JimmyDanger said:
It's proof of nothing, except that even with an extra year in development over MS, they still couldn't sell more units in that First 5 years - even now in this sixth year.
If the PS3 released a year earlier - would they have had the library? Would it have been even MORE expensive? Less powerful?
If the 360 released a year later would it have been more powerful? With a larger library? Cheaper?
And how would either of these variable factors have affected sales for each platform? Would every single one of those 6 million people bought a PS3 instead, and never bought an xbox (giving Sony a 4.5 million unit lead) - have 75% of those 6 million bought a PS3 already either as a companion console or straight up replacement? It's all just complete speculation. If you think the ONLY reason PS2 outsold GC/XBX was because of it's earlier release - which really , was probably the most minor factor when weighed against full software/controller BC (probably the main reason I bought a PS2 initially, as the launch lineup wasn't so hot) , DVD playback (without additional addon), first/3rd party exclusive library - then - well I know nobody believes that the primaray reason the PS2 dominated was because it was out first. The same way no one attributes the NES's success due to the fact it was out first, or the Gameboys (vs Lynx/Gamegear) - or any other historical sales comparison.
No - there is no proof of anything in "what if"/"elselworlds" speculation. The only variables we can account for in reality are those based in our reality. Not Counter Earth/Earth 2 where the PS3 released in 2005 for $300 or the 360 released in 2006 for $500. That is pure fanboy fantasy.
Complete thread derailment - initially just replying to the point you made.
On topic - Yes they do. Gran Turismo. Though if they brought out Last Guardian at PS4 launch - they'd absolutely win a lot of hardcores over straight away - and also give Team ICO their best selling title ever. Can we call Team ICO a franchise? Technically not - but they are a brand that carries a lot of weight.
Though if they brought out a TRUE Parappa/Lammy sequel (the threadbare Parappa 2 doesn't count for me!) with multiple co-op/competitive modes, replayability with different versions of songs (the same way that when you finished Lammy, you could do the songs as PaRappa or Dark Lammy either solo or in co op/competitive - with different mixes of the track for each - rather than do the same song while wearing a different colored beanie) - I would pay whatever it cost and preorder it now!
|
PS3 is selling at a faster pace than 360 with...
- Higher Price point
- Late Start
- Smaller Library of Games(at least at the start)
- Far harsher Critical Analysis
In this alternate reality speak, if PS3 came out first they would of had to have a decent library of games, started development earlier, etc. Otherwise they wouldn't release early.....which is the hypothetical we are talking about. What could MS have done any better if they had an extra year? Possibly make a more durable product less prone to failure at the beginning, yet that didn't really seem to impede sales in the first place. Maybe they would of had more games in development....but wait....they already had more games than PS3 in the beginning, so that still doesn't matter.
The idea is that if the two consoles switch released dates yet everything else about them remained the same, PS3 would have a 8-9million lead on 360 right now.I still think PS3 will eventually outsell it by generation's end. We saw this last gen when Xbox eventually outsold Gamecube in it's final years. This is just proof of selling power, PS3 has far better selling power with the most distinct barriers impeding it.
I do not think the head start is the only reason certain console's won their generation, but lets not kid ourselves, it damn sure helps.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/57911923/DQfpvkMU8AA_hnk.0.jpg)
