Quit with the 1 year headstart BS!!!

It seems that whenever exclusives or sales come up in a 360 and Ps3 argument, people want to automatically remove the Xbox 360's first year. It annoys me that people use the 1 year's start argument because it doesn't make sense. I mean if we look at video game history the person in the lead usually get beaten by something that comes out later. Let's see the trend from the beginning of consoles (no comparisons for the first 2 gens because of no records):

First gen winner: Magnavox Odyssey 1st console to come out and the winner with 330,000 units sold.

Second generation winner: The Atari 2600 was the 4th console to come out and winner with 30 mil units sold.

Third generation: First console was the Nes. 2 years later the Sgea Master System was released. Winner: Nes with 60 mil units sold.

Fourth gen: First console was The Turbo Grafix. 3 years later the SNES came out. Winner: SNES with 49 mil units sold.

Fifth gen: First console was the 3D0. 1 year later the PS1 came out. Winner: Ps1 with 102.49 mil units sold.

Sixth gen: First console was the Dreamcast. 2 years later the Ps2 came out. Winner: Ps2 with 140 mil units sold.

Seventh gen as of March 31, 2009: First console was the Xbox 360. 1 year later the Wii came out. Winner: Wii with 50.39 mil units sold.

As you can see there are only 2 gens where the winner was the first console out(1st and 3rd). Unlike the the 2nd, 4th, 5th and 6th gen the 360 isn't a complete faliure. So now can we quit with the 1 year head start BS?!?!?!

EDIT: It is an advantage but next time please don't dismiss the first year is all I'm saying. :cry: And also people the Gen isn't over. Maybe the Ps3 or 360 can make a comeback. ;)

The one year headstart is certainly a reason for Microsoft's success, but where cows start spinning things is when they act like it the sole reason for MS's success, which is absolute nonsense. The reason they do this is so that they can boil the PS3 losing to the 360 to a single reason and keep on thinking that the PS3 and Sony are perfect and it's just "teh headstart" that's holding Sony back. :roll:

You do realize that 1 year head start gives you an advantage

They ignore the fact as well that year over year sales for the 360 has risen every year whereas the PS3s has fallen every year.The 360 outsold the PS3 last year and it is and will do it again this year.Microsoft is widening the gap,I wonder does that not count because of the 1 year headstart?

Will do.

You do realize that 1 year head start gives you an advantage

-Melix-

The year head start certainly didn't hurt Microsoft, it was a bold move and had its risks but obviously despite the risk (RROD) it paid off and got Microsoft the attention it needed. I'll have to agree with Tragic_Kingdom that it is always funny when PS3 fanboys act like if it wasn't for that the 360 wouldn't be so far ahead. In all reality I think it might have put it further ahead considering launching price points and perhaps with an extra year of development time the RROD might have not been such a factor.

Microsoft has done extremely well this generation and really gone out of its way to bring the best gaming experience possible to their customer base at an affordable price. Yes they have their faults in certain areas, but doesn't every company out there? Nintendo's focus on "casual" gaming, Sony's arrogance out the starting gate and lack of support for its customers, they've all done poorly in some areas and excelled in others. I think credit has to be given where credit is due and in this case alot of credit goes towards Microsoft, not only for making a great gaming console at an affordable price but driving the industry with great competition and pushing developers to try to do bigger and better things with gaming. They've pushed first party developers much further than before (not including Nintendo that is, they've always been extremely first party driven) and in an industry that relied heavily on exclusive third party games its now coming down to what each company can do inhouse.

Alot needs to be factored in when comparing Sony and Microsoft, but I truly think that the year headstart thing needs to be dropped at this point.

Hm, good point. Noted. At the same time, wouldnt that give way to people saying we should wait until the gen is actually OVER people declaring winners in this or that. PS3 seems to be at a rough point and I do see it coming in third when all is said and done; Yet, people are already claiming its rolling in its grave and wii flatout won in sales. Yada yada.

