View Full Version : MS only to ship 4.5-5.5 million by June 2006
dukmahsik
31-Oct-2005, 20:29
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=12639
They really need to up the manufacturing IMO.
Hardknock
31-Oct-2005, 20:36
5 million sold in just 6 months is not bad at all.
msia2k75
31-Oct-2005, 20:45
Only? Well it's not that bad heh. However, they need to sell around these numbers. Below would be disappointing.
Hardknock
31-Oct-2005, 20:47
Only? Well it's not that bad heh. However, they need to sell around these numbers. Below would be disappointing.
For a $400 console it's very impressive. If you take a look at the PS2 launch sales, they were roughly the same. It's not until price-drops that the mainstream start buying a console anyway.
Titanio
31-Oct-2005, 20:50
If you take a look at the PS2 launch sales, they were roughly the same. It's not until price-drops that the mainstream start buying a console anyway.
Actually, no. If you start counting from the end of 2000 - and we should, to be fair, because it was only then that PS2 was available in all 3 territories - from that time, Dec 31 2000 to June 30 2001, Sony shipped 8.55m units. If you count from the European launch, to be more precise, the figure would be well over 10m (the overall total at that point was circa 15m, but I'm obviously excluding sales prior to the last european launch to come to the >10m figure, to try and normalise the comparison with x360's 3-territory expectations).
I wonder how long it will take for the PS3 to be the best selling next-gen console.
scooby_dooby
31-Oct-2005, 20:57
I wonder how long it will take for the PS3 to be the best selling next-gen console.
LOL, you say that like it's a foregone conclusion.
Whichever console becomes "best-selling" will depend on the game libraries, like it always has in the past.
4.5-5.5 is pretty damn good for June I think. Puts them on track for 9 or 10million by years end with production in full swing. 10million by the end of 2006 has been their goal from the very beginning.
expletive
31-Oct-2005, 20:59
I wonder how long it will take for the PS3 to be the best selling next-gen console.
Possibly not until the beginning of the NEXT next-gen.
I wonder how long it will take for the PS3 to be the best selling next-gen console.
Maybe in 3-4 years. ;)
Titanio
31-Oct-2005, 21:06
I wonder how long it will take for the PS3 to be the best selling next-gen console.
Month-to-month or total install base?
If we were to look at Sony's PS2 figures as a guide, and scale MS's projections linearly, it should start passing out in mid to late 07 in terms of total userbase ;) Not very reliable, but heh, what answer to this question can be? :D
Shifty Geezer
31-Oct-2005, 21:24
Actually, no. If you start counting from the end of 2000 - and we should, to be fair, because it was only then that PS2 was available in all 3 territories.Why only count from all territories? If Sony had released to all territories they would have sold no more than they sold in Japan, because that's as many as they could make. By the time you wait a year for worldwide release, production capabilities have improved. Sales of consoles are sales of consoles, starting from when the console is released, even if only release in Azerbaijan.
5/6 million sounds pretty good for new tech IMO.
Brimstone
31-Oct-2005, 21:25
Halo 3 with a big budget movie tie-in throws a monkey wrench into past statistics and trends imho. Microsoft has marketed the Halo franchies really well, and I'm sure that will continue.
Titanio
31-Oct-2005, 21:29
Why only count from all territories?
Because it's well over 3 times the market as in Japan-only...?
By the time you wait a year for worldwide release, production capabilities have improved.
It wasn't quite a year, and I think the impact of this is much less significant than that of having 3 territories to sell in vs 1.
I'm not claiming it's a perfect comparison, but it's as normalised as we can get I think.
This is all PR. They give a low estimate now so come June they can have a press release stating "xbox 360 doubles forcasts". It builds good press in the future. It a PR interest bearing bank account. It will create free advertisement and make the x360 seem like the hot summer item.
The actuall number will be higher. Mark my words. It's pr bs.
The x360 will have a good launch. They don't have a killer app game but neither did the ps2. They need one before the ps3 launches to win next gen.
Shifty Geezer
31-Oct-2005, 21:32
Because it's well over 3 times the market as in Japan-only...?
I'm not claiming it's a perfect comparison, but it's as normalised as we can get I think.I don't understand. A company invents a console, manufactures and sells it. The manufacture n million in a given timeframe. Sony made...what...3-4 million PS2's in 6 months? I've no idea what the figure is. MS are hoping to make 4-5 million. Whether those consoles are shipped all around the world or piled up in a warehouse, that's still the number they make, and MS seem to be heading for about the same amount made as PS2. They're just spreading them a deal thinner.
I don't understand. A company invents a console, manufactures and sells it. The manufacture n million in a given timeframe. Sony made...what...3-4 million PS2's in 6 months? I've no idea what the figure is. MS are hoping to make 4-5 million. Whether those consoles are shipped all around the world or piled up in a warehouse, that's still the number they make, and MS seem to be heading for about the same amount made as PS2. They're just spreading them a deal thinner.
I would tend to agree, supply in the first 6 months is largely limited by how many you can make not how many you can sell.
Gholbine
31-Oct-2005, 21:35
This is all PR. They give a low estimate now so come June they can have a press release stating "xbox 360 doubles forcasts". It builds good press in the future. It a PR interest bearing bank account. It will create free advertisement and make the x360 seem like the hot summer item.
The actuall number will be higher. Mark my words. It's pr bs.
The x360 will have a good launch. They don't have a killer app game but neither did the ps2. They need one before the ps3 launches to win next gen.
Good point.
Powderkeg
31-Oct-2005, 21:40
It wasn't quite a year, and I think the impact of this is much less significant than that of having 3 territories to sell in vs 1.
And that is the flaw in your thinking.
The first 6 months the PS2 was out it suffered from major supply problems. If they had released world-wide simultaneously like MS did, they wouldn't have been able to produce any more consoles than they did. The only difference would have been them shipping fewer consoles to each reason.
Your little idea is flawed because you are making the incorrect assumption that these numbers are low, and that they are only what MS wants to ship, rather than the limits of what MS is capable of producing. Sony won't ship this many consoles this fast when they launch because they can't produce more than this either. One region or all 3 is irrelevent, this is all they can produce.
If anything, Sony will ship fewer PS3's in the same amount of time because they are likely to have more production problems than MS.
Titanio
31-Oct-2005, 21:41
I don't understand. A company invents a console, manufactures and sells it. The manufacture n million in a given timeframe. Sony made...what...3-4 million PS2's in 6 months? I've no idea what the figure is. MS are hoping to make 4-5 million. Whether those consoles are shipped all around the world or piled up in a warehouse, that's still the number they make, and MS seem to be heading for about the same amount made as PS2. They're just spreading them a deal thinner.
Will you make the same for three markets as you would for one, though? I don't think you're guaranteed to sell everything you manufacture, by the way, beyond the first couple of million (or even up to that point!).
I'll get picked up on this, so before I say it I'll state that I'm GUESSING here, but I think it's very possible X360 is easier to manufacture than PS2 was starting out, which might offset your point a little about manufacturability at launch vs 9 months later etc.
And that is the flaw in your thinking.
The first 6 months the PS2 was out it suffered from major supply problems. If they had released world-wide simultaneously like MS did, they wouldn't have been able to produce any more consoles than they did. The only difference would have been them shipping fewer consoles to each reason.
Your little idea is flawed because you are making the incorrect assumption that these numbers are low, and that they are only what MS wants to ship, rather than the limits of what MS is capable of producing. Sony won't ship this many consoles this fast when they launch because they can't produce more than this either. One region or all 3 is irrelevent, this is all they can produce.
If anything, Sony will ship fewer PS3's in the same amount of time because they are likely to have more production problems than MS.
We'll have to agree to disagree. I think your market size is at least as big a point here as your supply. If MS restricted themselves to one market - say Japan, or even their strongest, the US - I don't think they'd sell that many systems, or ship that many even. So if you don't think you can make the comparison my way, I certainly don't think you can make it the other way (comparing to only Japanese numbers for PS2's first 6 months).
Guden Oden
31-Oct-2005, 21:46
They need one before the ps3 launches to win next gen.
Only ONE to secure the entire next gen? Whoah, sony might as well pack up and go home then!
"I think you overestimate their chances!"
LOL, you say that like it's a foregone conclusion.
Whichever console becomes "best-selling" will depend on the game libraries, like it always has in the past.
4.5-5.5 is pretty damn good for June I think. Puts them on track for 9 or 10million by years end with production in full swing. 10million by the end of 2006 has been their goal from the very beginning.
Are you really laughing out loud..? anyway it's all about the quality difference for me. Looking at the past I expect the PS3 to come on top and it's only a matter of time but how much?
Will you make the same for three markets as you would for one, though? I don't think you're guaranteed to sell everything you manufacture, by the way, beyond the first couple of million (or even up to that point!).
I'll get picked up on this, so before I say it I'll state that I'm GUESSING here, but I think it's very possible X360 is easier to manufacture than PS2 was starting out, which might offset your point a little about manufacturability at launch vs 9 months later etc.
We'll have to agree to disagree. I think your market size is at least as big a point here as your supply. If MS restricted themselves to one market - say Japan, or even their strongest, the US - I don't think they'd sell that many systems, or ship that many even. So if you don't think you can make the comparison my way, I certainly don't think you can make it the other way (comparing to only Japanese numbers for PS2's first 6 months).
They are talking about shiped consoles, not sold, so what does it then matter in how many territories they launch at?...
Powderkeg
31-Oct-2005, 22:13
Will you make the same for three markets as you would for one, though? I don't think you're guaranteed to sell everything you manufacture, by the way, beyond the first couple of million (or even up to that point!).
I'll get picked up on this, so before I say it I'll state that I'm GUESSING here, but I think it's very possible X360 is easier to manufacture than PS2 was starting out, which might offset your point a little about manufacturability at launch vs 9 months later etc.
We'll have to agree to disagree. I think your market size is at least as big a point here as your supply. If MS restricted themselves to one market - say Japan, or even their strongest, the US - I don't think they'd sell that many systems, or ship that many even. So if you don't think you can make the comparison my way, I certainly don't think you can make it the other way (comparing to only Japanese numbers for PS2's first 6 months).
You are forgetting that MS is having shortages of supply even for it's launch. It could sell more than these numbers if it had the supply. Supply is the limiting factor in the first year, especially during a holiday launch.
I'll also point out here that within 9 months of the PS2 launch in Japan it was out in every region as well and had gone through the holiday shopping season in both the US and Europe, yet it still shipped less.
In fact, if you go by the high-end numbers by MS and assume the same production for the next 6 months then after a full year MS will have shipped more 360's than Sony shipped PS2's in it's first year.
The limit here is production, not available market.
Titanio
31-Oct-2005, 22:45
They are talking about shiped consoles, not sold, so what does it then matter in how many territories they launch at?...
They would not manufacture or ship as many consoles if they were launching in only one territory, you can be absolutely sure of that.
The size of your market and expected demand absolutely play a role in the numbers. As does
"manufacturability".
You are forgetting that MS is having shortages of supply even for it's launch.
I'm not forgetting that. I simply don't think they'd ship the same number of consoles in one territory as in three for the same period.
I'll also point out here that within 9 months of the PS2 launch in Japan it was out in every region as well and had gone through the holiday shopping season in both the US and Europe, yet it still shipped less.
Less than what? Shipments to the end of its first year was 6.4m.
In fact, if you go by the high-end numbers by MS and assume the same production for the next 6 months then after a full year MS will have shipped more 360's than Sony shipped PS2's in it's first year.
A year of being in 3 territories versus 1 year in Japan and 4-6 months in Europe/US for PS2. And you'd be talking about 0.4m more ;)
The limit here is production, not available market.
The market you're aiming at undoubtedly affects numbers. There is an upper limit on how much each market can take in a period. And again - you are not guaranteed for first Xm of sales immediately. People often say with regards to every system that for the first few months you'll sell as many as you can make, but this hasn't always been true, even in recent cases (e.g. PSP did not sell out immediately).
I'm also wondering about X360's manufacturability. The DVD drive ain't gonna hold it back. IBM claims it'll easily meet demand from MS. Xenos is, according to hints from here and elsewhere, producing good results. So where's the bottleneck? I don't think it's trivial, obviously, but someone made the point earlier, and it is likely true, that PS2s were easier to manufacture 9 months after its launch than at launch - but I wonder how much more difficult X360 is for its time vs that same PS2 9 months post-launch.
expletive
31-Oct-2005, 23:12
I'm also wondering about X360's manufacturability. The DVD drive ain't gonna hold it back. IBM claims it'll easily meet demand from MS. Xenos is, according to hints from here and elsewhere, producing good results. So where's the bottleneck?
My guess would be how fast they can run the conveyor belts and stuff the things into white and green boxes. Isnt that enough of a bottleneck? :)
Hardknock
31-Oct-2005, 23:15
Actually, no. If you start counting from the end of 2000 - and we should, to be fair, because it was only then that PS2 was available in all 3 territories - from that time, Dec 31 2000 to June 30 2001, Sony shipped 8.55m units. If you count from the European launch, to be more precise, the figure would be well over 10m (the overall total at that point was circa 15m, but I'm obviously excluding sales prior to the last european launch to come to the >10m figure, to try and normalise the comparison with x360's 3-territory expectations).
LOL. To be fair my ass. What a retarded ass comparision. Regardless of how many territories they are sold in, they are both still limited by how many they can produce, so theoretically they still would have sold the same amount in 6 months(xbox 360 is just spread out over multiple territories instead of all going to one territory.) All launch hardware has great sales.
mckmas8808
31-Oct-2005, 23:15
I wonder how long it will take for the PS3 to be the best selling next-gen console.
I'd say by 2007 E3. I'd be surprised if this didn't happen.
dukmahsik
31-Oct-2005, 23:26
I would think PS3 will start to outsell 360 worldwide in 2007 but will still be behind in US during that time. 2008 is when I expect it to outsell 360 in the US.
Serenity Painted Death
01-Nov-2005, 00:00
PS3 will have a 20 million lead in Japan at least. Europe is almost as staunchly pro-Sony. U.S. might be close, but the overall war shouldn't be. I think anyone expecting anything else is in for a disappointment. I'm not even sure the U.S. is going to be very close once all is said and done.
Sony would have to make a mistake the caliber of Nintendo sticking with cartridges to be overturned in the span of a single generation. So far, at least, it seems they've avoided this. Absent this, it will take a constant chipping away by the competitors if they are to be beaten. Of course, Sony could just pull off something really stupid... who knows.
hadareud
01-Nov-2005, 00:15
PS3 will have a 20 million lead in Japan at least. Europe is almost as staunchly pro-Sony. U.S. might be close, but the overall war shouldn't be. I think anyone expecting anything else is in for a disappointment. I'm not even sure the U.S. is going to be very close once all is said and done.
Sony would have to make a mistake the caliber of Nintendo sticking with cartridges to be overturned in the span of a single generation. So far, at least, it seems they've avoided this. Absent this, it will take a constant chipping away by the competitors if they are to be beaten. Of course, Sony could just pull off something really stupid... who knows.
Sometimes you don't have to make mistakes or be stupid to not win. If only it were that easy ...
PS3 will have a 20 million lead in Japan at least. Europe is almost as staunchly pro-Sony. U.S. might be close, but the overall war shouldn't be. I think anyone expecting anything else is in for a disappointment. I'm not even sure the U.S. is going to be very close once all is said and done.
Sony would have to make a mistake the caliber of Nintendo sticking with cartridges to be overturned in the span of a single generation. So far, at least, it seems they've avoided this. Absent this, it will take a constant chipping away by the competitors if they are to be beaten. Of course, Sony could just pull off something really stupid... who knows.
Or having the cnosole t too high price. As they have mentioned, it seems that Sony this time will have fewer price dropes and far apart, and most mainstream byuers buy the consoles when they start going down in price, at a $400 or even $300 price point they will not be selling the boatloads of consoles they do now...
