By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
fatslob-:O said:
zorg1000 said:

Having a great game every 3-4 months is not enough to make hardware succeed if the software output is slow, the hardware features are unappealing, the device is poorly designed, the marketing/advertising sucks and the price is high for what the product offers.

Even after discounting the Vita (frankly just it's brand name alone was great advertisement for the system), how do you explain PS1's sudden rise to popularity after it's underwhelming launch and 1st year performance ? (couldn't get great reception initially)

Your point about advertising/marketing is clearly bunk regardless since it's not a high factor or indicator to a platforms success ... 

zorg1000 said: 

 

So yes, its a lame excuse to say, "this game didnt sell this console so why would it sell that console?" when there are multiple other factors at play.

The only other factor at play is launch price since it's the only aspect shown to have any correlation to a platforms success aside from it's library, everything else is just noise ... 


How do i explain PS1 sudden rise to popularity? The things i listed earlier.

1. Software quality, output & variety

2. Hardware features, specs & design

3. Marketing & advertising

4. Appropriate price based on 1-3

 

PS1 easily beat N64 & Saturn in these categories and that caused it to sell so well.

 

No console manufacturer has ever had amazing mainstream success right out of the gate, not Atari, not Nintendo, not Sega, not Microsoft and not even Sony. All of them started out slow before reaching mainstream success.

 

I really have no idea what point you are trying to prove by bringing up PS1.

 

 

As for marketing/advertising, it makes a huge difference, otherwise companies would not spend billions every year on it.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.