By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Does Sony win every generation by default?

think-man said:

I'm just dumbfounded as to how Anfebious and Pavalink understood me but you didn't....Oh well, you even replied to my comment and said "Well, it makes more sense when you put it this way." then you suddenly forgot.

Uttly dumbfounded.


 

Anfebious said:

So... Sony lost the generation through bad choices that's okay. But Nintendo didn't win it through good ones? How exactly? Are you implying that Sony's fuck up was the whole reason of the Wii success? I certainly don't agree with that.

think-man said:
Pavolink said:


Do you really believe people around the world would have passed from the Wii to buy a PS3? Do they have a reason to pass from the cool console to buy another PS console?

And to answer the OP, yes Sony wins by default because the other two are incompetent, not because Sony did something noteworthy.

Read my reply to Anfebious I probably wasn't clear enough in my first post. My bad

So yeah, exactly what I said in my previous post. Nothing to be dumbfounded about.

The other two read you original post the same way i did.

As for my, "Well, it makes more sense when you put it this way." post. I didn't forget it but you replied to my first post as if you were arguing with the point i made and challenging me to prove it, so I carried on since I figured if you thought it wasn't along the same line as what you were trying to convey you wouldn't have replied in that manner.

 

think-man said:
Play4Fun said:
think-man said:

Each to their own.


Each their own what? That was fact, not opinion.

No it can't be proven, thus it's an opinion :)

 

Good day sir.

So yeah, it's all on you.



Around the Network
ECM said:
Shorter thread: Sony wins except when it doesn't.

I hate when people steal things that I was going to say.

OT: What a silly thread.



think-man said:
DucksUnlimited said:
Play4Fun said:
 
 

 

Nothing about Xbox 360 or the Wii having the same sales, so the only way to read that is that you though thatt had Sony not fucked up PS3, Wii wouldn't have sold like it did instead PS3 would have dominated the sales chart

So don't be acting like you made yourself clear and people simply didn't understand. Next time try to be more thorough with your post so your meaning actually comes through, like you did afterwards:

 

 

Uhh...what? His point was very clear from the start. Don't blame him for your inability to comprehend his post.

Id say, we are just going in circles when he even said at the start of the argument that it made sense then 5 minutes later it suddenly didn't make sense anymore lol





The thing is, there are 4 main ways of differentiation: price, performance, innovation and convenience.

- Playstation, and some other Sony products, always try to differentiate from the competition by performance. This is an easy decision to Sony, since they are the one with most know-how about hardware manufacturing from the big 3.
This would mean, in theory, that Nintendo/MS have to choose between:
1) A weaker Hardware, at the same price point
2) A similar Hardware, at a higher price point
3) A similar hardware, sold at loss, so it can have a similar price point
While this does not seal the fate of a gen, it gives Sony a more tangible advantage. Albeit this HW advantage is only really important if it reachs the mainstream public (those who don't read Digital Foundry and don't watch IGN comparative videos).


- Nintendo, on the other hand, tries differentiation by innovation.
Innovation is a two-edged sword. If you have a hit, it doesn't really matter your competition performance edge over you, you are set to trounce it or ignore it (Iphone, DS, Wii). On the other hand, if you have a flop, you are probably stuck in an even worst situation than just being weaker.

And the thing with innovation is that is never easy to see. If it was easy, somebody else would have done that already, and it wouldn't be innovation anymore.


PS: i'm not saying this is the only variable of the industry, but towards a "default" aspect, i think that's how i see those companys.



DucksUnlimited said:
Play4Fun said:
 
 

 

Nothing about Xbox 360 or the Wii having the same sales, so the only way to read that is that you though thatt had Sony not fucked up PS3, Wii wouldn't have sold like it did instead PS3 would have dominated the sales chart

So don't be acting like you made yourself clear and people simply didn't understand. Next time try to be more thorough with your post so your meaning actually comes through, like you did afterwards:

 

 

Uhh...what? His point was very clear from the start. Don't blame him for your inability to comprehend his post.


You just came in, you have no idea what i am reffering to.



