How do the sales prove that 360 and Wii sales are independent? Do you really think that if the Wii dropped off the planet right now that the 360 would not be affected in any significant way?

Microsoft original xbox is also the first console to have a Hard drive (which they lost their ass on and learned their lesson) The first console to have standard ethernet port for broadband (dreamcast had a 56K modem standard), first console to have an online social network built for gamers.
Really if you think about it the original xbox it was quite a revolutionary console that was ahead of its time (even those these were concepts from the PC), and the 360 is the refined improved version. I still have to hand it to Nintendo though as I feel that nearly every generation they do something that is completely original. Some notable Nintendo firsts that everyone else copied would be analog sticks, force feeback, and motion control.

JaggedSac said: Jeronimo66 said: JaggedSac said: Jeronimo66 said: JaggedSac said: Jeronimo, there is absolutely no way to prove your point.    Maybe I can. Impress me.      I am kind off waiting on Montanas reply to go further but I did post this in case you missed it: Wii sales do not affect Xbox 360 or Visa Versa, not in any significant way, especially from the multiplatform games example I showed you earlier, when games come out on 360 the same version does not come out for the Wii or visa versa, 360 sales affect PS3 sales and visa versa, because 95 percent of the games are on both, the Wii is different and doing it's own thing the sales prove what I am saying. There is no proof here.  Proofs require facts.

I know I was just putting a general idea out there that I believe makes sense.

 

Torillian said: How do the sales prove that 360 and Wii sales are independent? Do you really think that if the Wii dropped off the planet right now that the 360 would not be affected in any significant way?

 

 No I do not believe 360 sales would increase in a significant way, yes sales would increase but not significantly, but if 360 or PS3 were to leave the planet, watch sales grow tremendously.

technically wouldnt the arcade be the ones to thank for this? i mean they gave scores to how good you were to a certain game, that score translates to how good you were and how well you knew the game. achievements / trophies are just the modern day high score system.

anyways whatever its just a way to give gamers satisfaction.

I think 360 sales would not increase in a significant way because peoples attention would now shift not only on 360 but also on the PS3, especially when PS3 hits 299.

gergroy said: There was plently of backlash at the time. Although, you don't see as much sony bashing on this site, the sony fans are over represented here. Which is kind of sad because I really like sony a lot, but I feel myself siding with microsoft a lot on here just because I feel they are getting the short end of the stick.

Now it's MS that's getting the short end of the stick? Two years of Sony/PS3 bashing (inaccurately bashing most of the time btw), but a few MS bashing threads (most are accurately bashing them for dirty tactics, etc) over a few months is making you feel that way? I wonder what you were doing in Sony/PS3 bashing thread a year or more ago. Were you agreeing that the PS3 was not as powerful as the X360 or the PS3 wasn't meant for gaming threads? How about the "no games" threads just a little over a year ago? There was PLENTY of Sony/PS3 bashing over 2 years because those people were/are misinformed. There are people still thinking the Blu-ray drive in the PS3 is slower than the DVD drive in the X360. There are people still thinking that the Blu-ray drive cost Sony $300+ per PS3 at launch. It was actually just $125. They were using that to bash the PS3 for being $600 instead of $400 at launch. The fact that the console was subsidized more than ANY console in history (near $300) BECAUSE OF the Blu-ray push didn't even register in their heads. They didn't realize the BD drive was basically free to consumers. The point of all that was to say Sony/PS3 should get a free pass for, AT LEAST, a year or more of INaccurate bashing like MS/X360 had. However a lot of the MS/X360 bashing threads are accurate.

