Chrkeller said:
Yes. I want evidence, data. Not some random person who ssys so. Have any data? The ps2 attach ratio was right where consoles are, including those without players. Feels like a bunch of made up nonsense on your end. I mean you said the ps2 didnt make money, but then show data where it made billions. You daffy ducked yourself. "I was there" isnt data nor proof. |
Your original point was the PS2 is the most successful console and it's not even close. I refuted that claim with the points I've made which you haven't responded to other than to hardp on DVDs not being the reason for its success which is a completely different discussion(and wouldn't confirm your original claim even if you were right).
Someone else posted two links attempting to prove standalone DVDs were as cheap if not cheaper than what the PS2 was offering. Those links actually refute their argument, especially the blog post link. The blog post asked if they should buy a PS2 or a standalone DVD player to play DVDs. Do you think this was the only person who contemplated such a decision? Do you think most people were posting on internet blogs in 2000? PS2 was the hot item coming off the success of PS1 and now they're offering a highly sought after cheap DVD player? the casuals were going to jump on that and that blogpost link proves this is the consumer decision people had in their heads. being able to play video games was a bonus.
Consumers didn't know there were cheaper options available, just as those who bought the NES didn't know about the Sega Master System and the Turbo Graphix 16 that had better graphics. They bought what had more notoriety, what all their friends had, and what was offering them something(free DVD player) their competitors did not.
