I have never stated that my opinion is correct.
You kind of did. And called anyone who disagreed "irrational", "ignoring the truth" and "idiots".
You have provided zero examples of where BC has single-handily without a doubt decreased turnover and sales. Nothing, zilch.
I am not saying that. I never claimed that, so I really don't have to "prove" it. Stop pinning weird opinions on me and demanding I prove them.
You, on the other hand, provided zero examples of where a lower price has single-handedly decreased sales. Nothing, zilch. Now what?
You haven't proved that the validity of online polls are wrong
Except, you know, by linking to a number of online polls that show just how flawed an unsupervised online polling system is, and pointed you in the direction of a more detailed explanation of why they aren't a reliable source of data,
while other kinds of research are.
you have shown that all forms of research are prone to human error.
You have no idea how proper research works, do you?
You just don't like what the polls are saying, thus you'll attack their validity without providing anything as a replacement.
Actual sales figures of the PS4 would be a replacement, however they're not available at the moment. As for "attacking the validity of sources you dislike", it's all you've been doing this whole thread.
People who don't care about the issue would still most likely vote in a poll, because as you said, it might increase the cost of the console.
Not if it's not part of the poll question. Default assumptions and all that.
You claim that those who want BC are more enthusiastic, yet what do you call yourself?
I haven't voted in the poll, so that would make me lethargic. I would vote in a poll that asked "would you like a significantly cheaper console". That one would be heavily skewed in favour of a cheaper console.
You obviously have no idea what I'm getting at here.
Like I said, it's quite possible that the numbers are underestimated, which is a possibility you seem to be ignoring, because again, it doesn't align with your opinion.
It's theoretically possible. It's just not probable in the least.
I have never once stated that the numbers provided are 100% valid. I stated that it gives us a general indicator as to how people feel about BC, and it's very possible that the numbers can be overestimated or underestimated.
Let me illustrate it with an example that might be easier for you to understand. Look at threads discussing a particular game, right here on the Temp. Let's say it's even a relatively popular game. Not everyone likes this game, only some people do; most don't care. But in the thread, there's tons of people who like the game, discussing it, exchanging experiences, tips, tricks, hacks, saying how much they liked it, etc. etc. People who don't care about it don't even enter the thread because they can't be bothered, there's only Guild McCommunist who only dropped in to say how he doesn't like it and that it's overrated. Now, looking at the thread, you'd think only one of several dozen people dislikes it, and you'd say the game is liked by 95% of the population. But looking at sales numbers, you see that even the most popular titles are only bought by, at most, 10% of the user base. Thing is, people who don't care about the game won't participate, because they don't care. The only participants will be those who like the game, those who absolutely hate the game and actively oppose it (as a minority), and Guild. So the thread doesn't reflect the average consumer, it only reflects a biased subset. And Guild.
However, it's the only evidence we have. Now provide proof that your argument has validity behind it.
No, it's the only evidence you're willing to accept, because it's the only "evidence" that supports your side. Proof that
my argument has validity? PS3 sales jumped after the price cut. Don't see how that proves my point? That means you're missing the point entirely. Stop pinning weird opinions on me and demanding I prove them.
You have stated a huge amount of people don't care about BC, now prove it.
PS3 sales doubled after BC was removed. It seems they don't care about it
enough.
Prove that please. You said that "I never said people didn't want BC", but you just did right there.
Nope. I even said BC is a neat feature. What I actually said is that
most people aren't willing to pay too much extra for it. People want BC, for no extra cost. Ain't gonna happen, sadly.
"And I have provided proof for everything I actually said". You have provided zero proof of that. And that's your own argument.
I provided zero proof of the ridiculous claims you continue to ascribe to me,
because I didn't have to. Why would I have to prove something I never said?
My argument is against those who state that BC is an automatic no, to which it isn't.
Nobody said it's an automatic "no". It's a deliberate, carefully weighed, and well thought out "no". It was not an easy decision to make.
You can't state that it's completely infeasible without actually having access to the research that states that.
Likewise, you can't state it's feasible without actually having access to the research that states that. Now, let's weigh the options, shall we?
a) BC costs nothing and Sony decided to omit it and instead waste tons of money trying to get it to work via streaming for the lulz because they are staffed and run by untrained chimps, or;
b) Implementing BC has a significant cost that would hurt sales more than BC would boost them.
And we know BC costs
something.
I swear, you people are idiots who can't read.
This is ironic, really.
Teardowns are useless, they provide no real information about costs and implementations.
You're right, they only provide hardware costs of all the extra hardware built in to allow BC, they don't tell us anything about the implementation costs and the extra labor involved. And I
suppose that if that part has a
negative cost, the total cost
could be less than the cost of the hardware alone. Mathematically. 'Cuz values can be negative. But somehow I doubt that's the case here.
Remember the OLPC project? The $100 laptop? It ended up costing $210. Pandora? Same. Turns out hardware is not the only component of the end cost.
Unless you have access to decapped images and other architectural information and designs, you can't state that in the least. Similarly, you haven't provided any cost analysis.
Here's all the analysis you need: added hardware = added cost. Period.
and what if launch sales would have reduced because of the lack of BC.
And what if launch sales would have increased because of a lower price tag? Prove that they wouldn't.
you're all thinking I'm trying to argue that "$0NY are idi0ts and should 4dd BC!!!11!!", but instead I'm trying to argue "wait, there's a strong possibility that BC can increase sales drastically, and we have no precedent that says otherwise"
If that's what you're trying to say, how come you keep saying "everyone in the world wants BC more than they want a cheap console, Sony are idiots for opting to offer a cheaper console instead"? That, and there is a
very very slight possibility BC at a higher price would increase sales "drastically", and a much higher possibility that it would only increase them
only slightly, whereas a lower price has a definite and undeniable effect of increasing sales
significantly.
