Playstation 2 Outselling Xbox 360

Posted by Domino

Info from September issue of GamePro Magazine:

The Playstation 2 has been consistenly outselling the Xbox 360 since Microsoft's new hit the market seven months ago. Using data collected from The NPD group, online site Ars Technica found that the Playstation 2 substantially outselling the Xbox 360.
According to it's research, "Microsoft has averaged 246,000 console sales each month in the U.S, while the PS2 has seen an average of 473,000 units- a number bolstered by an estimated 1.5 million sales in December alone. Leaving out December, Sony's average drops to 302,000 per month, still outpacing the Xbox 360 by a healthy margin.

This news confuses me and gives me a good example of what the future will look like. I'm not a Sony fanboy, but I did find this interesting.

Posted by Vampiro V. Empire

I'm supposed to be surprised by this?

Posted by Axis

Hmmmm... Playstation 2 is 130 dollars... Xbox 360 is 400 (In some cases 300). I wonder what people will go for? Would they go for the 130 dollar system that has a huge library of games or go for a 400 dollar console that doesn't have a huge library?

Posted by Prince Shondronai

Indeed. The true test for the 360 will begin when the Wii and ps3 come out, as well as the 360's killer aps. 360 has a solid enough lineup right now, but I'm sure it'll be a much bigger deal when Halo 3 and Gears of War and such come out. Sadly, unless the big name Japanese game developers jump ship from sony to Microsoft, I don't see the 360 ever hitting it big in Japan.

Posted by Klarth

No small fucking wonder considering one's been around half a decade longer than the other. Plus, it's cheaper.

I HEARD THE NES OUTSOLD THE PSP BY A LONG WAY GUYS

Posted by Vampiro V. Empire

Quoted post: No small ****ing wonder considering one's been around half a decade longer than the other. Plus, it's cheaper.

I HEARD THE NES OUTSOLD THE PSP BY A LONG WAY GUYS

Per month. There's more PS2s sold per month than 360s.

Posted by Aioros

Quoting Vampiro: Per month. There's more PS2s sold per month than 360s.

[COLOR="Yellow"]It's sad that it that the point of the article has to be explained to some people very slowly and word for word.[/COLOR]

Posted by Klarth

Ugh, Aioros, you're ****ing braindead. The fact that it's been around for longer means that it's been open to multiple pricedrops AND the thing's userbase and popularity is far more established.

Posted by higbvuyb

Quoting Klarth: Ugh, Aioros, you're ****ing braindead. The fact that it's been around for longer means that it's been open to multiple pricedrops AND the thing's userbase and popularity is far more established.

Yeah, and since the PS2 breaks down more regularly, you have to buy a new one more often.

Posted by Bebop

Why are people STILL buying these? Why?

Posted by TendoAddict

Quoting Bebop: Why are people STILL buying these? Why?

Because they keep breaking down and people are too afraid to get things repaired. Hopefully, I hear sony's planning to sell PS2's in a bakers dozen. Should save them both time.

Posted by Vampiro V. Empire

I highly doubt even half of 473,000 PS2s break down per month. The reasons listed above about a more established library and a far cheaper price are far more likely.

Posted by Aioros

[COLOR="Yellow"]The argument isn't which console has sold more, virgin. It's surprising because as you said, a console that has already been out for half a decade (which means it's entire fanbase already owns it) is outselling the 360. either make sense next time you post or don't bother, i don't speak idiot.[/COLOR]

Posted by Speedfreak

[quote=Aioros][COLOR=yellow]The argument isn't which console has sold more, virgin. It's surprising because as you said, a console that has already been out for half a decade (which means it's entire fanbase already owns it) is outselling the 360. either make sense next time you post or don't bother, i don't speak idiot.[/COLOR]

I'd be totally with you if you didn't use "virgin" as an insult. That ain't cool. Not to mention factually incorrect!

