Youre upset/confused Because the S plays Xbox games with S features? Doesn't seem that confusing. Besides it does just work. Most people not on Kotaku don't care if it's 1080p.  Even with a kick-ass rig, my PC stuff doesn't always "just work" so I don't think it's the worst statement. 

Yeah, you may be safe. It's like nerdy tech stuff but shortly after they did those BC less models, that's when they changed suppliers. Caps only last for so long anyways but the PS3 can still be fun. 

The X luckily avoided all of that is whisper quiet. Even the ps5 has a better cooking solution this time.

I don't think game sales have ever been higher? Consoles are sold out at every store. 

Theyre trying something different but consumers are already familiar with these purchase models thanks to the pro/X models and hell, even cell phones. I want the most powerful console I can buy, but its smart to offer a cheaper box for people that don’t care about 4k. Btw, no analysis are assuming the PS5 is gonna be…

Hmmm....I’m thinking you DIDN’T watch the digital foundry videos. It will be locked to 1080p. Why would a couple years make a difference? In three years you will still have 1080p veesions of the games. The CPU matters and it’s the same.

But why do you think MS has had a different experience? There are some things I would consider. When PS2 came out, we were done with the PS1. BC was cool, but it was a real generation shift. Anecdotal sure, but I knew TONS of people who bought PS1 classics because they were cheap and easily available.

I hear what you’re saying, I don’t know if I agree though. I think the vita was actually one that didn’t lose money for Sony (for once) because as you pointed out, it was so similar to cell phones hardware. I mean at $250 and $300 it’s hard to say the switch isn’t a better deal. Different year release of course but…

Thats completely ridiculous. I’m not sure what your definition of intensive games are but just because it’s not running last of us 2 at 4k doesn't prove your point. 

Look I like the vita too, but I think the switch crushed it. Even if we ignore the SD card issue. I’m assuming you mean it had Netflix and a web browser? If you mean hardware, the vita can't even come close to touching it. 

That's fair, don't get me wrong, I don't think it's perfect. I would have liked to see more 1080p. It's just that Nintendo has taught us that they're never gonna try to be a muscle head on the tech side.  I'd like to see Metroid come out faster than a hardware revision personally. I'm sure we'll see a switch 2 in the…

The switch does not have “lackluster” hardware. It’s a MOBILE chipset that runs on 8 watts. It’s honestly incredible what it can do. While it’s no doubt that a tegra 3 would be better, it’s probably better to wait another generation of the chip before the switch 2 should be created. 

Its like the old argument. “That guy only volunteers for the homeless because it makes him feel better. He’s doing it for himself, not the homeless” It doesn't matter why he helps.  It's important that he does it. 

There is a huge fundamental different in your example though. The LoU on PS3 required a genuine port of the engine. It was so labor intensive they actually we’re afraid to release it because the performance was actually quite poor up until the final stretch because as you know the PS3 was radically different to the…

“neither console manufacturer has yet committed to complete backwards compatibility at launch”

“we explored every option and it turned out the best option was the one that costs you the most money."

The point is a solid one. When you write for school, or work, or whatever the bare minimum you do is include meanings of acronyms or uncommon phrases. 

That game makes SOOOO much money though. Someone IS playing it. 

Did you ever play mafia 2? That games radio was terrible and felt fake and forced. I respectfully disagree with you on this one. 

Just for fun check this video out. This dude still puts out videos about how nfl2k is still ahead if Madden 20.