[quote name='CoffeeEdge']Your point? The hardware being pushed further over time is a given with any computer hardware, and doesn't prove or disprove and sorts of sales possibilities whatsoever.
Because Playstation diehards are desperate to convince themselves that the PS3 can still somehow come out on top, or at least, pull itself out of a distant third. So, inevitably, they rely on the worthless observation that the PS1 and PS2 sold really well.
The Atari 2600 was practically the only name in town for years, and it was all drastically downhill after that. The NES and SNES sold really well, too, and then the N64 came out. Again, precedence means nothing.[/QUOTE]
If you don't own a PS3, these threads are really pointless in terms of information, insight, or aid.

I'm just pointing that out to save you some time... Not full of useful "non-PS3" information at all.... :lol:
But in reference to your supporting argument, let me add a little perspective.... (some of which is opinion, some of which is merely observation, and still more of it is probably purely anecdotal...) If you want pure facts, I'm just not there for you.
The 2600 was pretty much tapped out by the time Atari pulled the plug the first time, and their lax licensing made for some serious shovelware that really didn't add anything to the already bloated lineup. Most big houses couldn't recoup the development costs for their cartridges with the $5 "drugstore" carts undercutting the market and making it impossible to do anything interesting at over a $10 pricepoint. Realistically, MOTS was already scheduled for the closet long before the "next gen" consoles were due. (Computers took care of that for them...)
Comparatively during the "atari" era, the Colecovision sold very respectably its first year, and the Intellivision sold respectably as well, in spite of the stranglehold Atari had on the "first gen" (really second gen) market. The problem with the rival consoles was (as always) the exclusivity of licensing of some of the major arcade titles (Space Invaders comes to mind) which hampered their adoption into the millions of homes the 2600 was in... (Let's not forget the 5200 either...) Arcade licenses aren't so important these days with the decline of arcades here in the States, but I think they're still popular in Japan (or at least they were), and the consoles that get the "hot" arcade titles are probably going to sell more simply out of that feature than processing power and triangle processing.
Nintendo may have stumbled with their overly-arrogant stance w/r/t the N64, but they had consistently dominated the market from NES to SNES to Gameboy... having only one real rival during the SNES days in the Genesis... The NES trounced the Master System, and the Gameboy trounced just about everything else at the time (or since for that matter.) Even the TurboGrafix 16 sold respectably over its lifespan... (not the gazillion that the SNES/NES sold, but it was in the millions, IIRC.) Hindsight is 20/20... but it wasn't nearly as clear-cut as we sometimes oversimplify...
So, in terms of licensing, grabbing exclusives, and getting onboard the proven market leader... we have seen in Japan not an "abandonment" of the Sony brand as we have here (mindshare wise) in the States (in the face of the 360 or the Wii)... just a market shift that most likely won't hit here, because our cell phone service providers suck butt.

Is it the end of the PS3? No. Is it the end of Sony? Hardly. Is it time for 360 fans to constantly post how delusional PS3 owners are about the prospects for their console? Not unless you're _really_ bored. :lol:
We (the rest of the world) should make a clean break... make more RPG's here and stop looking to Japan for our console ideas.

And we should lighten up on the "also ran" FPSes... we can do with a few less of those and a few more other genres I think... but that's just me.

I'd personally like my RPGs not to be centered on a group of teenagers with special powers (and half-cat species or whatever)... But I'm old...