Posted by higbvuyb

Quoting Aioros: [COLOR="Yellow"]The argument isn't which console has sold more, virgin. It's surprising because as you said, a console that has already been out for half a decade (which means it's entire fanbase already owns it) is outselling the 360.[/COLOR]

Hey, you know what? Time passes. You understand that? That also means that people grow older. If a young child gets older, guess what they can do? Correct. They can play computer games. What do they or their parents parents, ignorant of the differences between consoles do? Yep. They buy the cheapest one that they have heard about. Which console is that? The Playstation 2. Do they know that the Xbox 360 is vastly better? No, and they can't be bothered paying the extra money. As people get older, older gamers they stop playing their PS2s, and newer ones buy PS2s. The fanbase is constantly moving, unlike you, who will remain in a pitifully early stage of mental development.

Klarth, being far more intelligent than you, didn't see the need to explain something simple as this, as the average person would understand.

Posted by s0ul

The next logical step in this argument, after calling each other stupid and virgins is clearly yo momma jokes. PROCEED

Posted by Speedfreak

[quote=higbvuyb]Hey, you know what? Time passes. You understand that? That also means that people grow older. If a young child gets older, guess what they can do? Correct. They can play computer games. What do they or their parents parents, ignorant of the differences between consoles do? Yep. They buy the cheapest one that they have heard about. Which console is that? The Playstation 2. Do they know that the Xbox 360 is vastly better? No, and they can't be bothered paying the extra money. As people get older, older gamers they stop playing their PS2s, and newer ones buy PS2s. The fanbase is constantly moving, unlike you, who will remain in a pitifully early stage of mental development.

Klarth, being far more intelligent than you, didn't see the need to explain something simple as this, as the average person would understand.

PS2 has been out 5 years, not 20.

360 should be selling more than PS2, the market is pretty much saturated with them. So either PS2 is selling amazingly well or 360 is seriously underperforming.

Posted by higbvuyb

I meant that people who were not old enough to play playstation games became older and then bought a playstation 2, so the user base is nto stagnant.

Posted by Speedfreak

Not enough people would get into that age group in 5 years to keep console sales strong, otherwise they wouldn't bother making anymore consoles. If Sony could sustain these sales for the next 50 years do you honestly think they'd bother with losing several billion on PS3?

It's basic business. The gaming market isn't very big, less children are taking up videogames and the rest of it is already saturated. Your theory is bunk.

Posted by Aioros

Quoting higbvuyb: Hey, you know what? Time passes. You understand that? That also means that people grow older. If a young child gets older, guess what they can do? Correct. They can play computer games. What do they or their parents parents, ignorant of the differences between consoles do? Yep. They buy the cheapest one that they have heard about. Which console is that? The Playstation 2. Do they know that the Xbox 360 is vastly better? No, and they can't be bothered paying the extra money. As people get older, older gamers they stop playing their PS2s, and newer ones buy PS2s. The fanbase is constantly moving, unlike you, who will remain in a pitifully early stage of mental development.

[COLOR="Yellow"]That statement makes no sense, whatsoever.

Kids do grow and their console or game preference matures as well. But not in as little as 5 years. Even if what you said was true on a different universe where kids miraculously grow and mature 3 times faster than humans, the Playstation 2 isn't even the cheapest home console on the market right now.[/COLOR]

Posted by higbvuyb

Quoting Aioros: [COLOR="Yellow"]That statement makes no sense, whatsoever.
Learn proper english, and you might understand. Unfortunately for you, you don't seem to have enough brain cells.

[quote]Kids do grow and their console or game preference matures as well. But not in as little as 5 years. Even if what you said was true on a different universe where kids miraculously grow and mature 3 times faster than humans, the Playstation 2 isn't even the cheapest home console on the market right now.[/COLOR]

Its the console with the 'best' balance between cost and being well known.
Since about 33 percent of people own a console, assume that every year, 33% of 1/100th of the population buys a console.

The US has a population of 300 million. 33% of 3 million is 1 million.
So, that's about 83,333 consoles sold per month, due to the aging population. Which is a significant proportion of all games console sales.

And that's an absolute low end estimate, because younger poeple are far more likely to buy a console than older people.

Posted by Speedfreak

[quote=higbvuyb]Learn proper english, and you might understand. Unfortunately for you, you don't seem to have enough brain cells.

Its the console with the 'best' balance between cost and being well known.
Since about 33 percent of people own a console, assume that every year, 33% of 1/100th of the population buys a console.

