The guy who updates VGChartz is also guessing. His numbers aren't reliable in the slightest. Mentioning VGChartz on, say, NeoGAF will instantly get you banned.Indigo_Dingo said:If we didn't listen to sources that had pretentious names, we'd pretty much be guessing.
And this is because you sound like them. Except you are serious more often than not.Indigo_Dingo said:I see. So you stereotyped me, and lumped me in with those people. Thats just great.
No I just think you have zero chance of wearing that stuff, even if you want to be taken seriouslyIndigo_Dingo said:When I say all electronic gaming, what do you think I am referring to? Its in every gaming PC, Wii, 360, Ps3, DS, and PsP.AceDiamond said:Yeah and that also means we must stop using anything created by Bayer (and by association anything created as a result of aspirin), stop buying Volkswagens, and anything made by Siemens technology.Indigo_Dingo said:If we're going by past sins rather than present quality, can I point out this?Samah said:I think you'll find that the main reason Sony won the war was because they BOUGHT their win [http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/02/22/1939200]. Blu-Ray also has more restrictive DRM than HD-DVD, and the MAFIAA love that.dcheppy said:Believe it or not, the PS3 cemented blu-ray as the winner of the hi-def format wars, a lucrative win for Sony.
I refuse to buy any Sony product after what they did to Lik-Sang [http://www.lik-sang.com/index.html].
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust
That means that, unless you are a massive hypocrite, you must now renounce all forms of electronic gaming, and never touch a computer again. See ya.
Oh and, IBM had a hand in developing the PS3's Cell Processor, so I think you need to get rid of that. Unless of course this is a "do as i say not as I do" situation
What I'm saying is that he's being stupid for thinking that way.
And why didn't you mention Hugo Boss? Or is it that as gamers we have a 0% chance of ever wearing that stuff?
Probably should've read the rest of what I wrote, eh?Indigo_Dingo said:You can use meaningless internet rules all you like, you know I have a point - holding present day Sony fully responsible for that makes as much sense as holding present day IBM responsible for their work in helping the Nazis be so very efficient.
What point? What point were you trying to make? That throwing your money around just to get the media device you helped invent so you can take over a market you haven't been able to control since the 1970s is the same level of business douchebaggery as helping the nazis? If so, Fission Mailed buddeh.Indigo_Dingo said:I read what you said. Not my fault if you were completely missing the point of what I was saying because you are trying to be annoying.AceDiamond said:Probably should've read the rest of what I wrote, eh?Indigo_Dingo said:You can use meaningless internet rules all you like, you know I have a point - holding present day Sony fully responsible for that makes as much sense as holding present day IBM responsible for their work in helping the Nazis be so very efficient.
But yes, I suppose I should consider whether or not a country has recently declared war on mine when deciding to buy a product, or if a company colluded with a hostile nation half a century ago. Guess I'll never buy anything ever again.
Because that's how any serious analysis does things. There are too many seasonal factors to compare one month to the next (example: November sales are generally a few times higher than a few months before because of the Christmas rush), so seeing numbers compared year-to-year on the same month is a sign that the analyst has *some* semblance of credibility.Jumplion said:But one thing I don't get, why are people comparing the sales to last year? Wouldn't you compare them to the month before? I mean, I get it, it's the holidays and all, but a monthly sale is a monthly sale.
None of which disproves my point that this is over-hyped. The PS3 is not "dying on the shelves". Nothing in your post proved that statement invalid. Not doing as well as the last 2 times does not equal failure.brtshstel said:Even if the Playstation 3's market performance isn't as bad as the article says it is, the seventh generation is still a big departure for Sony. Considering that the previous two generations were both rocket-hot success stories for the multimedia supergiant du jour, the current console war in comparison is looking rather grim. The PlayStation in its two forms was the first home console (Game Boy notwithstanding) to surpass one hundred million units sold. The PlayStation 2 in its two forms was the fastest console to reach one hundred million units sold, is the best selling console of all time, the console that helped DVDs become the industry standard, not to mention that it was essentially *the* competing device that killed the Sega Dreamcast and Sega's hardware division altogether. No small feat if you ask me.SaintWaldo said:The NPD report this is from points out that PS3 still has a positive growth for year-on-year total units. November was just a bad month, and folks want the news to sound as gloomy as possible.
The PS3 is _not_ going the way of the Dreamcast because, um, PS3 (16mil+ as of Sept) already beaten the Dreamcast(10.1mil LIFETIME), in sales terms alone, soundly. That won't go away even if they fail to sell another unit, which will not happen.
Alas, the PlayStation 3 pushed the innovation envelope a bit too far. It's expensive(for both manufacturer and consumer), harder to program for, and lacks exclusive killer-apps that have done wonders for Microsoft and the past Sony consoles. Although it will take nothing short of an act of God to destroy Sony's gaming department, Sega had a very similar thing happen in the transition from successful Mega Drive (Genesis) to expensive-unpopular-overly-complicated Sega Saturn.
The problem Sony is currently facing, though, is that since their system is both the most expensive and the most expensive platform to develop for, they might end up like Nintendo did the last 2 gens. The first/second party support is excellent but outside that there's nothing to write home about. It's a slippery slope, really: you lose customers, you lose games, which in turn makes you lose customers and...you see where I'm going.SaintWaldo said:None of which disproves my point that this is over-hyped. The PS3 is not "dying on the shelves". Nothing in your post proved that statement invalid. Not doing as well as the last 2 times does not equal failure.