Switch is selling better than PS4, PS2, PS1, PS3, X360 launch aligned

[DonFerrari]

curl-6 said:

DonFerrari said:

So you jumped to defend only part of the argument but forgot to mention it? Because original point is PS3 being a flop by selling 85+M while others being a success selling less than 30M and all of that because of "context". There is as much or more context to say those systems are flop than to PS3 being a failure.

I explained the lost of billions but sure ignore it. On being outsold it was by a system that both companies admit didn't directly compete. Now if you want to say MS stole about half the sales PS3 could have coming from PS2 that would be another point.

Again, I never said systems selling less than 30 million were successful.

How other non-gaming divisions fared does not change the fact that PS3 lost billions. And tbh the "don't directly compete" card is only ever played when someone wants to try to claim their preferred system being outsold "doesn't count".

So will you say N64, GC, WiiU, Xbox are all flops? At what number of sales can we consider it a flop? Would 3DS also be a flop since it dropped to about half the sales of DS and that without even a strong competition?

Don't try to change the point. PS3 was made to lose that money to improve other divisions, it was a calculated move (you may claim it didn't work) not a result of failure. Let's say if Mercedes-Benz blow 15 Billion dollars in Formula 1 (just random number) while the prizes on the championship amounted to 10 Billion as a marketing stunt to promote their brand. Would you say that division flopped because it lost money or you would consider that they knew how much it would cost and how much it would earn directly, accept that particular venture would lose money and strategically decided for it anyway because of the benefits in other parts?

Unless you think Sony is dumb enough to think that selling a 800 console for 499 is lucrative by itself and not that they undercut the price of BD players at the time to push BD as a media format to win over HD-DVD in expectation that it would make they a lot of money on licensing and movie department, plus Cell would become standard for they to push on other electronics... Nope, they knew that would cost a lot of money for that department. If they had to prematurely discontinue PS3 as MS done with Xbox and Nintendo with WiiU and VirtualBoy then we would have evidence that the PS3 itself was a failed project not that the loses and movements were calculated and pushed from outside Playstation department.

zorg1000 said:

DonFerrari said:

Read original argument that PS3 is considered a flop selling 85+M while others are being considered a success selling less than 30M.

You may have skipped (or I worded wrong) sold more SW per HW, not more SW total. And it wasn't 700M less, from what I remember was more like 500M (I remember last official numbers from Sony on total SW for PS2 being 1.5B and PS3 basically 1B). That is why I put more 1st party sold game and more 3rd party sold per HW.

 

Nobody said they were a success though, that is something you made up.

Like I said, having a slightly higher tie ratio doesnt mean much when the overall number is significantly lower.

Will say again, go look at the begin of the discussion. That was about PS3 being a flop selling over 85+M and other systems being success selling less than 30M. Then we had mandalore with "context". It is the second time in this discussion where he makes some bad claims and people come to cover for him on wrong basis. First was his claim of PS4 having 2 pricecuts before 2 years in the market as justifcation for the flip on positions between PS4 and Switch, when in fact for the time shown on the OP PS4 didn't had any yet. And now is his justifying PS3 was a flop "in context" on an argument that included the other systems being success, which he didn't dismiss success.

No, you said that I said Sony mare more on the PS3 SW than on PS2, that is plain wrong.