The US has a population of 300 million. 33% of 3 million is 1 million.
So, that's about 83,333 consoles sold per month, due to the aging population. Which is a significant proportion of all games console sales.

And that's an absolute low end estimate, because younger poeple are far more likely to buy a console than older people.

If those kind of sales were sustainable, and the market really was constantly growing at such a rate, why on earth do you think these companies would produce new consoles that lose billions of dollars? Purely to give us better graphics because they're nice like that?

Posted by Prince Shondronai

Quoting Speedfreak: If those kind of sales were sustainable, and the market really was constantly growing at such a rate, why on earth do you think these companies would produce new consoles that lose billions of dollars? Purely to give us better graphics because they're nice like that?

They're not? You used me, Nintendo! YOU USED ME!

Posted by higbvuyb

Quoting Speedfreak: If those kind of sales were sustainable, and the market really was constantly growing at such a rate
No. Market growth means that the rate at which people buy the product is increasing. (basically). However, my figures mean that if the population stays roughly the same, the growth rate will be almost zero, because a console is not an object that needs to be constantly bought, as in, it's not 'consumable'.

[quote]why on earth do you think these companies would produce new consoles that lose billions of dollars? Purely to give us better graphics because they're nice like that?

Because the more consoles they sell, the more games people buy, and the mroe money they get from selling games, and royalty fees, etc. By your logic, they shouldn't be selling any consoles at all.

Posted by Speedfreak

[quote=higbvuyb]No. Market growth means that the rate at which people buy the product is increasing. (basically). However, my figures mean that if the population stays roughly the same, the growth rate will be almost zero, because a console is not an object that needs to be constantly bought, as in, it's not 'consumable'..

You are batshit crazy.

First off, "market growth" means exactly that, the market growing. What you described as the rate at which buy the product is increasing is what is called positive market growth. Which is to say the market is growing and the rate at which it is growing is getting faster.
The opposite of that is negative market growth, which means the market is still growing but the rate at which it is growing is slowing down, which is what was happening in Japan until Nintendo boosted it in the last couple of years with DS.
The market would shrink through people leaving gaming and there being a lack of new younger gamers to replace them, which in actual fact is what's starting to happen in the US. Less youngsters, as a matter of fact, are taking up gaming.

[quote=higbvuyb]Because the more consoles they sell, the more games people buy, and the mroe money they get from selling games, and royalty fees, etc. By your logic, they shouldn't be selling any consoles at all.

What the hell do you mean "by my logic"? The only opinion I've given in this thread that isn't an attack on yours is

"[FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90]So either PS2 is selling amazingly well or 360 is seriously underperforming."[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90][/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90][/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90]You didn't even answer the question, regardless. You have clearly stated that it's possible to keep sales of systems high due to aging population, that is the entire basis of your arguement.[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90]I know as a matter of fact that launching a new system costs billions of dollars in R&D and the loss made on every system sold, and much more profit is made on games than there ever is on the systems themselves.[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90][/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90]Based on your logic and my facts, we can conclude this:[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90][/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90]- More money is made on games than hardware [/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90]- A huge userbase cements developer support indefinately[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90]- New hardware costs billions to design and manufacture[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90]- Hardware sales are sustainable indefinately due to aging population[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90][/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90]The problem with that is this renders developing new hardware inherently pointless, because you'd be able to make way more money keeping the current hardware and exploiting the gigantic userbase. And this doesn't reflect reality, so something in the conclusion is clearly wrong. There's only a few things that can be wrong: the concept that new systems cost billions to manufacture (fact); the concept that a huge userbase generates more developer support, game sales and eventually more money (fact); and the concept that an aging population is enough to sustain console sales (based on figures entirely off the top of your head).[/COLOR][/FONT]

[FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90]I'm willing to bet my age-old facts will stand up to scrutiny more than your figures![/COLOR][/FONT]

Posted by Aioros

Quoting Speedfreak: [COLOR="lightgreen"]You are batshit crazy.[/COLOR]

[COLOR="Yellow"]Best summarizes what i was about to say.

I'm done arguing with somebody who seems to keep making up points as he goes.[/COLOR]

Posted by higbvuyb

Quoting Speedfreak]You are batshit crazy.
No, you and paul are both too retarded to understand your own language.