They would not manufacture or ship as many consoles if they were launching in only one territory, you can be absolutely sure of that.
Actually I am quite certain that even if they only launced in the US they would still manufacture that same amount of consoles...
Or having the cnosole t too high price. As they have mentioned, it seems that Sony this time will have fewer price dropes and far apart, and most mainstream byuers buy the consoles when they start going down in price, at a $400 or even $300 price point they will not be selling the boatloads of consoles they do now...
You're right. In fact, after all the reports around 1999 about the super high-end computer ala PS2, I must have been imagening those strategic price drops or the fact that they sold in millions while still remaining at the original price point for over a year, then later continued to sell despite a cheaper available Xbox... :wink:
Europe is almost as staunchly pro-Sony.
Most gamers over here are not married to the brand. And a lot of PS2 owners would love to have a Xbox right now.
Things will be interesting to say the least.
Hardknock
01-Nov-2005, 08:36
You're right. In fact, after all the reports around 1999 about the super high-end computer ala PS2, I must have been imagening those strategic price drops or the fact that they sold in millions while still remaining at the original price point for over a year, then later continued to sell despite a cheaper available Xbox... :wink:
Sony sold roughly 20 million of their 100 million sold(so far) at the original pricepoint. The vast majority however(over 80%), waited until a pricedrop. I think that's what he was saying.
Considering that's more or less the entire userbase of the Xbox, I find that rather impressive... :wink:
Considering that's more or less the entire userbase of the Xbox, I find that rather impressive... :wink:
It is impressive, but don't you think that going from 100 million sold consoles to 20 million wouldn be a huge blow to Sony? One that might even bring down the company to its knees? And don't forget that this time around the launch price might be even higher, will those 20 million buy it at $400?...
london-boy
01-Nov-2005, 09:23
It is impressive, but don't you think that going from 100 million sold consoles to 20 million wouldn be a huge blow to Sony? One that might even bring down the company to its knees? And don't forget that this time around the launch price might be even higher, will those 20 million buy it at $400?...
Where did that come from? Why would Sony only sell 20M PS3's? :???: Obviously selling only 20M PS3 will be a disaster for Sony, but is anyone really expecting that? The only thing that might cause that is if Sony can't supply enough working units, which is the only real problem they have.
If Sony can put enough PS3's out there, they'll be just fine.
Who sais they will go from 100 to 20 million?
You obviously think that the launch price will be higher than what PS2 launched at. Fair enough - Considering though that 20 million people bought the PS2 at its highest selling price within the first 2 years seems to show that people are willing to pay. I don't really see your problem. Even at $400 the PS3 will sell and after it has sold 20 million units, strategic price reductions will ensure that casuals will continue to buy it. I really don't see what you're questioning.
As I said before though, if we were to believe many reports back in 1999, no one would have thought PS2 would launch at $299 in America.
If PS3 launches in fall of 2006 in America, I wouldn't expect it to be sold at over $299 simply because it'll be competing with an equally priced Xbox360. If it is launched in Spring however, a $399 wouldn't be far fetched IMO.
Who sais they will go from 100 to 20 million?
You obviously think that the launch price will be higher than what PS2 launched at. Fair enough - Considering though that 20 million people bought the PS2 at its highest selling price within the first 2 years seems to show that people are willing to pay. I don't really see your problem. Even at $400 the PS3 will sell and after it has sold 20 million units, strategic price reductions will ensure that casuals will continue to buy it. I really don't see what you're questioning.
As I said before though, if we were to believe many reports back in 1999, no one would have thought PS2 would launch at $299 in America.
If PS3 launches in fall of 2006 in America, I wouldn't expect it to be sold at over $299 simply because it'll be competing with an equally priced Xbox360. If it is launched in Spring however, a $399 wouldn't be far fetched IMO.
I know that what I said was extremely drastic, about the 20 million sold consoles thing. Even if they had the console at $400 through the whole console life cycle they would still sell more than 20 million, no doubt. However, I just want to point out that thie time things are different.
Last time they didn't have an xbox 360 to compete with at launch, which to tell you the truth I think is a bigger opponent than Dreamcast. SO they had more than a years headstart where they without a problem could sell at $299, I wonder how it will be now with the xbox 360 and maybe at a price of $400.
The other thing which I really can't get out of my head is that this time proportionally they have much more tech in their console, and I mean they sell their PSP for $299, how will they be able to have the PS3 for that price at launch? Of course they could if they took massive losses. They took losses for the PS2 so they will do it again for sure, but this time around they will be more heavy, so the question is if they can take it...
I know that what I said was extremely drastic, about the 20 million sold consoles thing. Even if they had the console at $400 through the whole console life cycle they would still sell more than 20 million, no doubt. However, I just want to point out that thie time things are different.
Last time they didn't have an xbox 360 to compete with at launch, which to tell you the truth I think is a bigger opponent than Dreamcast. SO they had more than a years headstart where they without a problem could sell at $299, I wonder how it will be now with the xbox 360 and maybe at a price of $400.
What makes you think the Xbox360 is a bigger opponent than the Dreamcast at its time? As far as I remember, the Dreamcasts predecessor, the Saturn, enjoyed a much larger installbase than the Xbox does today. Sega also had a very strong mindshare among its fans.
Also, you have to factor in that Xbox360 in its premium form is costing $400 as well - and that won't change within the next year. So it's not as if Sony would be the only ones launching at $400 - that is, if they do - which I'm not certain of, not unless they launch in Spring in America.
The other thing which I really can't get out of my head is that this time proportionally they have much more tech in their console, and I mean they sell their PSP for $299, how will they be able to have the PS3 for that price at launch? Of course they could if they took massive losses. They took losses for the PS2 so they will do it again for sure, but this time around they will be more heavy, so the question is if they can take it...
Proportionally more tech? What makes you think that? I need to remind you that PS2 was quite expensive initially because of the in-house tech they used and fabs. This in turn allowed them to lower the price at strategic points in the cycle...
PSP was sold at $299 because the market allowed it to. Nintendo launched their console at a mear $50 less, so while they are trying to sell on the much better graphics on PSP, I think the price of $299 is more than fair (given that the only alternative with much worse graphics is being sold at a mear $50 less).
Do you have any evidence or better arguments supporting why this time it will cost more for Sony than what it did when they launched PS2?
london-boy
01-Nov-2005, 11:38
What makes you think the Xbox360 is a bigger opponent than the Dreamcast at its time?
Well for one, MS won't finish their cash any time soon.
What makes you think the Xbox360 is a bigger opponent than the Dreamcast at its time?
Common! not with this nonsense again! If you can't honestly see the differencetween sega and Microsft, then you simply shouldn't be attempting to compare them.
As far as I remember, the Dreamcasts predecessor, the Saturn, enjoyed a much larger installbase than the Xbox does today. Sega also had a very strong mindshare among its fans.
Um, no & no. The saturn install base was smaller than what MS has today.
Do you have any evidence or better arguments supporting why this time it will cost more for Sony than what it did when they launched PS2?
Do you have any evidence to back yo your saturn claims? of course not, then don't go around saying "Do you have any evidence or better arguments..." when your own evidence and arguments are extremly weak.
Well for one, MS won't finish their cash any time soon.
Very funny. :wink: No seriously, at the time Dreamcast launched, who thought Sega would go bust after a full year of being on the market? I bet Sega didn't think so either.
I don't see how MS's money makes them any better of an opponent. Despite MS's cash reserves, Xbox didn't really make a dent into Sony's userbase - and that's including with the "price dumping" at the time Xbox launched but failed to pick up (I remember getting a free Xbox if you bought the bundle with 5 games etc).
Remember, I'm questioning what makes Xbox360 appear to be a stronger opponent today than Dreamcast at its time when it launched a full year ahead of everyone else (1998-99).
Dave Baumann
01-Nov-2005, 11:49
Dreamcast was reliant on SEGA games first, 3rd party second. Microsoft is far more reliant and 3rd party devs and, as devs generally appear to be testifying, are providing them with the tools to make their games.
london-boy
01-Nov-2005, 11:51
Very funny. :wink: No seriously, at the time Dreamcast launched, who thought Sega would go bust after a full year of being on the market? I bet Sega didn't think so either.
I don't see how MS's money makes them any better of an opponent. Despite MS's cash reserves, Xbox didn't really make a dent into Sony's userbase - and that's including with the "price dumping" at the time Xbox launched but failed to pick up (I remember getting a free Xbox if you bought the bundle with 5 games etc).
Remember, I'm questioning what makes Xbox360 appear to be a stronger opponent today than Dreamcast at its time when it launched a full year ahead of everyone else (1998-99).
Again, MS won't finish their cash anytime soon. They have proved they intend to dump a lot of money on the Xbox project (what is it now, 4Bn just for the Xbox?), and they will keep dumping cash to make sure that the X360 won't "die" the way Dreamcast did.
Personally i don't think the X360 will sell more than PS3, but even getting as many units out there as the first Xbox will get the job done for them. They'll just keep trying until they're safe. They will make insane profits from Windows and all their other software so they'll always be safe, until someone comes in to challenge them in the PC world.
Do you have any evidence to back yo your saturn claims? of course not, then don't go around saying "Do you have any evidence or better arguments..." when your own evidence and arguments are extremly weak.
Alright, checked the numbers and it seems the Saturn wasn't that successful after all (around 10 million worldwide at first glance) opposed to the 25+ million that I thought.
Still doesn't make my question any less relevant: What makes Xbox360 a stronger opponent? If you don't feel like answering the question, may I suggest you read the forum rules, because the rest of your reply certainly isn't adding much to the on-going discussion, nor do I see it contributing in anyway besides provoking flames. Thanks.
london-boy
01-Nov-2005, 11:56
Dave is right, X360 also has much more 3rd party support than DC. EA for example wasn't even making games for DC!!! And as much as everyone seem to hate them, everyone also seem to buy their games.
Come on Philly, it's quite obvious that the X360 is and will be in a much better position than DC ever was.
London Boy:
Surely you don't think Microsoft will dump their entire cash reserves into the Entertainment division, do you? Besides, I think it is quite evident that Microsoft isn't thinking of using that much of money as they did with the Xbox... do you disagree with this? If not, then I don't see why "Microsofts cash reserves" is of any importance to the few questions I've raised.
No one is arguing Xbox360 production will be halted a year after launch.
Still doesn't make my question any less relevant: What makes Xbox360 a stronger opponent?
1. Marketing and brand name
2. Financial backing
3. Developer support
4. Publisher support
5. One of the biggest game franchises in the previous generation (edited for shifty reasons)
6. One of the best developement environments and dev tools.
7. Xbox live is paying for itself (IMO better than Sega net)
All of these are bullet points Sega didn't have when the dreamcast launched. What are your bullet points to counter this argument? Or better yet, just explain to everyone why these are not valid.
If you don't feel like answering the question, may I suggest you read the forum rules, because the rest of your reply certainly isn't adding much to the on-going discussion, nor do I see it contributing in anyway besides provoking flames. Thanks.
Don't try and take the high road. All you're doing is dismissing any reasons anyone has, without providing any reason to back up "exactly" what makes you think Xbox 360 is in the same catagory as the dreamcast. Not only that, but you didn't even bother to research you Saturn comparison sales numbers, and that makes me use your own statment back at you " your reply certainly isn't adding much to the on-going discussion"... As london boy said "It's quite obvious" that xbox 360 isn't in the same catagory as dreamcast, however if you refuse to accept or properly counter points people post, then you need to rethink who here is contributing to the thread.
What makes you think the Xbox360 is a bigger opponent than the Dreamcast at its time?
$$$
Also, you have to factor in that Xbox360 in its premium form is costing $400 as well - and that won't change within the next year.
We don't know that, especially as MS has said that price reductions a repart of their plan, and they also sell a system for $300, that might get cheaper faster.
So it's not as if Sony would be the only ones launching at $400 - that is, if they do - which I'm not certain of, not unless they launch in Spring in America.
No, but while the xbox360 has no next gen competition, the PS3 will have.
Proportionally more tech? What makes you think that? I need to remind you that PS2 was quite expensive initially because of the in-house tech they used and fabs. This in turn allowed them to lower the price at strategic points in the cycle...
This time they have cell, which IIRC Sony is using IBM to fab a part of them for the PS3, they have the RSX, that they will have pay rojalities for, they have much more RAM, half of which is the really expensive kind, they have the Blue Ray, sure they had DVD in PS2 but compaired to BR, DVD at that time was a mature technology, not to mention all the wireless, ports and so on and so on.
PSP was sold at $299 because the market allowed it to. Nintendo launched their console at a mear $50 less, so while they are trying to sell on the much better graphics on PSP, I think the price of $299 is more than fair (given that the only alternative with much worse graphics is being sold at a mear $50 less).
The $299 price is fair, no doubt, that is not what we are talking about, rather what the launchprice could be. Even a $700 price for the PS3 would be fair, how well would it sell though.
Do you have any evidence or better arguments supporting why this time it will cost more for Sony than what it did when they launched PS2?
See above...
Shifty Geezer
01-Nov-2005, 12:08
5. One of the biggest franchises in the previous generationSorry for this worthless comment of mine, but this made me laugh. One of the biggest franchises this gen. Out of three consoles. With PS2 at the number-one franchise, that leaves XB and GC. Kinda of hard for XB not to be 'one of the biggest franchises this gen.' :p
london-boy
01-Nov-2005, 12:11
Sorry for this worthless comment of mine, but this made me laugh. One of the biggest franchises this gen. Out of three consoles. With PS2 at the number-one franchise, that leaves XB and GC. Kinda of hard for XB not to be 'one of the biggest franchises this gen.' :p
I think he meant Halo...?
Game franchises shifty. Halo... A console itself isn't a franchise. i edited my oriignal post to include the word "game". i just assumed people knew I was talking about games, sorry.
Shifty Geezer
01-Nov-2005, 12:15
Game franchises shifty. Halo... A console itself isn't a franchise.Oh, okay. Though I disagree about the console. PlayStation is much a franchise IMO a Halo. It has sequels and has diversed into a portable system meaning the same brand name is being used in different areas to promote the hardare.
Playstation is a "Brand" not a franchise. Xbox is a brand. Sega didn't have a brand they carried across from console to console.
1. Marketing and brand name
2. Financial backing
3. Developer support
4. Publisher support
5. One of the biggest franchises in the previous generation
6. One of the best developement environments and dev tools.
7. Xbox live is paying for itself (IMO better than Sega net)
All of these are bullet points Sega didn't have when the dreamcast launched. What are your bullet points to counter this argument?
The thing is, I am not comparing companies - I was comparing their respective products. As such, financial backing and "best development environment" will only get you so far. No doubt, Microsoft is the bigger opponent - it's also the wealthiest company outthere which makes it a bigger opponent to just about any competing one outthere.
And yet, despite this fact and countless arguments of the same kind back in 2001 before Xbox launched - Xbox still failed to make a dent into the Sony's market. So much to having the biggest financial backing in history.. didn't mean squat to the average consumers outthere that walked home with a PS2 while Xbox was sold next to it at a lower price and more powerful hardware. So maybe Microsofts advantage isn't all that what it's hyped up to be, is it? It's certainly isn't as black & white as is being led to believe in this thread - in fact, there are much more factors that haven't been factored into the equation yet:
While you are correct that Xbox360 has more [publisher] support, better financial backing (especially backing that will go into advertisment), one big advantage that is lost to the current situation is that Sony appears to be gearing up for a launch much sooner than what they were targeting back in late 1998 when Dreamcast launched. To be plain and simple: While Dreamcast lacked the support & advertisment, it still had over a year of headstart over its nearest competitor; the PS2. One full year is a lot, especially when the console in question sells as well as the Dreamcast did. So the question is, how do you quantify which advantage is more important? Is that one year+ more important as a factor than the lack of support & advertisment or do you draw the line at a different spot? What ever it is, it's just not as black & white as you or Platon make it out to be.
