| DRJ said: Show me a console that has dipped below 10k/week in Japan or 100k/week in US that was able to recover... |
this is so stupid. Every console and every generation is different. Show me one console that dipped below 100k a week in the US that had a BD drive that neevr recovered, show me one console that sustained 100k a week that used motion sensing as its main control that never slowed down, show me one console with the most immersive online experience tha......well hopefully you get the point.
Analyze in relative terms, not X sold after X time, the N64 got off to a similar start in the states that the Wii did, does that mean the Wii is destined for N64 status compared to the PS? No, they are different consoles at different times with different variables. Its so assenine to compare console generations they are totally different products with different trends, different markets, different dollar values, different social impacts, different marketing, different consumers, different EVERYTHING.
You wanna talk in absolute sales the original Playstation sold liek hell for a long ass time, but it sold over 100 million worldwide.....oh, but that was sony first coming in right? So now people want to attach different variables when it doesnt help their absolute sales arguments. What about the N64 gettingoff to a tremendous start only to fall on its face and bow out to sony? Sounds similar to the PS3 and Wii comparisons in absolute sales right? Oh, but no because now its 600$ vs 250$ and the 360 is here the market is different right.
People only post sales correlation in absolute terms when it favors their choice, when the absolute terms dont line up with what they want to believe they throw in the logical variables but still cling to the absolute terms that benefit them. Look to the future/current sales to base your opinions on because past consoles have NOTHING to do with current consoles, far too many different variables.