Ascended_Saiyan3 said: gergroy said: There was plently of backlash at the time. Although, you don't see as much sony bashing on this site, the sony fans are over represented here. Which is kind of sad because I really like sony a lot, but I feel myself siding with microsoft a lot on here just because I feel they are getting the short end of the stick.   Now it's MS that's getting the short end of the stick? Two years of Sony/PS3 bashing (inaccurately bashing most of the time btw), but a few MS bashing threads (most are accurately bashing them for dirty tactics, etc) over a few months is making you feel that way? I wonder what you were doing in Sony/PS3 bashing thread a year or more ago. Were you agreeing that the PS3 was not as powerful as the X360 or the PS3 wasn't meant for gaming threads? How about the "no games" threads just a little over a year ago? There was PLENTY of Sony/PS3 bashing over 2 years because those people were/are misinformed. There are people still thinking the Blu-ray drive in the PS3 is slower than the DVD drive in the X360. There are people still thinking that the Blu-ray drive cost Sony $300+ per PS3 at launch. It was actually just $125. They were using that to bash the PS3 for being $600 instead of $400 at launch. The fact that the console was subsidized more than ANY console in history (near $300) BECAUSE OF the Blu-ray push didn't even register in their heads. They didn't realize the BD drive was basically free to consumers. The point of all that was to say Sony/PS3 should get a free pass for, AT LEAST, a year or more of INaccurate bashing like MS/X360 had. However a lot of the MS/X360 bashing threads are accurate.

Thanks for posting, but this thread isn't about console bashing. 

There was no backlash because Sony was only giving people what they wanted. Nobody cares that it's been done before.

Much silliness in this thread, I'm afraid. Saying the 360 and Wii aren't in competition with each other is nonsense: they are. Saying the 360 is a bastion of original ideas is nonsense: it isn't. Claiming Trophies have nothing to do with Achievements is nonsense: they're an almost direct copy. Saying Sony received no stick for implementing the Trophy system is nonsense: they did.

In fact, the more I think about this thread, the more it annoys me for the nonsense it espouses. Instead, let's see if we can tackle the central topic with a little less bias.

The 360 has Achievements. Achievements are a refinement of previous reward systems and High Score tables. Every 360 game has a number of challenges, called Acheivements, set by the game's developer. Completing an Achievement increases your Gamerscore -- basically your combined High Score for all the 360 games you have played. Most people see Achievements and Gamerscore as a new direction for old ideas, and a fairly awesome one as well.

Later, Sony, after many complaints from its userbase, and after losing multi-platform sales to the 360, implemented their Trophy system on the PS3. It was basically a blatant copy of the Achievement system with a bunch of new names and a couple of very minor innovations.

At the time Sony announced they were implementing Trophies it was blasted from many quarters for copying Microsoft. There was also much cheering from Sony fans that they were getting their own Achievement system, because, as already noted, many had been calling for it. Equally, there was much taunting from Microsoft fans because they Sony was late to the party and was unlikely to ever have a unified system as the developers could not be forced to update old games. At the time of the trophy implementation with Firmware 2.4, articles flooded the internet about Sony copying Microsoft. Some were nice. Some slammed Sony hard. Some simply said: 'about time, too'.

So, to answer the OP:

'...now I am not getting upset because of all this, my thing is where is the backlash that, Sony COPIED Microsoft?'

You were obviously paying attention at the time. For the months leading up to, and the months after it's implementation in the middle of last year, there was a significant backlash against Trophies. There was much crowing. 360 fans jeered. PS3 fans cheered. You get the idea. Just do an internet search and you'll find it all there in the past in all its ugliness. Just because you missed it does not mean it didn't happen.

Really, you are very late to the party.

'All I have to say to all you Playstation Fans is this, whenever you get the satisfaction of a trophy just remember who came up with the idea first.'

Why? I don't care where a particular feature was sourced from in the past, all I care about is whether I like what I have. I like Trophies. I like Achievements. I collect both. I care nothing for the companies behind them. I care about having fun playing games.

'Microsoft is innovativing in the videogame industry and not enough people is giving Microsoft credit with their mouth, just with their Wallets, Why is that?'

Because Microsoft have not innovated that much. All the have done is take a bunch of PC gaming staples, unified them in their console, added a funky achievement system, then charged for it. It's not all that innovative (well, perhaps the charging is; other platform holders are probably still kicking themselves). If Microsoft did something substantially new, and more often, then they would be complimented more, I'm sure.

Personally, I think Achievements and their copies are awesome. They may not be unique to Microsoft, but all games on the 360 have them, and that deserves a mention as a first, and a industry-defining first, as others are now playing catch-up. But that does not mean Microsoft should be lauded as the Innovation Kings, as that would be pretty laughable when you look at what they have, and how it got there.