I attribute the time advantage to be quite a significant one in any case - the Dreamcast had much better graphics than the outdated PSone, it had great software (despite lacking support by EA) and it sold very well - for a full year. If we fast forward to today, we have Xbox360 that is launching in late of this year, while PS3 appears to be launching in early 2006 (Spring). And if we still don't know if the PS3 launch will be Japan-only or if they are aiming to launch in two regions at the same time. Who knows, maybe, they'll [Sony] will even attempt to follow with a worldwide launch. Who knows? It's certainly anyone's guess and I'm sure Sony is still observing the situation very carefully.
As I said though, given the difference in launch dates of the competing consoles [Xbox360 vs Dreamcast], I'm not really sure anyone without factoring in all relevant points can say one is a stronger opponent than the other with a straight face. There's more to it than the backing company. As I said already, Microsoft's finances ment squat to the average Joe outthere when they walked home with a PS2 instead of a Xbox.
Reality is, Sony isn't launching over a year later - if anything, it's probably around 6 to 9 months depending if they'll go with a worldwide launch or not and in which regions they launch and when. As I already wrote a few pages back (I think in this thread or maybe the other one) - the first 1 year is that time when it is mostly bought by hardcore gamers and loyal supporters - in other words, a segment that isn't the majority of buyers anyway. That segment that will determine which console comes out on top are those that for a large part buy their products after first price drops anyway. These price drops won't occur too early anyway (Microsoft won't bring out a Xbox360 at $400 and drop the price 3 months later, or they'll piss off customers). On the other hand, if Sony launches early, I expect them to launch at the same price as Microsoft - if they launch in fall of next year, expect them to launch at $299 as well (the price that Microsoft will be at with their premium package).
Dave Baumann
01-Nov-2005, 12:47
Another element to factor in is that the third part devs, especially those large ones (EA in particular) do not want a defacto standard as it removes their leverage. Its in the dev houses interests to have more than one large player.
...snip...
You see where the finacial backing and company welth becomes important is that they can take losses much better. You see what happened to SEGA when the were loosing money. If it had been any other company, after the xbox adventure I am sure they would have stopped and Sony effectivily killed out of the bussiness. But not MS, since they have the $$$ they can keep going till they get what they want. Another thing is that this time around the xbox does have some brand name recognition, it didn't have it last time, so it is qute understandable that Joe or Jimmi or whoever bought PS2 rather than an xbox, since they "knew" what they were bying...
Playstation is a "Brand" not a franchise. Xbox is a brand. Sega didn't have a brand they carried across from console to console.
Sega consoles carried Sega brand.
Playstation is a Sony's product, it carries Sony brand so is Xbox is a MS product thus it carries Microsoft as its primary brand name. Large company that covers alot of different products normally have secondary trademark/brand, to differentiate their different product line. Like Microsoft Xbox, Microsoft Windows, Microsoft Office etc.
I assume Sega marketing (was some of the worst marketers in the world IMO) felt Sega was enough of a familiar brandname to carries their consoles. Same goes with Nintendo, even though Nintendo has other secondary brand like Game&Watch and Gameboy, that were/are very successful.
Franchises in consoles would be more like 3DO.
Sega consoles carried Sega brand.
You could say that Sega's name is a brand just like Nintendo's name was at one point. however, sega's name as a brand was not effective in selling the sega staturn or dreamcast. If sega stuck with the name "genesis" they probably would have kept a strong brand name.
Playstation is a Sony's product, it carries Sony brand so is Xbox is a MS product thus it carries Microsoft as its primary brand name. Large company that covers alot of different products normally have secondary trademark/brand, to differentiate their different product line. Like Microsoft Xbox, Microsoft Windows, Microsoft Office etc.
You're looking at it the wrong way IMO. Both sony and MS have made a concious effort to establish a NEW brand with thier consoles and not rely on the name SONY or Microsoft. With sony, the brand is "Playstation" and with microsft the brand is "Xbox". have a look at your consoles, you will notice both sony and microsft names are off to the side, far away from the playstation logo and xbox name.
Also watch commercials for either company, they make the name playstation & xbox the focus and not the name Sony and Microsoft.
Shifty Geezer
01-Nov-2005, 14:39
Playstation is a "Brand" not a franchise. Xbox is a brand. Sega didn't have a brand they carried across from console to console.Though going off track, how do you define the difference? Officail a franchise is a you license off to other people to use. In console games it seems to be applied to any IP that gets sequels. In the first (true) definition Halo isn't a franchise. In in the second common definition PS seems as much a franchise with seuqles as Halo.
Powderkeg
01-Nov-2005, 15:51
Phil
There is so much that you are not taking into consideration when comparing the 360 to the Dreamcast it's not even funny. It makes you look pretty bad.
I mean, let's do a reality check.
#1. The DC was the 3rd major failed system in a row for Sega. The 32X didn't even last a year before the Saturn replaced it, and the Saturn was pretty much a flop barely breaking the 10 million mark. (Less than half the Xbox userbase)
#2. The DC totally lacked EA support. You cannot discount how much not having the largest publisher in the world support your system hurts.
#3. The DC lacked the very desirable DVD movie playback support, which had just overtaken VHS in market demand.
#4. Sega was in major financial problems prior to the DC's release. Pretty much everyone knew they were close to failing which is why MS tried to buy them out before making the Xbox.
OK, unlike the DC, the 360 is building off a success, not 2 previous failures. People are much more willing to buy the 360, and developers are much more likely to support the 360 because the Xbox was a success.
The 360 is launching with major EA support. Next-gen Madden alone is a bigger selling point than all DC launch titles combined before the DC actually launched.
BluRay is definitely no where near the high demand of DVD in 2000, and won't be for many years to come.
And MS has enough money to buy Nintendo outright and still have cash left over, or to pay off almost 70% of Sony's debt without emptying their surplus cash supply.
The two are simply not comparable, and to even suggest they are shows how little you know of Sega and the dreamcast.
mckmas8808
01-Nov-2005, 16:02
You're looking at it the wrong way IMO. Both sony and MS have made a concious effort to establish a NEW brand with thier consoles and not rely on the name SONY or Microsoft. With sony, the brand is "Playstation" and with microsft the brand is "Xbox". have a look at your consoles, you will notice both sony and microsft names are off to the side, far away from the playstation logo and xbox name.
Also watch commercials for either company, they make the name playstation & xbox the focus and not the name Sony and Microsoft.
We don't agree much, but I agree with you here. Both Sony and MS did a smart thing and named their video game systems using an off name (i.e. Playstation and Xbox). Come to think about it maybe Sega should have stuck with Genesis. I to this day think that the Playstation name alone could sell more units because off its name than the Xbox could due to its games.
Powderkeg you clearly have no idea what kind of debt Sony is in - Microsoft could easily pay off ALL the debt and have plenty left over. I think you're confusing liabilities for debt. (They have a financial services/insurance business for god's sake, of course they have liabilities)
As for Nintendo, Nintendo would simply refuse to be bought. It would have to be the most hostile of hostile takeovers for Microsoft to get a hold of them.
All of that aside however, though I don't disagree that XBox is a 'success' (though similar to Sega's consoles, not financially) and that Saturn and Dreamcast were failures, I'm pretty confident in saying that if Dreamcast had stayed in it, their losses for the gen would have been a lot lower than MS', and their console sales probably a fair deal higher in the end.
The fact that a number of XBox owners count themselves among the Sega disaffected alone is a very telling sign of that.
Thegameman
01-Nov-2005, 16:18
Phil
There is so much that you are not taking into consideration when comparing the 360 to the Dreamcast it's not even funny. It makes you look pretty bad.
I mean, let's do a reality check.
#1. The DC was the 3rd major failed system in a row for Sega. The 32X didn't even last a year before the Saturn replaced it, and the Saturn was pretty much a flop barely breaking the 10 million mark. (Less than half the Xbox userbase)
#2. The DC totally lacked EA support. You cannot discount how much not having the largest publisher in the world support your system hurts.
#3. The DC lacked the very desirable DVD movie playback support, which had just overtaken VHS in market demand.
#4. Sega was in major financial problems prior to the DC's release. Pretty much everyone knew they were close to failing which is why MS tried to buy them out before making the Xbox.
OK, unlike the DC, the 360 is building off a success, not 2 previous failures. People are much more willing to buy the 360, and developers are much more likely to support the 360 because the Xbox was a success.
The 360 is launching with major EA support. Next-gen Madden alone is a bigger selling point than all DC launch titles combined before the DC actually launched.
BluRay is definitely no where near the high demand of DVD in 2000, and won't be for many years to come.
And MS has enough money to buy Nintendo outright and still have cash left over, or to pay off almost 70% of Sony's debt without emptying their surplus cash supply.
The two are simply not comparable, and to even suggest they are shows how little you know of Sega and the dreamcast.
The saturn din't sell half of what the xbox sold,but how is that diferent from the xbox seling little over a quart of what the PS2 sold and the xbox did had EA suport.
The xbox floped hard as well on sales and it had alot bigger suport than the DC had,whith companys like EA,Namco,Konami,Capcom and many others that help make the PS what it is today,still floped hard sales wise when you compare it to the PS2.
The xbox also lacked DVD playback out of the box,you had to buy aditional hardware to make it work.
That one is true Sega did had major problems,but like other member already say finalcial streth din't mean much on the PS2 vs Xbox battle.
The xbox 360 is a succesor of a system that failed to capture the market,in fact when you compare the PS2 to xbox number you see clearly that something whent very wrong for MS,the PS2 90 million the xbox 22 is not even close,whit and advantage of just 20 months,what sony had by that time 20 million cconsoles sold world wide.
Still the PS2 sold 70 more million after the xbox launch and MS only 22 million.
People don't see them as equal.
Powderkeg
01-Nov-2005, 16:25
Powderkeg you clearly have no idea what kind of debt Sony is in - Microsoft could easily pay off ALL the debt and have plenty left over. I think you're confusing liabilities for debt. (They have a financial services/insurance business for god's sake, of course they have liabilities)
They have over $60 billion in debt.
As for Nintendo, Nintendo would simply refuse to be bought. It would have to be the most hostile of hostile takeovers for Microsoft to get a hold of them.
I didn't mean to suggest there was a possibility of MS buying them out, only to say they had enough cash to do it. I've got enough cash to quit my job and retire like a prince in some poverty stricken 3rd world country, but that doesn't mean I'm turning in my 2 weeks notice any time soon.
The saturn din't sell half of what the xbox sold,but how is that diferent from the xbox seling little over a quart of what the PS2 sold and the xbox did had EA suport.
The xbox floped hard as well on sales and it had alot bigger suport than the DC had,whith companys like EA,Namco,Konami,Capcom and many others that help make the PS what it is today,still floped hard sales wise when you compare it to the PS2.
The xbox also lacked DVD playback out of the box,you had to buy aditional hardware to make it work.
That one is true Sega did had major problems,but like other member already say finalcial streth din't mean much on the PS2 vs Xbox battle.
The xbox 360 is a succesor of a system that failed to capture the market,in fact when you compare the PS2 to xbox number you see clearly that something whent very wrong for MS,the PS2 90 million the xbox 22 is not even close,whit and advantage of just 20 months,what sony had by that time 20 million cconsoles sold world wide.
Still the PS2 sold 70 more million after the xbox launch and MS only 22 million.
People don't see them as equal.
But you have to consider that the xbox came from nowhere. Why should people buy it? Why should they trust MS? How long is it going to last? WIll be it be a failure like dreamcast? PS2 was the safe bet and had established franshices. Comming as a newcommer with no backing what so ever into the console arena, and selling more than than Nintendo and 25% of Sony, I don't think that that is a small thing...
They have over $60 billion in debt.
No, they don't. They have $60 billion in liabilities.
Here is their balance sheet: Link (http://www.hoovers.com/sony/--ID__41885,period__A--/free-co-fin-balance.xhtml)
I think you're a little confused when it comes to financials - thus your confusion with the whole proxy/disclosure thing in that other thread.
Here is CitiGroup's balance sheet as well, for you to wrap your head around. I picked a financial services pure play to help you out: Link (http://www.hoovers.com/citigroup/--ID__58365,period__A--/free-co-fin-balance.xhtml)
But who knows, maybe you think CitiGroup has $1.3 trillion dollars of debt.
london-boy
01-Nov-2005, 16:34
But you have to consider that the xbox came from nowhere. Why should people buy it? Why should they trust MS? How long is it going to last? WIll be it be a failure like dreamcast? PS2 was the safe bet and had established franshices. Comming as a newcommer with no backing what so ever into the console arena, and selling more than than Nintendo and 25% of Sony, I don't think that that is a small thing...
PS1 also came out from nowhere, but things worked out rather differently didn't they...
Powderkeg
01-Nov-2005, 16:36
The saturn din't sell half of what the xbox sold,but how is that diferent from the xbox seling little over a quart of what the PS2 sold and the xbox did had EA suport.
The Saturn sold less than 10 million units total, and that is less than half of the Xbox userbase.
And how is the Xbox vs. PS2 sales at all relevent to my comments or points?
The xbox floped hard as well on sales and it had alot bigger suport than the DC had,whith companys like EA,Namco,Konami,Capcom and many others that help make the PS what it is today,still floped hard sales wise when you compare it to the PS2.
I like your last sentence, because it says it all. WHEN COMPARED TO THE PS@.
Well, don't compare it to the PS2. Compare it to MS's console userbase from the previous generation, which was ZERO. Going from ZERO to 22+ million is a success.
Going from 35+ million down to less than 10 million like Sega did was a failure. If you don't see the difference then try removing the ****** sunglasses.
The xbox also lacked DVD playback out of the box,you had to buy aditional hardware to make it work.
It was a very desirable option that the DC didn't have at all.
That one is true Sega did had major problems,but like other member already say finalcial streth din't mean much on the PS2 vs Xbox battle.
Sure it did. Financial strength is what made the Xbox last 4 years and made sure the 360 was a reality. do you think MS would have persued the 360 project if they were in as bad of a financial position as Sega was in 2008? Not a chance.
The xbox 360 is a succesor of a system that failed to capture the market,in fact when you compare the PS2 to xbox number you see clearly that something whent very wrong for MS,the PS2 90 million the xbox 22 is not even close,whit and advantage of just 20 months,what sony had by that time 20 million cconsoles sold world wide.
And there are a million reasons for that, most of which you obviously are ignorant of.
When the Xbox launched it had absolutely no previous userbase. Developers didn't support it because they didn't know how well it would see, and consumers didn't support it because the rumor was Nintendo and Sony would going to flatten them and MS would drop out of the console race.
Clearly neither of those problems exist now. Developers are giving the 360 tons of support (Even giving the 360 new versions of formerly Playstation exclusive titles) and consumers have absolutely no fears about MS staying around or getting good games.
The first year of the PS2 it enjoyed success based off the Playstation. The first 2 years of the Xbox MS had to struggle and fight to make a dent in the market because they were the great unknown.
And I shouldn't have to explain the implications of the 9-11 terrorist attacks only 2 months before the Xbox launch and how that effected consumer confidence and sales.
I'm not saying the Xbox 360 is going to outsell the PS3 by the end of next-gen, but I think even implying the 360 is another Dreamcast is beyond ignorant. It's just plain dumb.