Quoted post: First off, "market growth" means exactly that, the market growing. What you described as the rate at which buy the product is increasing is what is called positive market growth. Which is to say the market is growing and the rate at which it is growing is getting faster.

The opposite of that is negative market growth, which means the market is still growing but the rate at which it is growing is slowing down, which is what was happening in Japan until Nintendo boosted it in the last couple of years with DS.

So, you'rte posting barely relevant definitions of somethign that I already know the meaning of? Amazing.

[quote]The market would shrink through people leaving gaming and there being a lack of new younger gamers to replace them, which in actual fact is what's starting to happen in the US. Less youngsters, as a matter of fact, are taking up gaming.
My point is that the given figures are only because of new console buyers who 'know' the PS2 better than the XBox 360, and it's cheaper, and so they're more liekly to buy the PS2 than the XBox 360. And my figures support the fact that the consoles sold to the new console buyers makes up a significant proportion of those consoles that were sold, so those figures don't necessarily mean anyhting other than that peopel are to reytarded to realise that teh Xbox360 is better than the PS2, or they're too poor to afford the XBox 360.

[quote]What the hell do you mean "by my logic"? The only opinion I've given in this thread that isn't an attack on yours is
First, I said what I detailed jsut above. THen, you came up with this:
"If those kind of sales were sustainable, and the market really was constantly growing at such a rate, why on earth do you think these companies would produce new consoles that lose billions of dollars? Purely to give us better graphics because they're nice like that?"

First, due to your stupidity, you implied that what I meant was that the market was growing.
You know, buying a console isn't like buying cheese: You usually only buy each console once, but if you start eating cheese and you like it, you keep buying it. If about the same number of people buy a console each month because the population is aging, the number of people buying consoles because of that will REMAIN TEH SAME EVERY MONTH. That's ZERO amrket growth. Growth means that it's GETTING BIGGER. If somethign stays roughly the same every year, that's NOT GROWTH. Do you get it now? The whole basis of your argument is just irrelevant to what you said.

Quoted post: [FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90]I know as a matter of fact that launching a new system costs billions of dollars in R&D and the loss made on every system sold, and much more profit is made on games than there ever is on the systems themselves.[/COLOR][/FONT]

According to your logic, conpanies shouldn't make or sell any mroe consoles, because it maens they take a loss.
But, if they don't sell consoles at all, people who are new to the market because of the aging population (i.e they don't have consoles yet) won't be able to buy a console, and so they won't be able to buy any games. SO the games market won't grow. Unless they sell mroe consoles to poeple who don't have them yet.

Also, the people who already have to console will move to PCs for gaming, when consoles stagnate and PCs have far better graphics and processing speed.

[quote][FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90][/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90]Based on your logic and my facts, we can conclude this:[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90][/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90]- More money is made on games than hardware [/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90]- A huge userbase cements developer support indefinately[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90]- New hardware costs billions to design and manufacture[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90]- Hardware sales are sustainable indefinately due to aging population[/COLOR][/FONT]
[FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90][/COLOR][/FONT]
[quote][FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90]The problem with that is this renders developing new hardware inherently pointless, because you'd be able to make way more money keeping the current hardware and exploiting the gigantic userbase. And this doesn't reflect reality, so something in the conclusion is clearly wrong. There's only a few things that can be wrong: the concept that new systems cost billions to manufacture (fact): [/FONT]
Many things wrong with this. You haven't included the fact that "If Consoles fall too far behind PCs in performance, the many people who want games with good graphics, etc, will move to the PC and no longer buy console games".
Look at it like this. Say that the games industry makes no more new consoles and just games when the NES is released. After many years, far more advanced games such as Halo, etc come out on the PC, which has far better performance than the NEs come out. Would you ratehr play Pacman on your console or Halo on your PC? I'd say, the average person would rather play games on teh PC. So, console manufacturers lose much of their revenue.

Also, how is what I said relevant to your argument? If console sales weren't sustainable, as you say, less and less consoles would be sold. This doesn't mean that developping new hardware now does have a point, as you're implying.

[quote][FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90]I'm willing to bet my age-old facts will stand up to scrutiny more than your figures![/COLOR][/FONT]

No they won't especially if your entire argument is flawed.

