Xxain said:
Is that really fair though? We are in a much bigger industry than the PS2 days. Popularity is not limited to who sales more. Here's a non gaming example; Michael Jackson vs Drake. Drake will most likely beat all MJ's achievements by the time he is done, but MJ is still more globally known and he's been dead for 10+ years. EDIT: Another example is Michael Jordan vs Lebron James. |
Michael Jordan outscored LeBron James in a per game basis, and Jordan has 10 scoring titles, LeBron has 1 despite LeBron playing like 6 years more than Jordan. People consider Jordan the better scorer because he was the better scorer.
If there's an artist that comes out and blows out the sales numbers for Off The Wall, Thriller, Bad, and Dangerous .... yes, they are bigger than Michael Jackson.
The Switch kicks the PS2's ass in sales at year 8 and has outsold the PS2 virtually its entire product cycle, which is not a short product cycle either skewed by a small sample size. We're talking 8 freaking years here already. Switch 1 could sell 170-180 million, everyone knows this too, if Nintendo allowed it to stay on store shelves and maybe even gave a price cut it would get there easy.
The only reason the PS2 is even in this race is because of a technicality ... it needs like 3-4 extra years to be able to match the sales the Switch 1 will end up with, which is laughable if you're the "more popular console". No you're not. The "most popular console" should never be *years* behind the sales pace of another system at year 6/7/8 ... no way. That's a full generation worth of sales, you shouldn't be getting your ass kicked by another system if you're really the "most popular".