Well, don't compare it to the PS2. Compare it to MS's console userbase from the previous generation, which was ZERO. Going from ZERO to 22+ million is a success.Success with no profit at all? That's old "Xbox was a huge 3-billion-dollar PR campaign" bullshit. It's possible only for MS. If an ordinary company does that, it's out of market already. Therefore, what you say is "everything MS does becomes automatically a success". It's not a great success story of bulidinng up from zero, it's a zero-divide exception with a money blackhole. Dev companies surely love this situation, cuz Uncle Bill gives them huge allowances each year and "energize the market with tremendous synergy effect" :roll: Even SCE and Nintendo may be pleased to be able to spend less R&D incentives for third parties.
The Xbox project was sold to thh MS top brass as a long-term vision. They expected to lose money with their first entrance, they hope this will get them the mindshare.
If 360 fails to return on the investment, then they've got problems. Microsoft hasn't reached where it is today by continuing with unsuccessful projects. Xbox Execs have promised Gates & Ballmer that they should cover the time prefernce cost of capital with 360.
mckmas8808
01-Nov-2005, 17:31
But you have to consider that the xbox came from nowhere. Why should people buy it? Why should they trust MS? How long is it going to last? WIll be it be a failure like dreamcast? PS2 was the safe bet and had established franshices. Comming as a newcommer with no backing what so ever into the console arena, and selling more than than Nintendo and 25% of Sony, I don't think that that is a small thing...
Why should have people trusted Sony with the PSone? They also came from nowhere. Why did people even buy it? It's because Sony had and still has to this day a better videogame business model than MS does that's why. Nintendo and Sega had established franshices, yet Sony still blew pasted them on their first try at the video game industry. Sony dominated on their first try, why couldn't MS?
scooby_dooby
01-Nov-2005, 17:47
PSOne took off because of it's massive amounts of 3rd party support.
It had many more games than N64, and it picked up huge franchises like FF. This was due to Nintendo being overly strict, and PS adopting the cheaper, larger CD format. Sony had enough advantages they were able to convince developers to give them support.
XBOX never had any of these advantages, I don't know how anyone could expect it to duplicate PS1's success, 2 different situations at 2 different points in time. When it launched most of it's games were crap from MGS, it had virtually no 3rd party support, but it still went on to be a major success.
If you watch TV in the US now, you see an XBOX as often as a PS2 on shows like pimp-my-ride and other popular programs. It's now an established, respected brand name.
As far as developer support compared to XBOX1, this time around it's night and day, X360 has an absolute TON of 3rd part support, so therefore they wil have many games, therefore the console will sell extremely well.
PSOne took off because of it's massive amounts of 3rd party support.
It had many more games than N64, and it picked up huge franchises like FF. This was due to Nintendo being overly strict, and PS adopting the cheaper, larger CD format. Sony had enough advantages they were able to convince developers to give them support.
XBOX never had any of these advantages, I don't know how anyone could expect it to duplicate PS1's success, 2 different situations at 2 different points in time. When it launched most of it's games were crap from MGS, it had virtually no 3rd party support, but it still went on to be a major success.
If you watch TV in the US now, you see an XBOX as often as a PS2 on shows like pimp-my-ride and other popular programs. It's now an established, respected brand name.
As far as developer support compared to XBOX1, this time around it's night and day, X360 has an absolute TON of 3rd part support, so therefore they wil have many games, therefore the console will sell extremely well.
PS1's success is not down to developer support alone.
There were many critical elements:
-N64 being delayed time and again
-Nintendo adopting catridges
-Nintendo subsequently alienating Squaresoft
-Sega absolutely shooting itself in the foot with Saturn.
Finally, last but not least, Sony's brand name in the living room. Back then people would still pay that bit more for a Sony product. From simple association alone people trusted Sony products in the living room space. Microsoft never had that with Xbox, is the 360 going to change that? I don't know.
scooby_dooby
01-Nov-2005, 18:01
PS1's success is not down to developer support alone.
There were many critical elements:
-N64 being delayed time and again
-Nintendo adopting catridges
-Nintendo subsequently alienating Squaresoft
-Sega absolutely shooting itself in the foot with Saturn.
Finally, last but not least, Sony's brand name in the living room. Back then people would still pay that bit more for a Sony product. From simple association alone people trusted Sony products in the living room space. Microsoft never had that with Xbox, is the 360 going to change that? I don't know.
2 out of 4 of those relate directly to developer support. Adopting cartridges meant more expensive games to publish and less room for developers, and Nintendo's loss of SE is obviously a gain for Sony's 3rd party support.
I think PS1's massive success was due entirely to it's game library. Without such an overwhelming game library it would not have totally obliterated Nintendo and Sega.
The GFX were better on N64, and it had the Nintendo brand name, but what happened? PS1 just had WAY more games.
When it launched most of it's games were crap from MGS, it had virtually no 3rd party support, but it still went on to be a major success.The fact is, in addition to Western PC developers, even among Japanese companies, SEGA, Namco, Konami, Capcom, Tecmo, Koei, From Software, all of them and others pronouced their support for Xbox in 2001 before the launch.
mckmas8808
01-Nov-2005, 18:16
I think PS1's massive success was due entirely to it's game library. Without such an overwhelming game library it would not have totally obliterated Nintendo and Sega.
The GFX were better on N64, and it had the Nintendo brand name, but what happened? PS1 just had WAY more games.
And how does that change now? Sony still has most of those advantages if you ask me. You're 100% correct on why the PSone blow up fast. And you actually supported my point. Before the PSone, Sega Saturn, and N64 came out did people expect Sony to dominate? Most didn't. Those things that you mentioned like Sony going with CDs and Nintendo being stricted is hindsight 20 20. The important things to watch for next-gen could be this.
1. Nintendo's new controller could alienate 3rd party devs, which could result in less games being made for the system. Which would obviously mean less hardware sales.
2. Nintendo hiding so much information from gamers and developers in relation to the PS3 and Xbox360 could hurt them in the long run.
3. If the Revolution doesn't have High Definition support I guess you can see the obvious loss here.
4. MS not going with a HD media disc could hurt games in the long run. Especially if Blu-ray takes off like Sony and others want and need it to.
5. MS's horrible marketing skills compared to Sony could hurt the 360's future success. Everyone knows that Sony is the best at marketing so far.
6. MS's lack of Japanese support from gamers is also an obvious loss and can hurt the 360's future.
7. If Sony doesn't fix its stupid a$$ online support this is the biggest loss that the PS3 will have next-gen imho. Nintendo has a great plan for next-gen and MS already had a great one this gen.
8. Sony can't price itself out of the market. This one I think won't happen at all though.
9. Sony needs to be in all territories buy next October of 2006. If not this could be a problem for the PS3.
Now those are all the potential problems for each next-gen console imo that I can think of right now. As you can see everybody has these holes that need to be filled in some way. Nobody has a clean slate. And it has been this way for decades. Sony never had anything handed to them. Sony faced these same pot holes in the past and has surpassed them. For some reason the competitors have not.
Can any of you think of any other possible pot holes for these guys?
fireshot
01-Nov-2005, 18:21
Did i stumble wrongly into gamefaqs novice forums? MS in the same "sticky" situation as Sega DC was? :lol:
You keep your opinions that MS is no more a threat than a dying Sega. not much we can do after those points flew by you.
you do that while we see more publishers and developers confidently pinning on Xbox bigger success.
let the gaming do the talking, and we need some archiving
dukmahsik
01-Nov-2005, 18:22
wow sega = MS?
wow sega = MS?
MS took over that other spot known as Sega. So yes, they are Sega. ;)
BTW,
Don't you remember Xbox having alot of Sega games in its early life. ;)
scooby_dooby
01-Nov-2005, 18:29
And how does that change now? Sony still has most of those advantages if you ask me.
Not at all actually. Any advantage Sony has now for 3rd party support(if there is one) is EXTREMELY minor, and nowhere near the overwhelming support they enjoyed over N64, or dreamcast.
For all we know X360 could end up having more 3rd party support than Sony, it's certainly looking to be extremely close this time around, which will have "more" is totally debateable, but we can agree that either way it's going to be close.
Sony was simply in the right place at the right time, and made the right decisions. But we can already see history wil not repeat here, we can already see the 3rd party support for X360 is overwhelmingly positive.
dukmahsik
01-Nov-2005, 18:54
MS took over that other spot known as Sega. So yes, they are Sega. ;)
BTW,
Don't you remember Xbox having alot of Sega games in its early life. ;)
i used to love sega but they've suck the passed couple of years, hopefully they can turn it around with next gen. actually sony beat sega and took sega's place ;)
Inane_Dork
01-Nov-2005, 18:56
I heard all the arguments the last time. And yet, the Xbox was not Dreamcasted. Now Microsoft is building on the momentum they built up for the X360, and you want me to seriously consider it getting Dreamcasted? Sorry, but that boat sailed. Sony is not strong enough to force a growing competitor into oblivion. They have to be slouching that direction first.
mckmas8808
01-Nov-2005, 20:09
Sony was simply in the right place at the right time, and made the right decisions. But we can already see history wil not repeat here, we can already see the 3rd party support for X360 is overwhelmingly positive.
Correct but you make it sound as if Sony kind of became number 1 by luck though. Can you explain why with what MS has now is so much greater than what Nintendo had in 1993 and 1994? Nintendo had WAAAY more marketshare and mindshare then MS has now. And they also had the games too. So if this is true then why is MS in such a so so so much better situation then Nintendo was in 1994? To me the Xbox did ok, but far far from great. It should have done so much better with the obvious better hardware for graphics and king of all online capabilities. Yet they still lost to Sony by a wide wide margin.
I think in the end my point is Sony has a better videogame business model than MS. And in the end this is what will keep Sony to be number 1 through the next-generation.
In the US and Europe, MS did okay in terms of hardware sales and decent to good in Software sales. Despite having a fraction of Sony's user base, they consistently have games in the top 20 and even hold the #1 spot at times. I think it shows that console sales and active game buyers are not the same.
If you consider MS's big failiure, it is largely the Japanese market, who generally doesn't like outsiders and, it seems, especially US companies. If their new console doesn't do well in Japan again, MS should rethink their Japanese strategy. Maybe they should partner with Sega in Japan so that Sega and claim they are back in the console business and the Japanese can claim they are supporting a Japanese company. Dreambox or Mega Drive X?
In the US and Europe, MS did okay in terms of hardware sales and decent to good in Software sales. Despite having a fraction of Sony's user base, they consistently have games in the top 20 and even hold the #1 spot at times. I think it shows that console sales and active game buyers are not the same.
If you consider MS's big failiure, it is largely the Japanese market, who generally doesn't like outsiders and, it seems, especially US companies. If their new console doesn't do well in Japan again, MS should rethink their Japanese strategy. Maybe they should partner with Sega in Japan so that Sega and claim they are back in the console business and the Japanese can claim they are supporting a Japanese company. Dreambox or Mega Drive X?
Japanese don't dislike foreign things just because they are foreign though. They dislike them because more often than not they are considered unstylish or uncool. Look at iPod or fashion preferences in Japan and it'll be clear that foreign brands can do quite well there.
Powderkeg
01-Nov-2005, 20:30
Correct but you make it sound as if Sony kind of became number 1 by luck though. Can you explain why with what MS has now is so much greater than what Nintendo had in 1993 and 1994?
Microsoft increased it's userbase over the previous generation while Nintendo has lost it's userbase ever generation since the SNES.
Correct but you make it sound as if Sony kind of became number 1 by luck though. Can you explain why with what MS has now is so much greater than what Nintendo had in 1993 and 1994? Nintendo had WAAAY more marketshare and mindshare then MS has now. And they also had the games too. So if this is true then why is MS in such a so so so much better situation then Nintendo was in 1994? To me the Xbox did ok, but far far from great. It should have done so much better with the obvious better hardware for graphics and king of all online capabilities. Yet they still lost to Sony by a wide wide margin.
I think in the end my point is Sony has a better videogame business model than MS. And in the end this is what will keep Sony to be number 1 through the next-generation.
NIntendo started loosing brand reconigtion the moment the gensis came out . Add in the mortal kombat misshap was forever branded kiddy .
Ms on the other hand is like sega in some ways. Thier first console didn't do to well. But thier second console they had a better name and they got some key games made and took half the market .
Ms is in a grat postion cause in the usa and in europe the brandname is pretty strong , there are some pretty well known games and they are launching first capturing the markets view of what next gen should be much like sega did before nintendo could launch
scooby_dooby
01-Nov-2005, 20:38
Correct but you make it sound as if Sony kind of became number 1 by luck though. Can you explain why with what MS has now is so much greater than what Nintendo had in 1993 and 1994? Nintendo had WAAAY more marketshare and mindshare then MS has now. And they also had the games too. So if this is true then why is MS in such a so so so much better situation then Nintendo was in 1994? To me the Xbox did ok, but far far from great. It should have done so much better with the obvious better hardware for graphics and king of all online capabilities. Yet they still lost to Sony by a wide wide margin.
I think in the end my point is Sony has a better videogame business model than MS. And in the end this is what will keep Sony to be number 1 through the next-generation.
Making the right decisions at the the right time is hardly luck, it's smart gutsy business.
As for what MS has know that N didn't have? - Exclusive dev's like Bungie, Bioware, Mistwalker, Real Time Worlds, Team Ninja, Lionhead etc, 100% support from the worlds largest publishers EA, Activision etc, support from Square Enix. Well... that's a start no?
As a diehard N64 supporter back in my youth, no, Nintendo did not "have the games" There was Goldeneye, Starfox and...uhh...Turok 1 & Turok 2. It had some good games, but they were extremely few and far between.
Japanese don't dislike foreign things just because they are foreign though. They dislike them because more often than not they are considered unstylish or uncool. Look at iPod or fashion preferences in Japan and it'll be clear that foreign brands can do quite well there.
It's true, there are differences in prouduct tastes such as Americans like things big while they like things compact but, while I'm an outsider for sure in the Japanese way of life, from what I understand, "nationalism" or "homerism" plays an aspect in their business and consumer culture, moreso than the US, who love foreign goods. The US has a much higher import/export ratio than they do and the two nations are about the same in terms of industrialization and labor costs.
The nationalism for something like a console takes place at the business level (obviously nationalism isn't the only problem), not consumer level. If you can't get 3rd party support, you won't have the types of games that the market wants. If you don't have the types of games that the market wants, you don't sell consoles. This isn't really relevant when it comes to things like fashion, which is entirely consumer driven.
The nationalism for something like a console takes place at the business level (obviously nationalism isn't the only problem), not consumer level. If you can't get 3rd party support, you won't have the types of games that the market wants. If you don't have the types of games that the market wants, you don't sell consoles. This isn't really relevant when it comes to things like fashion, which is entirely consumer driven.
I disagree with this notion of business nationalism though (in this particular instance). Do you feel that on some level the Japanese business world is stacked against Microsoft? I feel to the contrary, that the support is very strong. There may be some sort of 'prevent the Gaijin company from getting a foothold' mentality among Sony's closest developer allies, but that has as much to do with their strong relationships with one another as anything else. Certainly there are a lot of Japanese developers onboard with MS this time - frankly more than I expected, and even more than I would say is justified, considering XBox's performance there. So honestly I would say in general that the Japanese dev community is being quite open-minded with Microsoft's upcoming console.
It'll be interesting to see how the 360's Japanese launch goes, that much is for certain.
Microsoft increased it's userbase over the previous generation while Nintendo has lost it's userbase ever generation since the SNES.
Microsoft increased its userbase from 0? Quite the accomplishment! :)
The Xbox success was not without cause, it launched with very advanced hardware and probably the biggest marketing campaign gamers have ever seen. Even with these factors the success of the Xbox was not assured, splitting Nintendos userbase instead of taking anything from Sony's. The Xbox could've and by all rights should've done much, much better.
Its true Nintendo's userbase has been decreasing every generation and thats because they have managed to screw up time and time again, and their mistakes with the GC were what allowed the Xbox to succeed more than anything else.