Quoting Paul Cesar: I'm done arguing with somebody who seems to keep making up points as he goes.

Nice contribution to teh thread, dumbass!
Anyway, you're meant ot make up your points. WHat do you think you do, copy them out of a textbook?

Posted by Speedfreak

[quote][FONT=Arial][COLOR=#e0e0e0]So, you'rte posting barely relevant definitions of somethign that I already know the meaning of? Amazing.[/COLOR][/FONT]

This is ridiculous. You didn't know what they meant because your definitions of them are different to what they actually mean.

[quote][FONT=Arial][COLOR=#e0e0e0] "If Consoles fall too far behind PCs in performance, the many people who want games with good graphics, etc, will move to the PC and no longer buy console games".[/COLOR][/FONT]

PCs are always ahead of consoles, pretty much without fail. There's already a graphics card that rapes RSX and Xenos, by the end of this year there will be cards that outperform both consoles combined. Graphics mean farely little to a platform's success. PCs are a niche market, and they are the exception.

[quote][FONT=Arial][COLOR=#e0e0e0]Anyway, you're meant ot make up your points.[/COLOR][/FONT]

Did I hear you correctly? Did you just say you are supposed to make s[COLOR=lightgreen]h[/COLOR]it up in an arguement?

[quote][FONT=Arial][COLOR=#e0e0e0]According to your logic, conpanies shouldn't make or sell any mroe consoles, because it maens they take a loss.
But, if they don't sell consoles at all, people who are new to the market because of the aging population (i.e they don't have consoles yet) won't be able to buy a console, and so they won't be able to buy any games. SO the games market won't grow. Unless they sell mroe consoles to poeple who don't have them yet.

Also, the people who already have to console will move to PCs for gaming, when consoles stagnate and PCs have far better graphics and processing speed.[/COLOR][/FONT]

You just don't get it. You haven't even seen my logic, you total imbecile. I've been using your logic in conjuction with well known and obvious facts and highlighting the inconsistencies, thereby proving your logic false. That's how I decided to prove you wrong. I could have just ripped apart your absolutely mental calculations, but I prefer to do it this way.

Regardless, people don't migrate to greater processing speed, they migrate to better games. That's why PS2 won this generation, that's why console games sell better than PC games.

[quote][FONT=Arial][COLOR=#e0e0e0]No they won't especially if your entire argument is flawed.[/COLOR][/FONT]

I've been arguing your point, the flaws you're seeing are the inconsitencies it has with reality.

Okay, you wanna pick holes in my logic? Okay, then go for it, just be sure you pick at the right thing the next paragraph will be my reasoning for why PS2 is still outselling Xbox 360.

PS2 has more games and it is cheaper, Xbox 360 has an extremely small library because it launched less than a year ago and hasn't completely gotten up to speed yet. At this time PS2 has more appeal than Xbox 360.

That's it.

Am I suggesting that it's possible for a less powerful system to have more appeal than a much more powerful one? Why yes, yes I am! And the market agrees with me, NES beat Master System, GameBoy beat 10 more powerful competitors, DS is beating PSP, PS1 beat N64, PS2 beat Xbox and I predict Wii will at least tie with the other two next generation.

Posted by higbvuyb

This is your original reply. Unfortunately for you, you're just so bloody f***ing stupid that you didn't realise that what I said means that the market from sales from the aging population remains roughly stable.

ITS NOT ****ING GROWING. DO YOU GET IT?
GROWING MEANS SALES INCREASES. IF SALES DON'T INCREASE, ITS NOT GROWING.

Quoted post: Market Growth Rate - the rate, commonly expressed as a percentage per annum, at which a market is increasing in size.

This jsut shows that your definition is retarded because you said:

Quoted post: The opposite of that is negative market growth, which means the market is still growing but the rate at which it is growing is slowing down,

which is wrong because if teh growth rate is negative, the market gets smaller, it doesn't get bigger, just at a smaller rate.

And now you're being a bloody ****ign retard arguing something that's only remotely related to my point.

You're arguing this:

Quoted post: The problem with that is this renders developing new hardware inherently pointless, because you'd be able to make way more money keeping the current hardware and exploiting the gigantic userbase. And this doesn't reflect reality, so something in the conclusion is clearly wrong.

