RolStoppable said: DMeisterJ said: I will! Eventually I don't want to bog another thread down with MK, but what if I win? What will you do with yourself? See my edit to my previous post. But in the case you win against me in Mario Kart, I would have to forget my pride and do something that I will be ashamed of for the rest of my life: I will send you a friend request.

Rofl!!

Prepare to lose your pride then. 

It's no use trying to argue with Impulsivity.

He apparently learned his "facts" from the comments in "Wii vs. PS3" videos.

Impulsivity said: Nintendo doing well is not a new phenomenon. Cheap last generation hardware almost ALWAYS outsells the latest and greatest but has a shorter shelf life. Both the Playstation and PSOne sold most of their huge 100 million+ sales when they dropped so far (to about 100 dollars) that they were easy impulse buys. The Wii just started where the PS2 and PS1 ended up, as cheap last gen tech that can be had cheaply. Its not like Sony couldn't have made a PS2.5 and undercut Nintendo on the Wii, but they made a conscious decision to prioritize HD adoption rather then simply units sold. They're playing a vastly different game. Nintendo likes to make money only in video games so they make cheap last gen hardware (the N64 was way behind vs PS1 and Saturn, the Gamecube was way behind both PS2 and Xbox, the Wii is behind vs 360 and PS3) that makes money early and provides a platform for their rerun 1st party games which more or less never change over decades. If you play N64 versions of all the Wii games there's not much difference (I would go further back but N64 moved things to 3D so they're more exactly the same though Galaxy is damn similar to Super Mario Bros). Mario 64 is incredibly similar to Galaxy, Orcania of Time is almost identical to Twilight Princess, Mario kart is identical to the early 90s SNES game (even pulling in some of the same stages). Nintendo capitalizes on old ideas and old tech and makes a lot of money doing it, but not as much as Sony does across all its markets. Nintendo this gen has beaten Sony marginally in gaming revenue (by about 10-20% depending on quarter) but Sony has made huge gains in HDTV sales, receiver sales, Blu Ray sales and countless other peripheral markets that depend on cutting edge tech to drive business. I've spent thousands on Sony gear that can use the PS3's 1080p high def technology I would never have bought for a Wii (I can't even get above 480p graphics with that) Go ahead and say Nintendo is "winning" on gaming revenue, but do you really want 2001 graphics for the next 20 years? Every time I see imagine babies and the like all over gamestop (and sales charts) now it makes me very sad, but just because a company can clean up making mainly cheap crap with high margins doesn't mean that a cutting edge company like Sony doesn't have a position (and isn't making WAY more revenue then Nintendo ever could across gaming and related electronics). The only one really losing is MS who has about 30% of either Nintendo's or Sony's gaming revenue and has none of Sony's related tech sales unless the RROD makes you want to buy a Zune. Don't forget to add in PS2 for your end of 2008 predictions, if you look at the charts the PS2 is still selling hundreds of thousands of units per month (and millions near the holidays).

Probably the worst and most ignorant post ever made in Vgchartz. I won't comment any of your points, it will take me too long, since they are all tremendously wrong.

 

trestres said: a Zune. Don't forget to add in PS2 for your end of 2008 predictions, if you look at the charts the PS2 is still selling hundreds of thousands of units per month (and millions near the holidays). Probably the worst and most ignorant post ever made in Vgchartz. I won't comment any of your points, it will take me too long, since they are all tremendously wrong.

For the first time ever, i agree with you, both this thread and that post were a shame.

I remember the GC sold very very well in it's first years, in fact thats when it got a lot of it's sales, which then fizzled out over the next 4 years.

My logic is that the people who intended on getting the GC for it's value in software knew what they wanted in it's first two years, after that the PS2 had more value.

I just want to know what that value was; relative to the increase in value to the GC.

I can do the other prediction about the PS3 - but I'm figuring it's leading towards the PS3 doing a GC but in it's second year, meaning that the first half of it's third year is when it should virtually flatline like the GC.