This time around the Xbox has lost its biggest advantage (power), its only notable advantage is LIVE - a service which reaches less than 3million users, and from all accounts Sony will be implementing a fully-featured network for PS3. Sony hasn't put a foot wrong so far regarding the PS3 whereas one cannot say the same for the Xbox360. Will the early lead be enough? Maybe, and maybe not if MS squanders it with low supplies as has been hinted at.
I disagree with this notion of business nationalism though (in this particular instance). Do you feel that on some level the Japanese business world is stacked against Microsoft? I feel to the contrary, that the support is very strong. There may be some sort of 'prevent the Gaijin company from getting a foothold' mentality among Sony's closest developer allies, but that has as much to do with their strong relationships with one another as anything else. Certainly there are a lot of Japanese developers onboard with MS this time - frankly more than I expected, and even more than I would say is justified, considering XBox's performance there. So honestly I would say in general that the Japanese dev community is being quite open-minded with Microsoft's upcoming console.
It'll be interesting to see how the 360's Japanese launch goes, that much is for certain.
I too am surprised by the level of support for the 360 compared to XB1. But MS isn't the only US comapny who struggled in Japan. US made/developed games also can't penetrate the Japanese market for the most part. Anecdotally, everything I read says it's tough for an outsider in general to crack the Japanese market. The import/export ratios of the two countries shows evidence of it. This is partially due to high tariffs and other factors, but don't you think Japanese pride has something to do with it? Outside of a few folks in the US who buy "American only", most people in America have very little pride in "made in the US".
Back to the original topic, of the ~6 mil 360's in the next few months, Japan will definitely be the big question mark of can they can sell everything they make.
"power" was never an advantage in reality for xbox. Each generation the most powerful hardware does not win the biggest share of the market.
"power" was never an advantage in reality for xbox. Each generation the most powerful hardware does not win the biggest share of the market.
Yes it was. Most people brought into the brand because they thought it was more powerful. That's how they managed to get a foothold.
mckmas8808
01-Nov-2005, 23:00
Microsoft increased it's userbase over the previous generation while Nintendo has lost it's userbase ever generation since the SNES.
What pevious generation did MS have? Was it called the Xbox 180?:shock:
Ms on the other hand is like sega in some ways. Thier first console didn't do to well. But thier second console they had a better name and they got some key games made and took half the market
Wow two guys said the samething back to back. Had a better name? Should you be saying they have a better name so far? You make this sound like the 360 has already came out and is over with. How did they take half the market with their second console?
Making the right decisions at the the right time is hardly luck, it's smart gutsy business.
As for what MS has know that N didn't have? - Exclusive dev's like Bungie, Bioware, Mistwalker, Real Time Worlds, Team Ninja, Lionhead etc, 100% support from the worlds largest publishers EA, Activision etc, support from Square Enix. Well... that's a start no?
I do agree with you here scooby. You're right Xbox 360 does seem to have better games then the N64 had.
scooby_dooby
01-Nov-2005, 23:08
"power" was never an advantage in reality for xbox. Each generation the most powerful hardware does not win the biggest share of the market.
Yes it was. That's why I and everyone I know bought an XBOX, because it was more powerful than PS2 and had better looking games.
I had just bought Red Faction on my PS2, thought it was pretty sweet. Then I went to a friends house where he had Halo set up, I was addicted. Had never seen a game on that level before, with that quality, it made Red Faction look like total and complete CRAP.
2 weeks later my PS2 was sitting in a pawnshop and I had a nice new XBOX!
mckmas8808
01-Nov-2005, 23:17
"power" was never an advantage in reality for xbox. Each generation the most powerful hardware does not win the biggest share of the market.
Sorry I don't even have an Xbox and I know this was MS biggest advantage. It's the main reason people choose the Xbox over the PS2 in the beginning.
scooby_dooby
01-Nov-2005, 23:20
But they needed that since they had extremely weak 3rd party support, and not 1 single franchise.
Now it's a completely different situation. 3rd party support coming out the ying-yang, and lots of excellent franchises.
Mefisutoferesu
01-Nov-2005, 23:35
Just a something to point out... it's been my experience that any sense of nationalism within Japan in term of business is something that's been born out of the enviroment Japan grew up in. Geh... err, listen, Japan got steamrolled in the WWII, they had to rebuild and as such they had to maintain a strong sense of pride and fortitude (WE CAN DO IT!) for their products to really survive. Combine that with the fact that from a resource perspective Japan is heavily starved, and thus has to import a lot of materials, and now the aftermath of the bubble economy, it's not really surprising that Japan is economically playing it close to the chest, any country would. The rest of the world takes it as "HA HA HA, stupid Gaijin!! Our products are superior! HA HA HA!", but back in the 80s when Japan's economy was going nuts and eating up US products, what'd the US do? "BUY AMERICAN!!". It's perspective folks. Really, if you go to Japan they LOVE US products and culture. It's like gamers in the US "Oh, Japan is teh WIN!" only in reverse. Just look at Apple or how popular US musicians are there. I think a lot of people confuse doing what's best for your country with nationalism or even jingoism (!!) these days. Well, least that's how I feel.
Johnny Awesome
01-Nov-2005, 23:54
It's pretty idiotic to compare MS to Sega. Does anyone seriously believe that MS is not a serious player now?
<nu>faust
02-Nov-2005, 00:01
its not like i'm an expert on japan or anything but from my experience(visiting few times,having some japanese friends livin' in us,reading on the issue) i can clearly tell that japanese people's facination with us and american culture is undeniable. Of course this facination is not just in a friendly adoring loving way(it more like love and hate) but saying japanese people always prefer japanese products(cultural or material) over foreign ones no matter what is not accurate statement.
mckmas8808
02-Nov-2005, 00:06
It's pretty idiotic to compare MS to Sega. Does anyone seriously believe that MS is not a serious player now?
One word. NO!
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooby
Wow two guys said the samething back to back. Had a better name? Should you be saying they have a better name so far? You make this sound like the 360 has already came out and is over with. How did they take half the market with their second console?
Making the right decisions at the the right time is hardly luck, it's smart gutsy business.
As for what MS has know that N didn't have? - Exclusive dev's like Bungie, Bioware, Mistwalker, Real Time Worlds, Team Ninja, Lionhead etc, 100% support from the worlds largest publishers EA, Activision etc, support from Square Enix. Well... that's a start no?
I do agree with you here scooby. You're right Xbox 360 does seem to have better games then the N64 had.
Of course they have a better name .
In 2001 when the xbox launched how many people knew about it ? How many people had heard of the xbox before ? Mostly just the gamers that read magazines . But they had no name. They had the ms name , but that doesn't mean much outside of the os and office world .
Now the xbox brand has been built up. There are around 20million people from last gen that owned an xbox brand product and i would expect that some of that base will carry over just like i expect some of the sony base to cary over .
Not only that but now many gamers will see they are on thier second console. They will see that ms is here for hte long term and there will be an xbox 3. They will also see brand games that were built up over the last few years .
Its a much betterspot than what they were in last generation .
Thegameman
02-Nov-2005, 15:01
But you have to consider that the xbox came from nowhere. Why should people buy it? Why should they trust MS? How long is it going to last? WIll be it be a failure like dreamcast? PS2 was the safe bet and had established franshices. Comming as a newcommer with no backing what so ever into the console arena, and selling more than than Nintendo and 25% of Sony, I don't think that that is a small thing...
Yes thats true but so did sony when Nintendo and Sega were just finishing a brutal battle for the console market which Nintendo win,and sony whent to do what other consoles from Nintendo din't,make the market grow with over 100 million consoles sold,which is far from Nintendo's best console the Nes which sold 60+ millions.
From a games point of view the xbox was much more succesful than the DC,from a consumer stand point of view it was a disaster,people realy din't see it like they see the PS2,even to this moment the PS2 continue to outsold the xbox and even the GC combined each month in US which is MS best market.
But people had to give them credict for getting so much games with so little user base,if you compare it to the GC which was release first and have less games from 3rd parties.
mckmas8808
02-Nov-2005, 15:05
Yes thats true but so did sony when Nintendo and Sega were just finishing a brutal battle for the console market which Nintendo win,and sony whent to do what other consoles from Nintendo din't,make the market grow with over 100 million consoles sold,which is far from Nintendo's best console the Nes which sold 60+ millions.
From a games point of view the xbox was much more succesful than the DC,from a consumer stand point of view it was a disaster,people realy din't see it like they see the PS2,even to this moment the PS2 continue to outsold the xbox and even the GC combined each month in US which is MS best market.
But people had to give them credict for getting so much games with so little user base,if you compare it to the GC which was release first and have less games from 3rd parties.
QFT.
It's true, there are differences in prouduct tastes such as Americans like things big while they like things compact but, while I'm an outsider for sure in the Japanese way of life, from what I understand, "nationalism" or "homerism" plays an aspect in their business and consumer culture, moreso than the US, who love foreign goods. The US has a much higher import/export ratio than they do and the two nations are about the same in terms of industrialization and labor costs.So most Japanese people use TRON instead of Microsoft Windows? :roll:
scooby_dooby
02-Nov-2005, 16:06
Of course they have a better name....
THe middle 2 paragraphs are mine, the outer 2 are MckMass I think...
Thegameman
02-Nov-2005, 16:46
The Saturn sold less than 10 million units total, and that is less than half of the Xbox userbase.
And how is the Xbox vs. PS2 sales at all relevent to my comments or points?
I like your last sentence, because it says it all. WHEN COMPARED TO THE PS@.
Well, don't compare it to the PS2. Compare it to MS's console userbase from the previous generation, which was ZERO. Going from ZERO to 22+ million is a success.
Going from 35+ million down to less than 10 million like Sega did was a failure. If you don't see the difference then try removing the ****** sunglasses.
It was a very desirable option that the DC didn't have at all.
Sure it did. Financial strength is what made the Xbox last 4 years and made sure the 360 was a reality. do you think MS would have persued the 360 project if they were in as bad of a financial position as Sega was in 2008? Not a chance.
And there are a million reasons for that, most of which you obviously are ignorant of.
When the Xbox launched it had absolutely no previous userbase. Developers didn't support it because they didn't know how well it would see, and consumers didn't support it because the rumor was Nintendo and Sony would going to flatten them and MS would drop out of the console race.
Clearly neither of those problems exist now. Developers are giving the 360 tons of support (Even giving the 360 new versions of formerly Playstation exclusive titles) and consumers have absolutely no fears about MS staying around or getting good games.
The first year of the PS2 it enjoyed success based off the Playstation. The first 2 years of the Xbox MS had to struggle and fight to make a dent in the market because they were the great unknown.
And I shouldn't have to explain the implications of the 9-11 terrorist attacks only 2 months before the Xbox launch and how that effected consumer confidence and sales.
I'm not saying the Xbox 360 is going to outsell the PS3 by the end of next-gen, but I think even implying the 360 is another Dreamcast is beyond ignorant. It's just plain dumb.
Cuz the xbox 360 is the succesor to a failed console,if sega would had 4 billions to blow on the DC,it would have sold alot more than what the Xbox did,in fact Nintendo make profit out of the GC and sold what 18 or 19 million consoles,which is what 4 million away from the xbox which has alot more suport?
You say from zero to 20 million is a succes with a market so spanded as it is now,the Nes whent from zero to 60+ million the PS whent from zero to 100 million.
As you can see the closes is the Nes and it sold 3 times what the xbox sold,the PS sold 5 times.
MS din't have another console before the Xbox but they are one of the most known companys in this world,and their software is use for gaming on PC which has alot of millions of gamers as well.
Also how is that diferent from what happen to Nintendo?
They sold 60+ millions Nes,down to 50+ Snes does that mean the Snes was a failure?
Wait but the N64 sold like 30+ should we callk it a failure,when it sold 10+ million consoles more than the xbox with less suport cuz it sold less than the Snes?
Seling 22 million consoles with the kind of..
Money MS has invested on the xbox and loss what 4 billions.
With features build in that the other company sold apart HDD.
And with suport from almost every company making game for PS2.
No my friend that is more of and escuse than a fact,the xbox failed to capture a big share of the market vs a console which is older under power and that doesn't have a HDD build in,in fact many people say the GC is a failure cuz it din't sold what the N64 did,yet is close to the xbox and did make profits for Nintendo so how is the GC a failure is beyon logic to me.
The DC din't had it at all but by the time the PS2 was seling great the DC was $150 and then $99 and DVD player where $150 as well,by 2001 any one could buy a DC and a DVD player for far less than what the xbox would have cost you with the remote to see movies,but the fact is you had to buy a remote control,which was a joke cuz the PS2 was free and it wasn't like the xbox could not do it,they just luck it so you have to pay more.
The DC lasted almost 3 year with sega's finalcial problems,there is no reason on this planet why the xbox should not live until 2007,it as the last to the market and it is the first to be kill,but taking away the only factor in which money has serve MS to keep the xbox alive,how did it serve them vs the PS2 did it slow it down did the people reacted better to the xbox than to the PS2 cuz MS has very deep pockets,did it even capture 40% of the market....
Nothing my firend other than keeping the xbox alive and putting some nasty losses on MS deep pockets,is the reason why MS want to leave the xbox on back already,MS din't get to be as it is now blowing 4 billions on every product they make,if they don't see profits with the xbox 360 i think they will not compete again.
In fact what you say about the xbox not having suport is dead wrong,to begin with EA was on board so was alot of developers that say it,from Konami to capcom sega you name it,also what many people were thinking over the net was that MS with it's deep pockets would take the market from Sony hands,Nintendo was not even a problem for MS.
The PS2 make it the first year cuz just like the xbox it had games,is incredible that after so many years poeople still try to put down the PS2,cuz it clean the floor with any one including the great unknow company you claim to be which is not so unknown to begin with.
MS is one of the biggest companys in the wolrd,saying MS is getting into your business mean you have some big trouble.
If you think that MS was unknown when they release the xbox you are the one to need to take your goggles away my friend.
Unproven on the console market like Sony once was yes i give you that,but unknown i don't think so.
Lest see the PS2 had Tekken Tag,which is like the most popular fighting game for a PS console the first game ever to sold a million copys on PS.
Madden 2001 this one i don't even have to speak for it.
SSX which was a fresh new gamewhich also landed like Tekken and Madden great scores.
Compare to DOA 2.5 for the xbox which isn't as popular or as good as Tekken,PGR which was also release for DC by the name of MSR the same year the xbox was launch,in fact it god more hype as a DC game when it was tag as GT killer for months only to fell short by miles even to GT2 which was on PS with horrible graphics compare to MSR.
And Halo which another game of the bunch until MS buy Bugie and hype it as the be all end all of games,which was great but not the be all end all they claimed to be.
And I shouldn't have to explain the implications of the 9-11 terrorist attacks only 2 months before the Xbox launch and how that effected consumer confidence and sales.
I don't wnat to quote like this but this part here deserve it.
That is the worst escuse i had ever hear to justifie xbox low sales,escuse me and correct me if i'm wrong that was the first holiday season for the Xbox and the GC,in that case i would have to say that consumer were selective cuz they did buy the PS2 with confidence yet they din't do the same with the GC and Xbox.
The PS2 sold 3 million units that holiday outseling the xbox and GC combined.
Dude that is realy a bad escuse the PS2 sold extremely well that holiday outseling both combined.
It would have sound better if you say that the Xbox and the Cube landed into GTA3,MGS2 and FFX which was release on december 2001.
We have to see,the graphical advatage was one of the xbox key features,so was the HDD and but has gone away.
So most Japanese people use TRON instead of Microsoft Windows? :roll:
Like anyone else, they use Windows because that is the OS for which most business and consumer software is written. It's a platform. I don't know about TRON. Do they have thousands of software written for them?
If you want to compare buying preferences, you have to compare two like items, such as cars, electronics, computers, and even video game software. The Japanese and foreign counterparts are functionally equivalent. The only difference is quality.