Anyway, to the topic, the one year start isnt a clear cut reason to dismiss anything but it was a slight advantage whether you want to admit it or not. Ms knew this and they took the chance while they could. For better or worse, no pun intended.

The fact of the matter is that the 1 year headstart was one of the big factors of 360 lead. Everyone wanted the next gen system that had the HD graphics and this was the only one around also since alot of people owned the system and lets say thier friends wanted to play with them online they had to get a 360.

Good argument by TC, but I have to say that the year start still DEFINITELY benefited Microsoft immensely. That's why it's so important that they got a head start. You would have to be ignorant not to realize this. The Xbox 360's first year line up was not that great, but it didn't matter since they were the only console out. Microsoft had higher total time windows to implement strategic price cuts (the thing that Sony is trying to do now).

Good argument by TC, but I have to say that the year start still DEFINITELY benefited Microsoft immensely. That's why it's so important that they got a head start. You would have to be ignorant not to realize this. The Xbox 360's first year line up was not that great, but it didn't matter since they were the only console out. Microsoft had higher total time windows to implement strategic price cuts (the thing that Sony is trying to do now).

mD-

But still the year start isn't the sole reason for the Xbox's success. It is an advantage that you can't deny but your shouldn't leave the first year out just to suit an argument to your advantage.

The one-year headstart thing would have some truth behind it if PS3 and 360 sales were about equal every month. Needless to say, they're not.

:oops: Gee so many positive views on this. I though it would be flooded with people denying it. Thanks. 8)

The fact of the matter is that the 1 year headstart was one of the big factors of 360 lead. Everyone wanted the next gen system that had the HD graphics and this was the only one around also since alot of people owned the system and lets say thier friends wanted to play with them online they had to get a 360.

finalfantasy94

The Wii isn't competing for the same audience as PS3 and 360, so that's irrelevant.

Wow the ps2 beasted in sales.

The Wii isn't competing for the same audience as PS3 and 360, so that's irrelevant.

lantus

Joke right?:? Sometimes I can't tell the difference on this board.

Nice, but I have to admit the 360 might have needed this. The legacy of the PS2 was great, people KILLED for a PS3, for the sole reason for a super-PS2(graphics+gameplay). If they both had the same games(I mean the 360 had 360 launch games and the PS3 had its launch games) from the start the 360 would look weak in compairson. People got impatient though and got a 360 discovered it was not bad and spread the news to friends and here we are today.

[QUOTE="mD-"]

Good argument by TC, but I have to say that the year start still DEFINITELY benefited Microsoft immensely. That's why it's so important that they got a head start. You would have to be ignorant not to realize this. The Xbox 360's first year line up was not that great, but it didn't matter since they were the only console out. Microsoft had higher total time windows to implement strategic price cuts (the thing that Sony is trying to do now).

boredy-Mcbored

But still the year start isn't the sole reason for the Xbox's success. It is an advantage that you can't deny but your shouldn't leave the first year out just to suit an argument to your advantage.

Your right, it isn't the sole reason for its success, but it basically set a foundation for it's ability to beat the PS3 in sales. I used this response in another thread: The Xbox 360 is more popular for these three reasons: "1) It came out a year earlier so it was able to establish a fanbase. The majority of this fanbase would proceed to criticize the PS3 line up (which is understanding) because after 1 year, it still lacked quality games (After one year, the 360 wasn't that amazing either... it didn't have Halo 3). So hence, PS3 was known to everyone as the system with no games. 2) Halo 3. 3) It's lower price points relative to the PS3. General consumers usually see PS3 as the more expensive system up front so they for the one with more good games and that's cheap not thinking about the cost of xbox live every year and any additional accessories. They pretty much contradict themselves, but it doesn't matter because they end up happy and it makes Microsoft look smart as hell. Also, believe it or not, there are still people who think that the PS3 has no good games because it doesn't have a games as big as Halo 3 (I'm not talking about GameSpot users here. The people here know a lot more about what they're talking about than general gamers who play halo 3/call of duty/madden etc. I think I pretty much nailed it."mD-

Nice. Couldn't have said it better my self.

