BishopLamont said:
Why are you comparing the VB to the GB, it wasn't it's successor. While the PS3 is the successor to one of the two biggest consoles ever.
I'm comparing VB to GB because both are portable systems and both are made by Nintendo. GB was incredible successful and the VB was not. Altho VB was not directly a successor to the GB, nor was it intended to replace the GB, it was still a big failure compared to the original Gameboy.
When a company makes a gaming system that is so incredible popular you would expect that their next product, direct successor or not, would be popular as well (maybe not just as popular, but relatively). Just like the PS2 to PS3 situation. People expected PS3 to be very popular due to PS1 and PS2's popularity.
Gameboy was insane popular and has somewhat 1000+ games for it. VB didnt even sell a million units, it only had 30-40 games or so and it was discontuined the following year. Does things have to be a direct successor to be a failure?
D.Lo said:
That doesn't make any sense at all. While it used the 'Boy' name, it was in no way a continuation of the Game Boy, it was a totally new line. VB is more analogous to the PSX (Japanese PS2+PVR thing) as a failed spin-off product that was never really pushed. Nobody ever presumed the VB would sell 100 million, it was a new toy just made by the same company.
What doesnt make sense? VB was not intended to take over for the GB, true that, but it was still a big failure compared to how successful GB was and it was the next portable system in Nintendo's portable system line. Both are portable systems and both are from the same company so you can easily compare them, so i wonder what you mean with that it doesnt make sense at all.
PSX and VB are 2 different things. PSX is basicly a PS2 that had other media functions added on to it (or vice versa if you want). VB is a totally new and a own system, unlike the PSX. The VB is not a GB that have 3d added to it, the VB got much more powerful hardware than a Gameboy. The Virtuall Boy can also only play VB games, its not backward compatible with any GB games.
Anyway, the whole discussion was about PS3 being the biggest failure in history. PS3 might end up as the biggest fall from a predecessor system (hypothetic example: PS2 sold 100 million and PS3 sold 30 million, which would be a 70 million fall), but saying that its the biggest failure in history is plain wrong in my opinion. No one knows what PS3's final worldwide LTD will be anyway. There are other things in video game history that are bigger failure than the PS3, stuff like Jaguar, VB, Sega 32X and Apple Pippin. These are all systems that are made by huge video game companies, not some small company from Taiwan that only a handfull of people have heard of.
Selling less than a successor doesnt automaticly makes it the biggest failure in history in my opinion. There are many many factors that depends on failure, such as how many games the system gets and how long its being supported. Making a system that are discontunied after a year and only recieves ~50 games or so is a much bigger failure than a system that sells less than its predecessor, but still recieves alot of good games and are supported for years.