As for the XBox's "success", this much can be said--they established a good brand. They didn't do anything major to screw the buying public the way Sega and Nintendo did in the past, such as using proprietary or obsolete media, selling unsupported add-ons, or the biggie--not having a large library of software to choose. Sony also really never messed up in their two consoles.
20 million Xbox's sold is mediocre, neither a success or failiure. Calling it either is too extreme.
mckmas8808,
Sorry I don't even have an Xbox and I know this was MS biggest advantage. It's the main reason people choose the Xbox over the PS2 in the beginning.
I think you purposely are ignoring reason. look back and notice that the most successful consoles were not using the most advanced hardware (compared to comeptitors) in each generation. You don't need to own an xbox to look at past trends.
mckmas8808
03-Nov-2005, 13:23
mckmas8808,
I think you purposely are ignoring reason. look back and notice that the most successful consoles were not using the most advanced hardware (compared to comeptitors) in each generation. You don't need to own an xbox to look at past trends.
Whoa nelly. I know the most advanced hardware doesn't give you an automatic win. I was saying some people brought the Xbox because it had and still has the best graphics for a current gen console.
expletive
28-Apr-2006, 14:17
Microsoft has slightly revised its shipment estimates for end June, over 3 million sold at the moment:
However, particularly relevant to the video game press were comments made in the conference call following the results, during which officials revealed plans for five to five and a half million Xbox 360s to ship to stores worldwide before June 30th, the end of the company's fiscal year. This was up marginally on the previous 4.5-5.5 million estimate.
The company also revealed that it had shipped 3.2 million Xbox 360s thus far, including 1.8 million in North America, according to a TheStreet.com report, after repeated shortages due to manufacturing problems stymied many consumers over the holiday period and early 2006. However, Microsoft VP Peter Moore commented in a post-results call: "Our supply challenges are behind us operationally". The company also announced 10 million Xbox Live Marketplace downloads, including over 4 million Xbox Live Arcade games - though many of these were not paid, obviously.
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=9085
I bet MS cant wait to put the xbox1 to rest, theyre still losing money on it...
However, the division's loss increased "...due to an increase in product costs and sales and marketing expenses related to the Xbox 360 and due to the significant margin generated by Halo2 in fiscal year 2005." The document explained: "Our business model anticipates that while we currently sell Xbox 360 consoles at a negative margin, product cost reductions and the future margins on sales of games and other products will enable us to achieve a positive margin over the Xbox 360 console lifecycle." However, it noted that "...the first generation Xbox consoles continue to have negative margins." Microsoft's financials on the Home and Entertainment division ended: "We expect operating expenses and operating loss to increase as a result of Xbox 360 launch-related activities and Xbox 360 console costs."
Whoa nelly. I know the most advanced hardware doesn't give you an automatic win. I was saying some people brought the Xbox because it had and still has the best graphics for a current gen console.
To say that was an advantage is still stretching it. it was thouroghly proven having the msot advance hardware got you essentially nothing as far as market share. a very small minority of people bought an xbox due to the hardware that was inside.
To say that was an advantage is still stretching it. it was thouroghly proven having the msot advance hardware got you essentially nothing as far as market share. a very small minority of people bought an xbox due to the hardware that was inside.
Hmm, everyone, and I mean everyone I know who bought an XBox did so because they think it has the best graphics among the current gen consoles. Which means, it is the hardware inside.
None of them bought it for the games, but that could have been because they bought it early before Halo came out, where a few people would buy it just for that.
Not something to go statistically by, but I think if you do a poll here that'd be the main reason.
Speng.
weaksauce
28-Apr-2006, 16:16
ze xbox360 is gonna reach one billion peopple!
btw ps2 costed $100 more than DC but still outsold it.
ElStupido
28-Apr-2006, 17:18
Hmm, everyone, and I mean everyone I know who bought an XBox did so because they think it has the best graphics among the current gen consoles. Which means, it is the hardware inside.
None of them bought it for the games, but that could have been because they bought it early before Halo came out, where a few people would buy it just for that.
Not something to go statistically by, but I think if you do a poll here that'd be the main reason.
Speng.
all of the ppl I know bought the console for its hacked media center capabilities and the ability to play isos from the hd (-> pirating games in the most pleasurable fashion....).
So a large percentage of sales were motivated by better graphics, as you said, and the hackable capabilities.
Also Halo, being the system-seller in the us, is not that popular in the rest of the world, plz believe. Also the credit card payment system for xbox live acounts was highly unpopular in the eu because we don't have/need CCs in our daily lives as much as the americans do, just a small percentage uses CCs over here and they're mostly adults (like 35>). That's why MS in 05! introduced a prepaid CC so that more ppl would use live.
In germany the 360's price drops (http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showpost.php?p=741286&postcount=18) significantly because the sales are down. there were also no shortages in germany because the xboxes were never sold out (similar to japan).
All in all it seems like the xbox360 won't be successefull outside north america like it's i predecessor. ppl are also turned off by the myriads of shooters and pc-ports.
Also the credit card payment system for xbox live acounts was highly unpopular in the eu because we don't have/need CCs in our daily lives as much as the americans do, just a small percentage uses CCs over here and they're mostly adults (like 35>).
Haven't a clue about the rest of Europe but that's not even close to being accurate for the UK. Virtually everybody has a credit card, especially youngsters.
ElStupido
28-Apr-2006, 17:38
Haven't a clue about the rest of Europe but that's not even close to being accurate for the UK. Virtually everybody has a credit card, especially youngsters.
yes, I thought so and considered about writing something like: "this may not aply to the UK"
But you've always been different/detached from the continent :razz:
all of the ppl I know bought the console for its hacked media center capabilities and the ability to play isos from the hd (-> pirating games in the most pleasurable fashion....).
So a large percentage of sales were motivated by better graphics, as you said, and the hackable capabilities.
Anecdotal evidence is always a bit speculative, but you are acknowledging that the only people you know who also own an Xbox are admitted thieves. This is not representative of anything.
In germany the 360's price drops (http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showpost.php?p=741286&postcount=18) significantly because the sales are down. there were also no shortages in germany because the xboxes were never sold out (similar to japan).To back up even more anecdotal evidence from you, you link to an image of a site selling a Core unit, which by all accounts aren't selling nearly as well as the the Xbox 360.
All in all it seems like the xbox360 won't be successefull outside north america like it's i predecessor. And then you close with a sweeping generalization.
Come back with some data that can verify your assertions. Perhaps a news report from Germany about lackluster sales. Last I looked into it, sales were doing fine in Europe. Certainly Ubisoft is very happy...
Acert93
28-Apr-2006, 18:56
And people only bought PS2s for the DVD player... Anecdotal points only go so far. I personally don't know a single person who bought the console for anything other than playing games (outside the online hardcore gamers I know). I have a group of friends who all bought Xbox consoles to system link and have Xbox parties. Of course they are the minority, but consoles get different uses among various demographics.
Taking surveys of hardcore/enthusiest/hacker use of hardware as representative if the majority of gamers is silly. The Halo games were system sellers/killer apps and MS has provided a number of titles (and features, like Live) that appeal to certain gamers. Obviously having nice graphics appealed to some, but it seems very few people read magazines and even fewer sit a PS2 and Xbox side by side and do a quality test. Marketing, word of mouth, sales reps, and software tend to push sales beyond the early adopters.
Attributing 20M sales to pirates & people wanting better graphics seems to be far too narrowly focused. Of course as a forum that is defined by enthusiests, techies, and hardcore graphic junkies and therefor gravitating toward such it is not unthinkable that many here would get those very impressions.
ElStupido
28-Apr-2006, 19:51
Anecdotal evidence is always a bit speculative, but you are acknowledging that the only people you know who also own an Xbox are admitted thieves. This is not representative of anything.
I'm not even talking about my friends explicitly, my experiences derive from large forums (not warez ones) and minor newspaper/i-net articles (talking about the console's hackable media centre capability). It may sound funny, but I'm more in touch with the market than you are and I don't have reason to lie to you.
To back up even more anecdotal evidence from you, you link to an image of a site selling a Core unit, which by all accounts aren't selling nearly as well as the the Xbox 360.
I didn't just post the pic.
Ok, it's true that cores are selling worse, but it's a freaking 100€ off the price just a few months after the release!
The full version is selling for about 350 (50€ off, as I stated in that post) normaly - there you have your evidence: http://www.geizhals.at/deutschland/a151339.html
loceal stores offer sometimes bigger rebates. ppl have seen premiums selling for around 300€ (the targeted price of the core). But the normal price is about 350 right now. Why bother lower the price when the console is selling like hotcakes?..
The situation is nowhere near as desperate as in japan, but nonetheless it's still bad.
Come back with some data that can verify your assertions. Perhaps a news report from Germany about lackluster sales. Last I looked into it, sales were doing fine in Europe. Certainly Ubisoft is very happy...
1. there is a language barrier between us so even if I would present you some articles you would understand jack + there are no selling charts really (like there are e.g. in japan).
2. if you ask for evidence deliver some yourself.
----------
Taking surveys of hardcore/enthusiest/hacker use of hardware as representative if the majority of gamers is silly. The Halo games were system sellers/killer apps and MS has provided a number of titles (and features, like Live)
Attributing 20M sales to pirates & people wanting better graphics seems to be far too narrowly focused.
You see, I was talking more about the eu.I aknowledge the success in north america and I know how you are nuts about shooters and halo, but it is not the case for the rest of the world.
Ppl don't/didn't take advantage of live (for the reasons I've named already) because there is no such strong cc-culture in the eu (exculding uk).
The tech-freaks you've talked about here were to a large proportion the ones who bought the xbox. The ppl who wanted a cheap entertainement system and also the pirates who wanted an easy way to play their "backups". There were even tv shows where they showed how you flash the bios. Literally every games-shop (we mostly have small ones here, no ebgames-like chains) can provide you with modchips and build it in in a few hours.
1. there is a language barrier between us so even if I would present you some articles you would understand jack + there are no selling charts really (like there are e.g. in japan).
Then we're at an impasse. You are free to deliver more unsubstantiated opinions and I'm free to point out that you are making unsubstantiated opinions.
2. if you ask for evidence deliver some yourself.If I was making an assertion, absolutely. Always ask for the source.
It may sound funny, but I'm more in touch with the market than you are and I don't have reason to lie to you.Perhaps there is a language barrier between us. I say, "You need to back up your statements with some evidence." You say, "I know more than you, so trust me."
Here's why news reports are better than using a retailer website as proof (which, in fact, appears to be a price aggregator, much like froogle):
Link (http://froogle.google.com/froogle_cluster?pid=2342641979969631983&oid=18395270477215255139&btnG=Search+Froogle&hl=en&q=xbox+360&lmode=online&scoring=p)
(If the link doesn't work, it's basically showing a list of Xbox 360 cores for sale in the US, pulled from Froogle, one of which for about US$265. Should I take this as proof that Xbox 360 is selling poorly in the US?)
Hmm, I believe there is a big difference between the link you provided and the one ElStupido posted. In yours, there is a single, unrated retailer selling a core 360 for slightly below retail prize. And starting with the sixth, the prize is actually above MSRP!
ElStupido's link to Geizhals (By far the largest German-language territory price aggregator) on the other hand shows several highly-rated retailers consistently selling premium Xbox360 packages below retail price, most claiming (And, with their rating, there is little reason to doubt such claims) stock in the hundreds.
Hmm, I believe there is a big difference between the link you provided and the one ElStupido posted. In yours, there is a single, unrated retailer selling a core 360 for slightly below retail prize. And starting with the sixth, the prize is actually above MSRP!
ElStupido's link to Geizhals (By far the largest German-language territory price aggregator) on the other hand shows several highly-rated retailers consistently selling premium Xbox360 packages below retail price, most claiming (And, with their rating, there is little reason to doubt such claims) stock in the hundreds.
The link was merely to prove that listing the price of something is only part of the picture and not proof of anything other than the price. You are only arguing the scale of it.
It may indicate a sales trend wherein retailers are selling systems for even less than suggested retail. That's surely one assumption that could be made. So if someone wants to look at those prices and make that assumption, I'm going to ask them to back it up with a little more than pricing as evidence.
Sis, you're a bit out of line. ElStupido provided ample evience. Saturn in part of the Metro Group which also owns Media Markt and the two taken together are by far the largest European consumer electronics retail chain. The price aggregator, Geizhals, is very well maintained and trustworthy.
It's absolutely no problem to get a Xbox 360 premium for 30-50 € under MSRP here and the prices for the "Core" version appear to be in free fall. The damn things are more or less rotting on the shelves here.
It may indicate a sales trend wherein retailers are selling systems for even less than suggested retail. That's surely one assumption that could be made.
Um, that's actually the like scenario. Retailers sell for less than the MSRP and guess what... retailers usually have a reason for that and the reason is that it's better to sell something for cheap than not sell it at all.
Sis, you're a bit out of line. ElStupido provided ample evience. Saturn in part of the Metro Group which also owns Media Markt and the two taken together are by far the largest European consumer electronics retail chain. The price aggregator, Geizhals, is very well maintained and trustworthy.
It's absolutely no problem to get a Xbox 360 premium for 30-50 € under MSRP here and the prices for the "Core" version appear to be in free fall. The damn things are more or less rotting on the shelves here.
Be a bit fair to me now: I asked for proof since his first link was an image. He then replied with a link to this website. I still think pricing is not a valid indicator of sales, but it's a valid indicator of something, I suppose.
Quick question to those who know: how does that VAT come into play? I don't get why some prices are higher than 399, but if you exclude VAT it comes down. Did the original 399 price include that?
Um, that's actually the like scenario. Retailers sell for less than the MSRP and guess what... retailers usually have a reason for that and the reason is that it's better to sell something for cheap than not sell it at all.
So they would rather take a ~20% loss (or perhaps break even) and clear up the shelf space for something else? Is that what's happening? I'm presuming they would only replenish their stock. Because, otherwise then you'd see "out of stock" signs everywhere...
All prices always have VAT included, it's required by law. The only exception is B2B transfers when VAT is stated seperately.
So they would rather take a ~20% loss (or perhaps break even) and clear up the shelf space for something else? Is that what's happening? I'm presuming they would only replenish their stock. Because, otherwise then you'd see "out of stock" signs everywhere...
The online retailers seem to have extremely large stocks, which is surprising because they usually try to minimize their inventories. I take that as an indication that they have ordered far too many units in anticipation of a much higher demand. Selling a premium kit for €355 (plus shipping) probably breaks them even.
The €199 thing for the core version is a bit of a abnormality. This isn't online it's an actual chain of retail stroes but the offer seems to be limited to the Stuttgart area. This may seem confusing at the first glance, unless you know how these retail chains operate.
Every store has a monthly marketing budget at their free disposal and they often use it to sell some some items at a loss. They susidize the prices, so to say. There are usually two kinds of products that they like to subsidize. Either brand new high profile stuff (I picked up Warcraft 3 + a free DVD for €35 on release day there...) or products that don't move all that well in order to reduce stock.
Now, the problem is that these offers often have a snowball effect. If they are satisfied with the succes, other stores of that chain in different cities will likely follow the lead and once that happens everyone is forced to adapt because Saturn/Media Markt utterly dominates the market for consumer electornics in Germany and some other European countries.
expletive
29-Apr-2006, 03:47
Its all fairly pointless though isnt it? At the end of June, MS will have met 5 million or not, then we can all sit around and judge sales based on that. While i understand the potential validity and implications, this interim exchanging of pricing links seems to be getting nowhere.
FWIW, i was in a BB and a CC in NJ this evening. CC had no units of either SKU. BB had 3 cores and no premiums (they did have the HD accessory as well).