Around the Network
Play4Fun said:
think-man said:

I'm just dumbfounded as to how Anfebious and Pavalink understood me but you didn't....Oh well, you even replied to my comment and said "Well, it makes more sense when you put it this way." then you suddenly forgot.

Uttly dumbfounded.


 

Anfebious said:

So... Sony lost the generation through bad choices that's okay. But Nintendo didn't win it through good ones? How exactly? Are you implying that Sony's fuck up was the whole reason of the Wii success? I certainly don't agree with that.

think-man said:
Pavolink said:


Do you really believe people around the world would have passed from the Wii to buy a PS3? Do they have a reason to pass from the cool console to buy another PS console?

And to answer the OP, yes Sony wins by default because the other two are incompetent, not because Sony did something noteworthy.

Read my reply to Anfebious I probably wasn't clear enough in my first post. My bad

So yeah, exactly what I said in my previous post. Nothing to be dumbfounded about.

The other two read you original post the same way i did.

As for my, "Well, it makes more sense when you put it this way." post. I didn't forget it but you replied to my first post as if you were arguing with the point i made and challenging me to prove it, so I carried on since I figured if you thought it wasn't along the same line as what you were trying to convey you wouldn't have replied in that manner.

 

think-man said:
Play4Fun said:
think-man said:

Each to their own.


Each their own what? That was fact, not opinion.

No it can't be proven, thus it's an opinion :)

 

Good day sir.

So yeah, it's all on you.

So if you understood from that post over an hour ago why did you continue to act like you didn't understand and waste both our time?

Seems silly to me.



Play4Fun said:
DucksUnlimited said:
Play4Fun said:
 
 

 

Nothing about Xbox 360 or the Wii having the same sales, so the only way to read that is that you though thatt had Sony not fucked up PS3, Wii wouldn't have sold like it did instead PS3 would have dominated the sales chart

So don't be acting like you made yourself clear and people simply didn't understand. Next time try to be more thorough with your post so your meaning actually comes through, like you did afterwards:

 

 

Uhh...what? His point was very clear from the start. Don't blame him for your inability to comprehend his post.


You just came in, you have no idea what i am reffering to.

Believe it or not, I don't have to be in a thread while you're typing to see what you've typed. I actually read the whole exchange so I absolutely know what you're referring to, shocking as it may be.



think-man said:
Play4Fun said:

So if you understood from that post over an hour ago why did you continue to act like you didn't understand and waste both our time?

Seems silly to me.

Like i said in my last post:

As for my, "Well, it makes more sense when you put it this way." post. I didn't forget it but you replied to my first post as if you were arguing with the point i made and challenging me to prove it, so I carried on since I figured if you thought it wasn't along the same line as what you were trying to convey you wouldn't have replied in that manner.

You wasted your time. It's night here and I can't sleep. I got plenty of time for this.



DucksUnlimited said:
Play4Fun said:
DucksUnlimited said:

Believe it or not, I don't have to be in a thread while you're typing to see what you've typed. I actually read the whole exchange so I absolutely know what you're referring to, shocking as it may be.


Judging from your posts, no you don't.

You said he was clear from the beginning. He himself admitted he wasn't, so it had nothing to do with me having poor comprehension like you suggested.



Play4Fun said:
think-man said:
Play4Fun said:

So if you understood from that post over an hour ago why did you continue to act like you didn't understand and waste both our time?

Seems silly to me.

Like i said in my last post:

As for my, "Well, it makes more sense when you put it this way." post. I didn't forget it but you replied to my first post as if you were arguing with the point i made and challenging me to prove it, so I carried on since I figured if you thought it wasn't along the same line as what you were trying to convey you wouldn't have replied in that manner.

You wasted your time. It's night here and I can't sleep. I got plenty of time for this.

I didn't challenge you to prove anything, I simply said "each to their own" because at that point I believed we were all on the same page, then when I started getting strange replies I cleared it up and that's when you said it made sense. But then went back to before the comment like it never happened. I'm just surprised we had this whole conversion if you knew what I meant all the way back there.