So the article could be wrong about Series S being the best-selling for BF, but right about it (to the interpretation of some people) only selling because of stock? Sounds like a scenario a person would rather want to be the case, because statistically speaking the article could be right about both, or wrong about both, or wrong about the latter while being right about the other.
There's literally none of those options that have a higher probability than the other, considering the line about stock is mainly being re-contextualized by some people into something implicatively more damning than need be.
I would be interested in knowing what they plan to do for Series X availability going forward, now that they've got their Azure servers fitted with some of those units. But, I also don't think this is the best time to have that particular conversation.
How strong are those anus fumes to cause this type of post?
If it's based on factual data then post that data up to back up your claims. Otherwise at this point you're just riding an assumed point of agreement and other talking points hyped up by your own emotions if anything.
I think the gap in demand between PS5, Series X and Series S among the majority of gaming customers is nowhere near as big as you think it is, but if you're only focusing on hardcore/core early adopter types then that's an easy way to think it would be that way. You have to step out of that bubble. And just because the gap between them demand-wise may not be as massive as some want to think it is, doesn't mean a demand gap doesn't exist. The existence of a gap in demand whatsoever was never a point of contention so it's silly to keep trying to make it seem like that's what up for discussion.
Based on, again, what? How do you know it wasn't? It's not like the S has been struggling to sell as a whole; if it has lower demand among hardcore/core gamers than PS5 and Series X then knowing the shopping habits of them vs. more mainstream and casual gamers, not to mention the very real lockdown and economic situations brought about last year due to COVID that we were only just somewhat starting to come out of (and to this day we're still in the early phases of that :S), it's not surprising if Series S units weren't "flying off store shelves", despite otherwise doing well enough in sales to justify further production, supply, and distribution.
That literally tells nothing other than supply is good. Yet here you are, trying to twist it into a negative connotation WRT demand/desire. Also the fact you even put next-gen in quotations for it tells everything about your bias in this conversation. There's a reason most people are laughing at your posts.
"Wanting" a console to succeed? I think the numbers so far would show it is indeed succeeding, especially if you take division revenue into account. No one needs to "wish and hope" Series S does well. But in your eyes perhaps, it needs to do "well" like the PS5 is doing in order for you to consider it a healthy platform?
If that's the case, that's a bad standard to go by, it's like saying a modestly-budgeted indie film needs to make Endgame bank in order to be successful.
How many Little Timmys' are getting a Series X or PS5 in the first year? Not that many I'd reckon. The vast majority picking up these systems ATM are adults, and most of them are buying them for themselves or other adult loved ones. The only larger exception to that is Series S, which some are likely picking up as a secondary family console (such as to complement a household with Switches).
Your example still doesn't dismiss what is the real point of conversation here: that there IS demand for Series S, enough that people are still buying one due to that demand, even if that demand for some may not be as high as their desire for a Series X or PS5. Yes, would some of them have purchased the other two if they were available instead? Of course. But there are still folks who'd buy a Series S even in light of X or PS5 availability due to other reasons, such as price, bundle deals, or using it as an affordable retro gaming system & GamePass machine.
The fact some of you aren't even able to consider this just shows how much of a bubble you live in WRT gaming, you're definitely only seeing things from a hardcore/core console gamer early adopter POV when the total market is MUCH larger than that.
UK != The World. Wider Context != Global Market, necessarily.
You're starting to act like those people who are ignorant on a subject and cling to information from trusted sources (in some cases, supposed) to use as a bullet point in a debate while missing the actual context of the people you're responding to.
It's okay, Gumball, you're just cranky. Go get some sleep
That response wasn't specifically aimed at you, as if I were insinuating you are one of those people using that fact as a loaded talking point for dismissive purposes. I'm just saying, it as a factual point IS being manipulated by a lot of certain folks to downplay Series S's sales as mentioned in this report.
So in the similar way you claim we can't ignore the fact the other consoles were heavily supply-constrained and that Series S being in supply helped it sell more, you yourself should be able to agree with the claim) that there are definitely people using that very fact in a loaded, negative context to act dismissively and downplay the Series S's noted sales for BF (and in a lot of cases, just being dismissive and belittling of the console altogether, i.e
O
On Demand
's incredibly salty, whiny meltdown).
That's a rabbit hole I'd like a lot of folks to dig themselves out of so I can get the hell out of here, but
fourteen pages later and we're still here