You know, maybe one reason is because the competitor is making a better console, and if you don't make one, you'll fall behind?

And anyway, your reasoning doesn't apply because what I said means 'it can be seen that console sales will remain roughly stable in current circumstances, which means console makers do make new consoles', not 'it will remain stable regardless of other factors, for example, if console makers made no new consoles, or if a meterorite hit the earth'.

Posted by muffla

I had somthing to say, But I thought better of it.

Posted by Apathetic

Id have to say this one actually surprised me, I thought there was more xbox fanboys out there than sony. I wonder how microsoft is taking this one.

Posted by Vampiro V. Empire

Quoted post: I thought there was more xbox fanboys out there than sony

lol what?

Posted by Malevolence

Quoting higbvuyb: Nice contribution to teh thread, dumbass!
Anyway, you're meant ot make up your points. WHat do you think you do, copy them out of a textbook?

He made quite the contribution. He quit any arguement he might have participated in, while you keep going on and on. You aren't making a contribution, you're becoming an annoyance. I enjoy watching Speedy verbally own you every post though.

By the way, don't question someones english when your typing isn't top notch, alright?

Posted by Random

Working in the gaming industry I can tell you that perhaps the largest or at least second largest sales contribution is cost. Parents/Relatives/Friends want to buy someone a gift. They however don't have $400 to dish out. However the PS2 is set at $129.99.

It's rather amusing honestly. We sold numerous DS's and Gamecubes last christmas not because people necessarily wanted them but because they were the cheaper console(s). We'd have the Xbox, the PS2 and the Gamecube and parents took note of a $50 cheaper console.

Now i'm not going to say that the price is 110% of the reason because i'm sure its not. However it makes a large contribution.

Posted by s0ul

Quoting higbvuyb:

You know, maybe one reason is because the competitor is making a better console, and if you don't make one, you'll fall behind?

Then why would the competitor do it? Are you ****ing stupid?

Posted by Speedfreak

[quote=Random]It's rather amusing honestly. We sold numerous DS's and Gamecubes last christmas not because people necessarily wanted them but because they were the cheaper console(s).

Totally, PS2 is cheaper than Wii so I'm gonna buy another one. Even though I actually want a Wii.

Posted by higbvuyb

Quoting s0ul: Then why would the competitor do it? Are you ****ing stupid?

Because if console performance lags too far behind PC gaming performance, consoles are going to start losing market share.
Also, if they make a console that is better than everyone else's, then they can increase their market share.
Are you ****ing stupid?

Quoting Retard: He made quite the contribution. He quit any arguement he might have participated in, while you keep going on and on.
YOu don't even know what 'contribution' means. What a retard.

[quote]You aren't making a contribution, you're becoming an annoyance. I enjoy watching Speedy verbally own you every post though.

It's not exactly owning when he's just doing a strawman.

And you're not really 'owning' either when your argument is based partly around something you don't even know the meaning of, for example, 'market growth'.

And he's also implying that if you have something that is true for a certian situation, it is true for all situations, a logical fallacy.
He's also implying that if you have a set of axioms and a theory, and given those ideas, a false result occurs, then the theroy must be incorrect. Not so, because you haven't considered every variable.

I'm sorry if that's too complex for you to understand, go and kill yourself.

Quoted post: By the way, don't question someones english when your typing isn't top notch, alright?

Typing != English. English has nothing to do with how accurately your fingers hit the keyboard.

Quoted post: Totally, PS2 is cheaper than Wii so I'm gonna buy another one. Even though I actually want a Wii.

Which is where the 'new customers due to the aging population' and 'people who don't have a PS2 yet' people come in.

Posted by s0ul

Quoting higbvuyb: Because if console performance lags too far behind PC gaming performance, consoles are going to start losing market share.
Also, if they make a console that is better than everyone else's, then they can increase their market share.
Are you ****ing stupid?

Then why would the ****ing P- this is pointless. This will go in circles until the end of time.