I might of been a shift in what value was, I know Microsoft had done some Viral marketting to keep Nintendo out of the picture, but it was Sony who sold the most not Microsoft... just figured it would be interesting - sadly my PS3's browser is iffy =/.

Somethings missing though... I might be grabbing for straws.

Impulsivity's post is representative of a lot of HD gamers ...

I would say that his inability to see the Wii as being successful and in direct competition with the PS3 and XBox 360 is mainly because he refuses to see games outside of the most narrow definition of what appeals to him, and he fails to recognize advancement that doesn't fall into his shallow opinions of what improvement is.

When you start to look at videogames in the broader sense, and look at how far the hardware technology has come from the Atari to the Wii, and then look at how little advancement has been made in the user interface from the NES to the XBox 360 it seems like it was about time to focus on something other than raw technical performance.

Impulsivity said: Nintendo doing well is not a new phenomenon. Cheap last generation hardware almost ALWAYS outsells the latest and greatest but has a shorter shelf life. Both the Playstation and PSOne sold most of their huge 100 million+ sales when they dropped so far (to about 100 dollars) that they were easy impulse buys. The Wii just started where the PS2 and PS1 ended up, as cheap last gen tech that can be had cheaply. Its not like Sony couldn't have made a PS2.5 and undercut Nintendo on the Wii, but they made a conscious decision to prioritize HD adoption rather then simply units sold. They're playing a vastly different game. Nintendo likes to make money only in video games so they make cheap last gen hardware (the N64 was way behind vs PS1 and Saturn, the Gamecube was way behind both PS2 and Xbox, the Wii is behind vs 360 and PS3) that makes money early and provides a platform for their rerun 1st party games which more or less never change over decades. If you play N64 versions of all the Wii games there's not much difference (I would go further back but N64 moved things to 3D so they're more exactly the same though Galaxy is damn similar to Super Mario Bros). Mario 64 is incredibly similar to Galaxy, Orcania of Time is almost identical to Twilight Princess, Mario kart is identical to the early 90s SNES game (even pulling in some of the same stages). Nintendo capitalizes on old ideas and old tech and makes a lot of money doing it, but not as much as Sony does across all its markets. Nintendo this gen has beaten Sony marginally in gaming revenue (by about 10-20% depending on quarter) but Sony has made huge gains in HDTV sales, receiver sales, Blu Ray sales and countless other peripheral markets that depend on cutting edge tech to drive business. I've spent thousands on Sony gear that can use the PS3's 1080p high def technology I would never have bought for a Wii (I can't even get above 480p graphics with that) Go ahead and say Nintendo is "winning" on gaming revenue, but do you really want 2001 graphics for the next 20 years? Every time I see imagine babies and the like all over gamestop (and sales charts) now it makes me very sad, but just because a company can clean up making mainly cheap crap with high margins doesn't mean that a cutting edge company like Sony doesn't have a position (and isn't making WAY more revenue then Nintendo ever could across gaming and related electronics). The only one really losing is MS who has about 30% of either Nintendo's or Sony's gaming revenue and has none of Sony's related tech sales unless the RROD makes you want to buy a Zune. Don't forget to add in PS2 for your end of 2008 predictions, if you look at the charts the PS2 is still selling hundreds of thousands of units per month (and millions near the holidays).

Wow, just wow.  Is this a joke post?  If so, it's brilliant.  If not, it's the very epitome of epic phai.  Seriously, I'd bet if you looked up 'epic phail' on wikipedia, it would link to this post.

@thread:

I think it's a bit premature to compare the ps3 and 360 to the xbox and gamecube, but I understand sham's basic idea.

Congratulations Impulsivity, the only person who can match that is Rolstoppable.

Ajax said: Sonydomination starts with Little Big Planet

What's little big planet?

TheBigFatJ said: Ajax said: Sonydomination starts with Little Big Planet What's little big planet?

is this a joke post?

if not,its a platformer developed/published by sony,its very hyped