It is pointless when looking at total sales numbers only, but figuring out the distribution among the 3 markets can be interesting as well. Imagine, for example, that the next-gen market looks like this in mid-2008 (numbers taken out of thin air):
US:
60% XB360 30% PS3 10% Wii
EU:
60% PS3 20% Wii 20% XB360
JP:
50% Wii 45% PS3 5% XB360
(just imagine that the Wii does a DS in Japan)
Would make for a though situation for 3rd parties, wouldn't it?
I'm not saying that there will be a geographical devide nearly as strong as in that example, but it may just happen that everyone "wins" this console war - somewhere.
expletive
29-Apr-2006, 06:27
It is pointless when looking at total sales numbers only, but figuring out the distribution among the 3 markets can be interesting as well. Imagine, for example, that the next-gen market looks like this in mid-2008 (numbers taken out of thin air):
US:
60% XB360 30% PS3 10% Wii
EU:
60% PS3 20% Wii 20% XB360
JP:
50% Wii 45% PS3 5% XB360
(just imagine that the Wii does a DS in Japan)
Would make for a though situation for 3rd parties, wouldn't it?
I'm not saying that there will be a geographical devide nearly as strong as in that example, but it may just happen that everyone "wins" this console war - somewhere.
Definitely possible and i think exactly what MS was trying to avoid by launching first. Imo, MS felt that by launching first they would have an advantage for all developer decisions leading up to *at least* mid-2007. If you look at the likely scenario, the 360 will be at around 10-12 million by Jan 2007 with the PS3 and Wii (not sure i'll ever get used to that) being roughly around 2 million each. Plus they know theyve got Halo, with the movie tie-in, coming Q2 2007 which is another big bump in hardware sales.
If things play out this way, and at this point it seems likely, publishers are making development decisions in a console race where the 360 could have 2-4x the amount of units sold as the other 2 through the end of 2007. Thats a fairly compelling platform, especially if you add on what appears to be superior development tools and easy cross-platform development with Vista via XNA.
All that said, i think MS is hoping that this installed base momentum will get them the top software, which will, in turn, breed more hardware sales on a console that was designed to be agressively priced sooner rather than later. I'm fairly confident this is the crux of their strategy, it'll be interesting to see if it actually works.
mckmas8808
30-Apr-2006, 17:00
Definitely possible and i think exactly what MS was trying to avoid by launching first. Imo, MS felt that by launching first they would have an advantage for all developer decisions leading up to *at least* mid-2007. If you look at the likely scenario, the 360 will be at around 10-12 million by Jan 2007 with the PS3 and Wii (not sure i'll ever get used to that) being roughly around 2 million each. Plus they know theyve got Halo, with the movie tie-in, coming Q2 2007 which is another big bump in hardware sales.
If things play out this way, and at this point it seems likely, publishers are making development decisions in a console race where the 360 could have 2-4x the amount of units sold as the other 2 through the end of 2007. Thats a fairly compelling platform, especially if you add on what appears to be superior development tools and easy cross-platform development with Vista via XNA.
All that said, i think MS is hoping that this installed base momentum will get them the top software, which will, in turn, breed more hardware sales on a console that was designed to be agressively priced sooner rather than later. I'm fairly confident this is the crux of their strategy, it'll be interesting to see if it actually works.
Well we do know that by March 2007 Sony will have 6 million PS3s out there so it does close that 10 million "world-wide" head start pretty fast.
expletive
30-Apr-2006, 17:14
Well we do know that by March 2007 Sony will have 6 million PS3s out there so it does close that 10 million "world-wide" head start pretty fast.
Agreed.
Though you ahve to admit 6 million is probably a 'best-case' estimate from Sony at this point, they havent produced a single PS3 yet, much less 6 million of them.
Also, signs are pointing to Halo 3 being released around March 07. So while 10-12 million sold may be the total by January 1, 07, by the end of April 2007 that number could be quite a bit larger (due to Halo's release.)
scooby_dooby
30-Apr-2006, 17:20
Well we do know that by March 2007 Sony will have 6 million PS3s out there so it does close that 10 million "world-wide" head start pretty fast.
Hold on there cowboy. How many companies have ever had 6 million consoles out within 5 months? None? All we know is sony says there will be 6 million. It's gonna be quite the feat to pull off, so we'll see.
mckmas8808
30-Apr-2006, 17:23
Hold on there cowboy. How many companies have ever had 6 million consoles out within 5 months? None? All we know is sony says there will be 6 million. It's gonna be quite the feat to pull off, so we'll see.
Well of course things can change. Sony may actually only sale 3 million consoles in the first six months. But I'm only going by what each company is telling us. Sony is saying 6 million by March something and MS is telling us 4.5-5.5 million by June something.
And I'm guessing expletive's 10-12 million comes from the 4.5-5.5 million that MS used and then just adding 1/2 of a year on to that. So, he's also taking MS at their word as am I.
Johnny Awesome
30-Apr-2006, 18:01
It's a pretty safe bet that the numbers in March 07 will be something like this:
X360 - 10 million
PS3 - 5 million
Wii - 3.5 million
With Halo 3/Halo movie on the way right after that it's a pretty good scenario for MS. I still think Sony can win it world-wide, but I'm doubting they can pass MS in the US.
dragoon
30-Apr-2006, 18:06
I didn't just post the pic.
Ok, it's true that cores are selling worse, but it's a freaking 100€ off the price just a few months after the release!
The full version is selling for about 350 (50€ off, as I stated in that post) normaly - there you have your evidence: http://www.geizhals.at/deutschland/a151339.html
loceal stores offer sometimes bigger rebates. ppl have seen premiums selling for around 300€ (the targeted price of the core). But the normal price is about 350 right now. Why bother lower the price when the console is selling like hotcakes?..
The situation is nowhere near as desperate as in japan, but nonetheless it's still bad.
the same is true every other videogame console as well (all of them are selling below ERP according to the website you have quoted:
PlayStation 2 @ 129 (instead of ERP € 149): http://www.geizhals.at/deutschland/a123325.html
PlayStation 2 + Buzz @ 129 (instead of ERP 179): http://www.geizhals.at/deutschland/a162947.html
GameCube + Mario Kart @ 89 (instead of ERP € 99): http://www.geizhals.at/deutschland/a80377.html
PSP Value Pack + Game @ 225 (instead of ERP € 249 without game): http://www.geizhals.at/deutschland/a158436.html
dukmahsik
30-Apr-2006, 18:28
It's a pretty safe bet that the numbers in March 07 will be something like this:
X360 - 10 million
PS3 - 5 million
Wii - 3.5 million
With Halo 3/Halo movie on the way right after that it's a pretty good scenario for MS. I still think Sony can win it world-wide, but I'm doubting they can pass MS in the US.
I see by march 07
360 - 9 million
PS3 - 5 million
Revolution (refuse to use Wii) - 3 million
Powderkeg
02-May-2006, 13:05
I see by march 07
360 - 9 million
PS3 - 5 million
Revolution (refuse to use Wii) - 3 million
So, you think the 360 will sell 5-5.5 million units by June, but they won't be able to sell another 4 million units over the next 9 months, even though the holiday shopping season is part of that time frame?
ARE YOU NUTS?
You are basically saying MS won't be able to sell more than 500k systems world-wide through Christmas. They could double to triple those numbers in the US alone during the holiday.
mckmas8808
02-May-2006, 13:07
So, you think the 360 will sell 5-5.5 million units by June, but they won't be able to sell another 4 million units over the next 9 months, even though the holiday shopping season is part of that time frame?
ARE YOU NUTS?
You are basically saying MS won't be able to sell more than 500k systems world-wide through Christmas. They could double to triple those numbers in the US alone during the holiday.
Well I guess he is factoring in the new competiton too. A new Revolution and PS3 will hinder the X360's sales for sure. It's inevitable.
dukmahsik
02-May-2006, 14:16
So, you think the 360 will sell 5-5.5 million units by June, but they won't be able to sell another 4 million units over the next 9 months, even though the holiday shopping season is part of that time frame?
ARE YOU NUTS?
You are basically saying MS won't be able to sell more than 500k systems world-wide through Christmas. They could double to triple those numbers in the US alone during the holiday.
oh I like to be conservative with estimates then be pleasantly surprised :razz:
Powderkeg
02-May-2006, 14:19
Well I guess he is factoring in the new competiton too. A new Revolution and PS3 will hinder the X360's sales for sure. It's inevitable.
RIIIIGGGHHTTTT
A very supply limited PS3 and a console that only appeals to established Nintendo fans is going to cause MS, who will have no supply problems whatsoever, to actually have less sales in the holidays than it does right now.
You do realize that the Xbox averaged 2-3 million sold in November and December alone, right? Are you suggesting that the 360's sales will actually be 50-75% less than the original Xbox?
Or are you just arguing with me for the sake of arguing with me, and who cares how poorly thought out your point is?
dukmahsik
02-May-2006, 14:22
RIIIIGGGHHTTTT
A very supply limited PS3 and a console that only appeals to established Nintendo fans is going to cause MS, who will have no supply problems whatsoever, to actually have less sales in the holidays than it does right now.
You do realize that the Xbox averaged 2-3 million sold in November and December alone, right? Are you suggesting that the 360's sales will actually be 50-75% less than the original Xbox?
Or are you just arguing with me for the sake of arguing with me, and who cares how poorly thought out your point is?
Powder you do have some points... what do you think the numbers for each system will be in March 07?
Powderkeg
02-May-2006, 14:27
Powder you do have some points... what do you think the numbers for each system will be in March 07?
I think they'll hit the 10 million mark by the end of 2006. If they hit the 5 million by end of June (Low end of current projections), 2 million between June and end of October, and 3 million over the hollidays world-wide is realistic. 2-3 million sold world-wide in the 3 months following, so end of March would be 12-13 milllion.
And that's if it only stays on pace with the original Xbox. If demand is better and MS can meet that demand with the supply, they could possibly sell as many as 15 million systems by end of March, but I wouldn't put money on it.
dukmahsik
02-May-2006, 14:35
I think they'll hit the 10 million mark by the end of 2006. If they hit the 5 million by end of June (Low end of current projections), 2 million between June and end of October, and 3 million over the hollidays world-wide is realistic. 2-3 million sold world-wide in the 3 months following, so end of March would be 12-13 milllion.
And that's if it only stays on pace with the original Xbox. If demand is better and MS can meet that demand with the supply, they could possibly sell as many as 15 million systems by end of March, but I wouldn't put money on it.
if GOW, too human, viva pinata, and company really make a splash at E3, then 10 million by end of this year could happen
Adding more fuel to this fire, don´t know if this have been posted already.
May 01, 2006
The Chinese-language Apple Daily reports that Wistron aims to ship 5-6 million Xbox 360 game consoles in 2006. Company chairman Simon Lin, however, stressed that Wistron currently has no capacity expansion plan for game console assembly.
In related news, Wistron reported a first quarter earnings per share (EPS) of NT$0.4, according to a Chinese-language Central News Agency (CAN) report.
http://www.emsnow.com/npps/story.cfm?ID=18970
-------
This is only one foundry. Flextronic and celesticas numbers are not included here.
If MS can muster out some must have games after summer and have a interesting price, then I don´t see any problem with reaching 10+ million sold (or shipped or what ever number they want to play around with)
expletive
02-May-2006, 15:56
Adding more fuel to this fire, don´t know if this have been posted already.
http://www.emsnow.com/npps/story.cfm?ID=18970
-------
This is only one foundry. Flextronic and celesticas numbers are not included here.
If MS can muster out some must have games after summer and have a interesting price, then I don´t see any problem with reaching 10+ million sold (or shipped or what ever number they want to play around with)
I wonder what the others produce and how many MS would have counted 'in the can' going into 2006, maybe 2 million built as of Jan 1, 2006?
scooby_dooby
02-May-2006, 18:16
I wonder what the others produce and how many MS would have counted 'in the can' going into 2006, maybe 2 million built as of Jan 1, 2006?
The Dean Takashi article confirms OXM's number of 120k/week for the first 2. Celestica we don't know.
first, back in the ps1 day's, i think the IQ advantage( in 3d departement) of the ps1 over the saturn was a advantage nobody have talk in this thread.
It help a lot the PS1, I choose ps1 over saturn for this reason.
At the start game library wasn't that much of a issue.
My guess for Sony is somewhere between 4.5 and 5+ millions units by March.
For Ms depend if the 4.5/5.5 millions goals for june is achieve.
If not Xbox360 can be seen by consumer as a loosy system.
What I would consider :
1 The core is a good point for Ms.
299 $ (or slightly less if Ms feels thing 're going well and decide to take more loss) and a healthy game library can attract causual gamers very early (ie chrismass 2006 early in a console life cycle).
2 Ms is likely to have no suppies probleme at this time.
3 quality of the games will be very important.
Ms and sony have both a lot of editor support. Casual gamers don't give a shit to brand fidelity. If both system are on part, Ms will sold all the unit they can supplie (sony will anyway, supplie is more likely to be an issue for Sony).
4 Piracy will be an issue, if say xbox360 security is broken at the time Ms have say a 10+millions user base, this will attract lot of players (at this time game library will be healthy and 10+millions is a good base for p2p). Sorry but lot of my friends buy PS2 becauseof this: lot games, user >>easy piracy...(anyway not a good news for gamers in regard of dev cost, but a NON negligible factor in my opinion. (can be the same for ps3)
5 price of ps3 is not an issue at this time no matter what.
6 Xbox fail in Europe, what will be the PS3 supplies for europe at fall 2006...
My guess not a lot... Will european will wait till at least spring 2007?
My guess quality of game PS3 will have to be more than "barrely distingible" . This is worse in NA.
7 Sony will sellin Japan no matter what.
8 If consumer show a REAL interest for hdtv (and so bluray) Sony have a real technical advantage on MS.
9 XNA is a VERY smart move for MS, I think a lot of people here will change their mind when Vista will be out (2007+). even with say 25/30% market share in console business Ms will still be in good situation while discuting with editors.
10 Ps3 still have an advantage in first party editors, but Ms work in the good way.
11 Ms try to push new franchise, XXX17 can be borring at a time.
It's a lot of factors, too much for me in fact. Anyway I can see valid comparision between Xbox360 and dreamcast (nor that much with xbox in fact).
In the end, Sony will win this time with a confortable margin If anything go right (supplies, non defectives units a start, etc...)
Hence, Ms can gain a lot of market share, and anyway Ms is likely to gain some (my opinion). If ms gains lot of market share (understand make lot of money) they will crush Sony next round they will accept loss per unit that Sony can't stand and they don't want to take at this time (4B with xbox1 is enought at this time lol).
Shortly, I think Sony shows lot of confidence but knows that it has a hell lot of pressure above its shoulders...
(as a whole compagny even a half ps3 succes can be good cause it still mean a BR succes, but still not a good news for game division).
J_Saint
07-May-2006, 16:55
Microsoft Updates Shipment Numbers: 3.3 million Xbox 360s Have Shipped (http://blogs.mercurynews.com/aei/2006/05/microsoft_updat.html)
In April, Microsoft said it had an "inventory surge." Celestica, its third contract manufacturer, has ramped up its factory. So it seems that Microsoft has managed to ship many more units in the month of April to get to the number that Baker said. I believe the 3.3 million is the number sold through, not shipped in. In any case, both of those numbers shouldn't be that far apart because the 360s are still flying off the shelves.
When will we get the NPD numbers for April?
It seems the much-awaited April sales data of Xbox 360 has been out.
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=9326
NPD data also revealed that Xbox 360 hardware sales in the U.S. to date were 1.5 million units, and Xbox 360 software sold very well in April (a tie ratio of over 4). However, Wedbush Morgan notes: "Over the succeeding several months, we think that it is possible (even likely) that software attach rates will be around 3 units per Xbox 360 hardware unit sold, particularly as the release dates for many key sequels appear on the horizon."