Posted by Aioros

[COLOR="Yellow"]Wow! Did you come up with that hard hitting data research, in your a[COLOR="Yellow"]s[/COLOR]s? Now that statement doesn't even match your original argument of an aging population contributing to a certain console's succes due to price and popularity. I wonder why that is. . .[/COLOR]

Quoting higbvuyb: Anyway, you're meant ot make up your points.

[COLOR="Yellow"]Oh, right.

And come up with your own insults too, don't just copy-paste the ones that were just used against you.[/COLOR]

Posted by Bebop

Yeh so Xbox outsold GC. How about that guys?

Posted by Malevolence

[quote=higbvuyb]YOu don't even know what 'contribution' means. What a retard.

It's not exactly owning when he's just doing a strawman.

And you're not really 'owning' either when your argument is based partly around something you don't even know the meaning of, for example, 'market growth'.

And he's also implying that if you have something that is true for a certian situation, it is true for all situations, a logical fallacy.
He's also implying that if you have a set of axioms and a theory, and given those ideas, a false result occurs, then the theroy must be incorrect. Not so, because you haven't considered every variable.

I'm sorry if that's too complex for you to understand, go and kill yourself.
Shut up. You're acting like a faggot now. You're barraging people with insults thinking that will make you look any better. I also wasn't saying your english is terrible, I said your typing. What I meant was : Don't make fun of someones (Blank) if they can easily make fun of you for another thing.

If you really want to look intelligent, then don't insult someone 5 times in every post. I won't even argue with you, since I know next post you're just going to say something along the lines of "retard".

Posted by Axis

Quoting Speedfreak: Totally, PS2 is cheaper than Wii so I'm gonna buy another one. Even though I actually want a Wii.

I'm pretty sure he's referring the mainstream here. When a parent walks into Gamestop to get their child a console are they going to shell out 270 more dollars for a loaded Xbox 360 or spend the 130 on a PS2? The other question that comes to into effect with people is: Do I want to spend 400 dollars on 360 that has only a selection of games, or do I want a PS2 for 270 dollars less that offers a library much larger with assorted AAA titles? I think the choice is fairly obvious.

Of course if I certain person wants a console really bad they're going to save up for it.

Posted by Random

Quoting Axis: I'm pretty sure he's referring the mainstream here. When a parent walks into Gamestop to get their child a console are they going to shell out 270 more dollars for a loaded Xbox 360 or spend the 130 on a PS2? The other question that comes to into effect with people is: Do I want to spend 400 dollars on 360 that has only a selection of games, or do I want a PS2 for 270 dollars less that offers a library much larger with assorted AAA titles? I think the choice is fairly obvious.

Of course if I certain person wants a console really bad they're going to save up for it.

*Note the Final Fantasy 7 Victory music in the background*

Thank you Axis for putting it so simply ^_^

Posted by Darkbackward

Quoting Bebop: Why are people STILL buying these? Why?

Best selection of games, longest lifeline of all three consoles, brand NEW games still coming out.

You know, the usual since it took over Sega's role as best console line in 2002.

Posted by Speedfreak

[quote=Darkbackward]Best selection of games, longest lifeline of all three consoles, brand NEW games still coming out.

You know, the usual since it took over Sega's role as best console line in 2002.

*rolls eyes*

If it took over in 2002, how could it be the best console line?

Posted by Darkbackward

Quoting Speedfreak: *rolls eyes*

If it took over in 2002, how could it be the best console line?

The PS2 has had three versions, I believe.

Posted by higbvuyb

Quoting Aioros: [COLOR="Yellow"]Wow! Did you come up with that hard hitting data research, in your a[COLOR="Yellow"]s[/COLOR]s? Now that statement doesn't even match your original argument of an aging population contributing to a certain console's succes due to price and popularity. I wonder why that is. . .[/COLOR]
It's called logic.
Is the average person going to say 'hey, console graphics are twenty times worse than PC graphics! I could play games on a PC, or on a console. Let's play game son a console'? No, they're not.

I've had enough of your 'Hey, I'm going to argue against something that only vaguely resembles your argument!' foolishness in the other thread, don't start now.

Quoted post: And come up with your own insults too, don't just copy-paste the ones that were just used against you.

I'm assuming that this is an attempt at humour. A failed attempt at humour, more precisely.

