[QUOTE="Eddie-Vedder"]
[QUOTE="Plagueless"] Ah, the tried and true "year head start" argument. Let me ask you this, why do sheep not pull up that argument? Oh wait, I know, Its because their system actually sold well, as opposed to rotting with no games for the first 2 years of it's lifecycle. And on second note, the PS3 has NEVER been double the price of the 360. 2006 20gb 360- $399 2006 20gb PS3- $599 thats a difference of 33%, you moron. And this is the biggest gap of the gen, when comparing consoles with similar features. Dont try to thorm me that the Arcade vs the top-tier PS3 BS, not gonna work. Fact is, Sony, and the PS3, lost. The 360 atm does not have many exclusives, but to the average gamer this doesn't matter because there are so may great multiplats. In 2007, there were nowhere near as many good multiplats, and the PS3 suffered. Xbox outsold the PS3 in 2011 Worldwide. The gap grows bigger, not smaller. Sony is bleeding money as they have been since 2005. The Vita is set to be a colossal failure. At this rate, there wont be a PS4. MS, on the other hand, is as rich as ever, and fully ready to launch an amazing next-gen system. It's funny how you cows always bring up this year-head start thing, especially since both the PS1 and PS2 did it. Those systems had some great exclusives that everybody wanteed tough, the PS3? not so much.Plagueless
It's not an argument moron, it's a fact. And it's also a fact that the PS3 sold more in the same timeframe despite being more expensive. Fact, not argument. And I didn't bring up sales, they're pointless, just spreading some facts on lem crazed sales freaks.PS3 sales - 62 million.
Log in to comment