Nice, but I have to admit the 360 might have needed this. The legacy of the PS2 was great, people KILLED for a PS3, for the sole reason for a super-PS2(graphics+gameplay). If they both had the same games(I mean the 360 had 360 launch games and the PS3 had its launch games) from the start the 360 would look weak in compairson. People got impatient though and got a 360 discovered it was not bad and spread the news to friends and here we are today.

Camer999

Yeah If the Ps3 would have had a cheaper price and was released at the same time it would probably be close to the wii's numbers considering Sony's brand power. MS played it right.

Wow the ps2 beasted in sales.

Jfisch93

Yep it's the best selling console. Only time can tell if the Wii can beat that.

The one year headstart is certainly a reason for Microsoft's success, but where cows start spinning things is when they act like it the sole reason for MS's success, which is absolute nonsense. The reason they do this is so that they can boil the PS3 losing to the 360 to a single reason and keep on thinking that the PS3 and Sony are perfect and it's just "teh headstart" that's holding Sony back. :roll:

Tragic_Kingdom7

[QUOTE="Tragic_Kingdom7"]

The one year headstart is certainly a reason for Microsoft's success, but where cows start spinning things is when they act like it the sole reason for MS's success, which is absolute nonsense. The reason they do this is so that they can boil the PS3 losing to the 360 to a single reason and keep on thinking that the PS3 and Sony are perfect and it's just "teh headstart" that's holding Sony back. :roll:

stylesPS3

[QUOTE="Tragic_Kingdom7"]

The one year headstart is certainly a reason for Microsoft's success, but where cows start spinning things is when they act like it the sole reason for MS's success, which is absolute nonsense. The reason they do this is so that they can boil the PS3 losing to the 360 to a single reason and keep on thinking that the PS3 and Sony are perfect and it's just "teh headstart" that's holding Sony back. :roll:

stylesPS3

Yes this, because we all know Microsoft doesn't repair/replace the console for free now do they? Maybe some units were someone buying more than one, but I doubt its even close enough to make an overall impact. I'd be more willing to buy this as a reason for the higher sales numbers over Sony if Microsoft didn't repair these consoles, but they do so I really don't view it as a factor for their sales numbers.

[QUOTE="Tragic_Kingdom7"]

The one year headstart is certainly a reason for Microsoft's success, but where cows start spinning things is when they act like it the sole reason for MS's success, which is absolute nonsense. The reason they do this is so that they can boil the PS3 losing to the 360 to a single reason and keep on thinking that the PS3 and Sony are perfect and it's just "teh headstart" that's holding Sony back. :roll:

stylesPS3

lol failed at facts.

The one year headstart is certainly a reason for Microsoft's success, but where cows start spinning things is when they act like it the sole reason for MS's success, which is absolute nonsense. The reason they do this is so that they can boil the PS3 losing to the 360 to a single reason and keep on thinking that the PS3 and Sony are perfect and it's just "teh headstart" that's holding Sony back. :roll:

the wii is a all-around console

ps3 and 360 are for hardcore gamers

wii wins but i think the 360 and ps3 are better

[QUOTE="OhSnapitz"][QUOTE="stylesPS3"] your right its not the sole reason, fanboy or not, you KNOW that RROD has caused extra sales, deny it if you want but its a fact that cant be overlookedstylesPS3

You are kidding right?

[QUOTE="lantus"]

The Wii isn't competing for the same audience as PS3 and 360, so that's irrelevant.

boredy-Mcbored

Joke right?:? Sometimes I can't tell the difference on this board.

[QUOTE="boredy-Mcbored"]

[QUOTE="lantus"]

The Wii isn't competing for the same audience as PS3 and 360, so that's irrelevant.

lantus

Joke right?:? Sometimes I can't tell the difference on this board.

Yeah but your shouldn't exclude something because it draws to a different audience. The Dark Knight or Twilight may be for people who have read the seires but it doesn't mean you shouldn't invalidate it of being the best selling movies of 2009.

