has hurt prtables and what not when in actual fact the market has just normalized, all of this you have not debunked yet and keep repeating the same null and void arguments while not even reading the posts you're replying to properly and I'll keep telling you that until you realize.
XB had competition in the PS2 and GCN and was beating out the latter it had a lot of life left in it as specs wise it was well ahead of the other platforms, it stopped selling because MS did the exact same thing Nintendo did with the Wii U, anounced its successor and drop support for it as soon as its replaced. The comparison therefore sticks even if you don't want to admit it, fact is both platforms being dropped doesn't changed the validity of the argument and still leaves another point you haven't debunked.
No I'm not confusing you you are confusing yourself as the console vs portable part is a prime example of you either not understanding the point, not reading the post properly or maybe even both, you don't even understand what moving goalposts is and just desperate to try and use the term when the's no context it applies to. I highlighted that in its gen GB outperformed both SNES and MD to the point that both platforms were even outsold by it combined, you then tried to shift GB to PS1 to try and argue against the combined part but failed to grasp that the GB still outsold or sold on par with each of the home platforms which was the point, you then came back with an argument trying to combined sales of every console in 15 years to compare to one platform and the hilarious thing is it still fell flat because the point to begin with was that portables always sold on par with the home platforms so GBs 118 is still on par or more than any home platform before the PS2. This whole debacle is you moving goalposts and still letting in a goal because you failed to understand the point well done.
You again fail to understand another point the's a difference between functional progression from a prior platform and competitive progression, when a company has no competition they progress things how they want as it suits them when the is competition however they're force to consider progressions that they'd normally wouldn't bother with or want to leave for much later. Had Sony not entered the portable market we may not have gotten PSP level perfomance in a portable for a while because no one was forcing the issue, the last part of your post is another bit that isn't coherent because new platforms are always in development.