Quoting Malevolence: I also wasn't saying your english is terrible, I said your typing. What I meant was : Don't make fun of someones (Blank) if they can easily make fun of you for another thing.

Really? Since everyone has an attribute that can be made fun of, that means nobody should make fun of anybody else, right? Ha.

And that's irrelevant. And you can't exactly make fun of someone's typing, can you? 'Oh my ***! he accidentaly pressed the wrong key so a word got spelt incorrectly! That's pretty **** funny, lets make fun of him!'

[QUOTE]Shut up. You're acting like a faggot now. You're barraging people with insults thinking that will make you look any better.

Holy Sh*t, the irony!

Quoted post: If you really want to look intelligent, then don't insult someone 5 times in every post. I won't even argue with you, since I know next post you're just going to say something along the lines of "retard".

Now, you're just being a retard. I don't see you giving your plesant advice to anybody else that insults others often, you double-standarded fool.

And I've got a right to be annoyed, because some people are too **** retarded to see a logical fallacy, and even if I try to drive it into their brain by a half-dozen posts (hi Aioros), they still don't get it, or they are somehow incapable of reading it.

my post was 'Roughly X number of people will buy a new console in a month because of teh aging population, and often, their parents buy them a console. Them (or more often, their parents) are not likely to know much about game consoles. So, they will buy a PS2 rather than an Xbox 360, which costs much more. This contributes a significant fraction to teh total PS2 sales'.

Then, speedfreak comes in and says 'How do you know those sales figures can be sustained?' which is irrelevant, becuase we're talking about now, and console sales figures now. And obviously, it's doubly irrelevant because if the very few significant figures used in the calculation, which means that the minor inaccuracy will 'mask' any fall in console sales.
And he's been trying to argue an irrelevant point accross many points, and saying things that just don't logically follow.

Aioros shouldn't bother reading this post, because he will probably ignore the content of my post and just do another strawman.

Posted by s0ul

hig, you're embarrassing yourself, give it a rest.

Posted by Pit

Quoting Random: Working in the gaming industry I can tell you that perhaps the largest or at least second largest sales contribution is cost. Parents/Relatives/Friends want to buy someone a gift. They however don't have $400 to dish out. However the PS2 is set at $129.99.

It's rather amusing honestly. We sold numerous DS's and Gamecubes last christmas not because people necessarily wanted them but because they were the cheaper console(s). We'd have the Xbox, the PS2 and the Gamecube and parents took note of a $50 cheaper console.

Now i'm not going to say that the price is 110% of the reason because i'm sure its not. However it makes a large contribution.

You don't work in the gaming industry. You're a cashier at gamestop :)

Posted by Skitzo Control

[quote=s0ul]The next logical step in this argument, after calling each other stupid and virgins is clearly yo momma jokes. PROCEED
Yo' mommas such a slut, the only reason she wears panties is to keep her left ankle warm.
---
Hey, you know what's cool? Posting what you call "news" when everybody involved in gaming with some sense would already know the story. You might as well have told us that Sega's Dreamcast was a flop, and Sega is no longer in the harware business. Why not post another "The Xbox is Really Fuc[COLOR=white]k[/COLOR]ing Big" topic?

Posted by Cloudstud

Well i personally think that this is a pretty interesting fact. What I look at though is not who is selling the most but who is making the most money. And if you do the math microsoft definitely is. If were just going off systems sold and microsoft is selling for an average of 400 (which is probably and undershot) and sony is selling an average of 130 and using the numbers from the first post on this thread microsoft comes out way on top. Microsoft is at about 9,840,000 while sony is only at 6,149,000. So just off these numbers and just looking at systems sold microsoft is making more money. Ya sure alot less systems sold but at 400 to 500 a pop they are crushing sony in sales.

Posted by Vampiro V. Empire

What the ****?

Posted by Random

Quoting Pit: You don't work in the gaming industry. You're a cashier at gamestop :)

IT WAS EB (Which is Gamestop anyways)

SO WHAT?? I SOLD A LOT OF MOTHER ****IN **** THERE K? THATS RIGHT MOTHER ****IN ****..

**** YOU PIT. **** YOUR MOM, **** YO DADDY AND **** YOUR COUCH NIGGA..

We still watching Spiderman 3 when KoH arrives? lololo