[QUOTE="Tragic_Kingdom7"]

The one year headstart is certainly a reason for Microsoft's success, but where cows start spinning things is when they act like it the sole reason for MS's success, which is absolute nonsense. The reason they do this is so that they can boil the PS3 losing to the 360 to a single reason and keep on thinking that the PS3 and Sony are perfect and it's just "teh headstart" that's holding Sony back. :roll:

stylesPS3

The RROD caused the 360 to lose potential sales as well, I am also willing to bet it lost more than gained.

One thing worth noting is this, the 360's best game in 2005 was COD2, the COD series is now on PS3, so that means if the PS3 came out in 2005, that would be a game on PS3. But yes your point is good I was just pointing this out.

[QUOTE="stylesPS3"][QUOTE="Tragic_Kingdom7"]

The one year headstart is certainly a reason for Microsoft's success, but where cows start spinning things is when they act like it the sole reason for MS's success, which is absolute nonsense. The reason they do this is so that they can boil the PS3 losing to the 360 to a single reason and keep on thinking that the PS3 and Sony are perfect and it's just "teh headstart" that's holding Sony back. :roll:

The RROD caused the 360 to lose potential sales as well, I am also willing to bet it lost more than gained.

the one year headstart is indeed a big reason for MS's success this gen, but it isnt the only reason. there is of course the price of the PS3, and people's personal tastes in exclusives.

[QUOTE="Camer999"]

[QUOTE="stylesPS3"] your right its not the sole reason, fanboy or not, you KNOW that RROD has caused extra sales, deny it if you want but its a fact that cant be overlookedstylesPS3

The RROD caused the 360 to lose potential sales as well, I am also willing to bet it lost more than gained.

Don't you think people in the real world talked about RROD the first year after it was out so there friends saw that it happened and avoided the 360.

EDIT: Even if people did not avoid the 360, I bet it gained less than 50k sales from broken 360s.

Why should we quit with the headstart BS? With the majority of games being multiplat this gen (unlike those days when everything was basically exclusive) having a 1 year head start does actually make the difference.

[QUOTE="stylesPS3"][QUOTE="Camer999"]

The RROD caused the 360 to lose potential sales as well, I am also willing to bet it lost more than gained.

Don't you think people in the real world talked about RROD the first year after it was out so there friends saw that it happened and avoided the 360.

EDIT: Even if people did not avoid the 360, I bet it gained less than 50k sales from broken 360s.

Why should we quit with the headstart BS? With the majority of games being multiplat this gen (unlike those days when everything was basically exclusive) having a 1 year head start does actually make the difference.

Espada12

[QUOTE="Camer999"]

[QUOTE="stylesPS3"] no people dont just expect failure, it happens suddenlystylesPS3

Don't you think people in the real world talked about RROD the first year after it was out so there friends saw that it happened and avoided the 360.

EDIT: Even if people did not avoid the 360, I bet it gained less than 50k sales from broken 360s.

Are you at least willing to agree that RROD (overall), did not help the 360?

The fact of the matter is that the 1 year headstart was one of the big factors of 360 lead. Everyone wanted the next gen system that had the HD graphics and this was the only one around also since alot of people owned the system and lets say thier friends wanted to play with them online they had to get a 360.

finalfantasy94

And like others are saying, the RROD on the 360 would be a more valid excuse (because it's plagued the 360 for over 3 1/2 years now), but the 360 is selling just fine regardless.

Really the only arguement in which a year's head start has any bearing is one of console sales. I mean, how many compelling games did the 360 have in its first year?

Really the only arguement in which a year's head start has any bearing is one of console sales. I mean, how many compelling games did the 360 have in its first year?

MrDziekuje

Really the only arguement in which a year's head start has any bearing is one of console sales. I mean, how many compelling games did the 360 have in its first year?

MrDziekuje

Really the only arguement in which a year's head start has any bearing is one of console sales. I mean, how many compelling games did the 360 have in its first year?

Really the only arguement in which a year's head start has any bearing is one of console sales. I mean, how many compelling games did the 360 have in its first year?