Shifty Geezer
18-May-2006, 12:47
Isn't that kinda low for the targets? 1.5 million in NA (or is that actually US?) can't mean much more than 2.5 million worldwide, maybe 3. 3 million in six months including Christmas, they need a sudden pick up. Though of course they had supply issues didn't they. I guess it's the next couple of months we really see what demand for XB360 is.
mckmas8808
18-May-2006, 12:49
Isn't that kinda low for the targets? 1.5 million in NA (or is that actually US?) can't mean much more than 2.5 million worldwide, maybe 3. 3 million in six months including Christmas, they need a sudden pick up. Though of course they had supply issues didn't they. I guess it's the next couple of months we really see what demand for XB360 is.
Yeah I think between June-October the X360 will start to really sell big in EU and NA. Hopefully for MS sake they have at least 6 million units sold worldwide before the PS3 and Wii hit stores.
1.5 million in NA (or is that actually US?) can't mean much more than 2.5 million worldwide...
It's US. I think they'll make their summer 5M target, as they were talking about it a lot last week, but another 5M before the PS3 launch seems like a lot...
End of this year is another story, but Moore said 'before the others launch'. It would surprise me.
Bad_Boy
18-May-2006, 14:40
What happens if microsoft doesnt sell 10 million before the others launch? It's not like we can declare them loosers of the "console war" by then, they still will be ahead even if sony gets 6 million out by march. I say give it atleast 2 holiday seasons of having all 3 consoles out like peter moore said before we can declare anything. January 1st 2008 I think he mentioned on G4.
I think this is more of if a company can keep its word on shipping 10 million, 6 million, or x million before x day. These are pretty relatively small numbers if you think about the big picture. (100 million for ps2 for example)
I kinda think this "X_million by this day/season" is kinda hyped up a bit.
What happens if microsoft doesnt sell 10 million before the others launch? It's not like we can declare them loosers of the "console war" by then, they still will be ahead even if sony gets 6 million out by march. I say give it atleast 2 holiday seasons of having all 3 consoles out like peter moore said before we can declare anything. January 1st 2008 I think he mentioned on G4.
I think this is more of if a company can keep its word on shipping 10 million, 6 million, or x million before x day. These are pretty relatively small numbers if you think about the big picture. (100 million for ps2 for example)
I kinda think this "X_million by this day/season" is kinda hyped up a bit.No, you have it right: it's about hitting targets. If they miss their targets, it doesn't bode well, plain and simple. 10 million by end of 06 is just a nice round figure, which humans love. That's why it gets the attention.
Dr Evil
18-May-2006, 16:24
According to Teamxbox X360 sold 295k in US on april, PS2 sold 205k.
http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/10976/Xbox-360-Outsells-the-PS2-in-April/
mckmas8808
18-May-2006, 16:45
According to Teamxbox X360 sold 295k in US on april, PS2 sold 205k.
http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/10976/Xbox-360-Outsells-the-PS2-in-April/
Yes that is correct. To the people that have a 360, are these good numbers to you?
expletive
18-May-2006, 16:48
Yes that is correct. To the people that have a 360, are these good numbers to you?
Well it really depends if they were still somewhat supply constrained, even for a portion of the month.
If theyre still selling 'every unit they can make' well then thats good for them. However, 300K on its own isnt overwhelming and I think they may need more than that to hit the self-imposed 10 million target...
Dr Evil
18-May-2006, 16:50
Yes that is correct. To the people that have a 360, are these good numbers to you?
Well for April I think it's atleast ok...
mckmas8808
18-May-2006, 16:52
Well it really depends if they were still somewhat supply constrained, even for a portion of the month.
If theyre still selling 'every unit they can make' well then thats good for them. 300K on its own isnt overwhelming and I think they may need more than that to hit their 10 million target...
Yeah I was asking from the stand point of getting to 10 million. Do you really believe they will reach 10 million by the end of this calendar year?
Isn't that kinda low for the targets? ...
Targets are based on SHIPPED numbers
these are sold through retailer numbers (harder to quantify) and AFAIK, they do not include all retailers (Wal-Mart?)
oh and that was a U.S. number.
Dr Evil
18-May-2006, 17:00
Yeah I was asking from the stand point of getting to 10 million. Do you really believe they will reach 10 million by the end of this calendar year?
Well it's hard to say, November and December will probably be very good months saleswise, if there is a pricecut for christmas, it'll help, I'm not sure if it's needed though as the PS3 is going to be more expensive anyways. 10mil is a hard goal to make anyways, but I think it might be possible.
expletive
18-May-2006, 17:00
Yeah I was asking from the stand point of getting to 10 million. Do you really believe they will reach 10 million by the end of this calendar year?
If they hit 5.5 million by end of June that gives them 5 months to sell 4.5 million units, 900K per month till end november. I guess if Gears launches in October? I guess looking at the launch portfolio would help to see if theyve got enough to drive demand during that time.
Off the top of my head i know Gears and Splinter Cell are certainly 2 where you can chalk up those months to adequate demand, not sure about the rest...
EDIT: and the new Madden 2007, so thats 3 of the 5 months accounted for...
Yes that is correct. To the people that have a 360, are these good numbers to you?
well first of all i have no doubt that Xbox is going to take a greater share of the market this generation compared to last and they may actually win in NA. So supply constrained as they were in the first 4 months and seeing as they have only had 1 month of product on the shelf, I'd think MS would be happy with their sales position.
It's going into the slowest part of the year and with some big fall releases and then a Holiday with a more expensive, (supply limited) PS3 coming out, I predict that they will hit (or exceed) their targets for this year.
By the way, I'm reading Xbox360 Uncloaked and MS target for this generation is 40% share.
Acert93
18-May-2006, 17:11
MS is still launching in various parts of the world, although these supply issues are kind of pathetic. Just a couple weeks ago my local Walmart got 8 units and the 4 Premiums and 3 Cores were gone in less than 24 hours and the last Cores was gone within 3 days.
I know they have stated production is increasing, but if they want to hit 5M by June 31st (less than 45 days away) and Between July 1st and November 16th (4.5 months) sell another 5M they need to get the show on the road, especially since Sony is talking about getting 6M units out in a 4 month window (compared to MS's goal of 5M by June 31st, which is 7.5 months). Demand is high, but launch early does no good if you don't meet demand. I guess the only silver lining for MS is Sony will be production restrained as well it seems and will be going for a larger worldwide launch.
good point Acert93
any sales success that MS wil have is based on them having all 3 production facilities ramped up and putting out 1-1.5 mil per month (as is their goal) AND getting them on the correct shelves.
They missed a golden opportunity in the first 4 months of not having enough supply but with PS3 not coming until almost the holiday and with a WW launch as well, MS will be in a position to scoop up lots of customers IF the product is there.
goonergaz
18-May-2006, 17:22
I've been recently thinking about this, I think X360 is selling around the same rate as XB and as such I expect about 8m units by the end of the year (that's this FY - so 9.5m total).
there are a couple of 'howevers' tho...
firstly XB didn't have to deal with the launch of 2 new consoles and secondly XB didn't launch worldwide...is is it 'truely' selling as well/slightly better?
tap-in, I think 40% is optomistic, I can see this gen going roughly 33% each - it all depends how Wii goes down...oh dear, did I just say that!? :D
By the way, I'm reading Xbox360 Uncloaked and MS target for this generation is 40% share.
I think they're publicly more ambitious than that. They're talking about winning outright and believe the first to 10 million will have unstoppable momentum for having the biggest share.
Then again, maybe 40% will be the biggest share if Nintendo carves well over 20%.
EricVonZipper
18-May-2006, 17:26
I'm curious to see the May and June numbers, wonder if the PS3 pricing will contribute to a 360 sales increase. I know my friend was on the 'fence', but is thru waiting and will get a 360.
I've been recently thinking about this, I think X360 is selling around the same rate as XB and as such I expect about 8m units by the end of the year (thos this FY - so 9.5m total).
there are a couple of 'howevers' tho...
firstly XB didn't have to deal with the launch of 2 new consoles and secondly XB didn't launch worldwide...is is it 'truely' selling as well/slightly better?
You are correct but the difference is that there is no telling how much they lost with one of the worst supply chains ever for the 1st 4 months with 360. I think the bump to almost 300,000 (sold, not shipped) in April is a good indication that there was more demand thatn supply prior to to April.
tap-in, I think 40% is optomistic, I can see this gen going roughly 33% each - it all depends how Wii goes down...oh dear, did I just say that!? :D
oh that certainly has changed after E3 and the dynamic of Sony's prices (and removal of features) and the excitement of the Wii.
the 40% was targeted in 2002 in their long range plan.
I'm guessing that they feel to be in a pretty strong position now after E3 but Wii may get a bigger share than anyone anticipated,
Then again, maybe 40% will be the biggest share if Nintendo carves well over 20%.
I agree
28-32-40 (plug brand names in randomly :wink:) would not be out of the question world wide.
Japan may be in play big time between Sony/Nintendo this gen. NA and europe will most likely come down to Sony/MS.
expletive
18-May-2006, 18:29
I know they have stated production is increasing, but if they want to hit 5M by June 31st (less than 45 days away) and Between July 1st and November 16th (4.5 months) sell another 5M they need to get the show on the road, especially since Sony is talking about getting 6M units out in a 4 month window (compared to MS's goal of 5M by June 31st, which is 7.5 months).
I'd take Sony's estimated production numbers with a rather large grain of salt. Remember, it is in their best interest to minimize the perception of a holiday PS3 shortage.
Powderkeg
18-May-2006, 18:56
Yeah I was asking from the stand point of getting to 10 million. Do you really believe they will reach 10 million by the end of this calendar year?
10 million by years end should be easy.
They were at 3.3 million before the end of April. 5-5.5 million by end of June, that's 2 million in 2 months during the slowest time of the year for console sales.
During the holidays MS should have no problem selling around 400-500k in October, and 1-1.5 million per month for November and December in the US alone. This would be inline with sales during the best year of the original Xbox.
Taking the conservative side, figure 2.4 million from the US during the holidays, added to 5 million by end of June. 7.4 million.
That would leave MS with only having to sell 2.6 million systems in Europe and Asia combined over the 6 month period folowing June, plus July through September US sales. 450k per month average world-wide sales would be more than enough to hit 10 million.
I don't see any reason why they couldn't hit those marks, do you?
RobertR1
18-May-2006, 18:59
10million as long as the production is there shouldn't be an issue. I think the main reason they want to hit 10million is so they can then concentrate on getting people shifted to Vista during 07. I wouldn't be too surprised if Vista was pushed back so it would not compete against the 360 during the critical holiday season.
expletive
18-May-2006, 19:10
I don't see any reason why they couldn't hit those marks, do you?
Common sense aside, just seems partially implausible that they could sell half the total # of Xbox1's sold in 12 months doesnt it?
Acert93
18-May-2006, 19:12
10 million by years end should be easy.
I thought Moore said 10M before the PS3 launched, which would put this at about the middle of November and presumably the large Thanksgiving weekend sales.
Not that it matters in that sales numbers for November probably wont be available until mid/late December at the earliest. If MS does not hit their numbers they could just wait until January to announce fiscal 2006 numbers anyhow.
Powderkeg
18-May-2006, 19:18
Common sense aside, just seems partially implausible that they could sell half the total # of Xbox1's sold in 12 months doesnt it?
No.
Historically speaking, over half of all consoles sold during the year are sold in the holiday season. During the Xbox days a normal month would see about 150k units sold, but a November or December would be close to the Million mark, if not over.
It was normal for the Xbox to sell 2+ million systems between October and December in the US, and that was often more than the rest of the year combined.
Not to mention that it should be totally expected that they would sell half the number of systems of a 12 month supply during a 6 month time frame. Even if you just took the total number of systems sold and divided them equally across each month I would still expect half the systems to be sold in half the year.
expletive
18-May-2006, 19:24
No.
Historically speaking, over half of all consoles sold during the year are sold in the holiday season. During the Xbox days a normal month would see about 150k units sold, but a November or December would be close to the Million mark, if not over.
Oh I agree but when i put it in that context (vs xbox1 sales) i have a hard time believeing it myself. :)
I suppose, though, if MS is to gain marketshare this generation they have to start somewhere...
Acert93
18-May-2006, 19:34
Common sense aside, just seems partially implausible that they could sell half the total # of Xbox1's sold in 12 months doesnt it?
Different market situations, different sales constraints and momentum? Your analogy above is not perfect because while MS is now facing 2 new competitors, last time Sony had a head start and the 360 co-launched with the GCN. Sony had an edge in software and even price and the GCN came in lower priced. MS also did not have a lot of game support. This time around they have a game library head start, a lower price than Sony, and Wii is not competing necessarily for the same consumers. Last time the Xbox did not have online, while this time Live co-launched. Production issues are also different, with the 360 having far more production shortages + higher demand than the Xbox1 had. Even if Sony does hit their 6M target, they are going to generate a huge stir and shortages which may also steer people to the 360/Wii.
As for games, the 360 has more than just Gears of War, Splinter Cell, and Madden in 2006. For big titles you have Forza 2, Mass Effect, Lost Planet, and Viva Pinata. Those titles are surrounded by a pretty solid supporting cast as well. Now and through Summer there is Prey, Chromehounds, MotoGP, Table Tennis, Battle for Middle Earth 2, Saint's Row, Test Drive, among others. This fall should see FEAR, Crackdown, maybe Too Human on top of the 3rd party titles like Rainbox Six: Vegas and so forth. Of course you need to consider the sales impact of "coming soon" titles like Bioshock, Alan Wake, Halo 3, Fable 2 and 3rd party software like Medal of Honor, Brother in Arms, the Darkness. Sure someone may pick up a 360 for Gears in anticipation of Brother in Arms in the Winter and Halo 3 in the Spring. And we cannot discount the back library which is currently keeping sales pretty brisk.
For people who have wanted a 360, but could not get one due to shortages, it is not just Gears of War or Splinter Cell that will motivate a sale in any given month, but also having some really good next gen games on the market as well. Oblivion, GRAW, CoD2, and PGR3 have all sold well and been critically acclaimed. I have not chosen/bought a next gen system yet, but out of all the games I have seen coming this year and already out, PGR3 is still at the very top of my "wish" list. If I could get it on the PC I would in a heartbeat.
360 sales are more complex than comparing Xbox1 sales and what games will be available what month. For all we know MS may hit a "wall" with the enthusiest market at some point and we may discover that casual gamers are not impressed with the lineup and price. Or we may continue to see brisk sales that totally tap the supply well into 2007.
I think MS's numbers are pretty aggressive. Summer is typically pretty slow, and they have 2 months to sell 2M consoles. Demand is high, but that is a lot of units and will be relying on momentum, future game previews, and the current library to push that. I am not sure anyone knows how many units MS would sell if they totally saturated the market right now, but 2M sounds like a lot for such a slow time of year. I guess they are banking on people to have kept an interest.
mckmas8808
18-May-2006, 19:41
I think MS's numbers are pretty aggressive. Summer is typically pretty slow, and they have 2 months to sell 2M consoles. Demand is high, but that is a lot of units and will be relying on momentum, future game previews, and the current library to push that. I am not sure anyone knows how many units MS would sell if they totally saturated the market right now, but 2M sounds like a lot for such a slow time of year. I guess they are banking on people to have kept an interest.
The fact that they can't bank on Japan at all is really hurting MS. I can't really see them selling 2M consoles worldwide in 2 months.
The fact that they can't bank on Japan at all is really hurting MS. I can't really see them selling 2M consoles worldwide in 2 months.
Reading the Uncloaked book, MS actually considered writing Japan off this gen. :smile:
Probably not seriously (obviously) but I really think that any perceptible sales numbers from there is considered gravy for MS.
Different market situations, different sales constraints and momentum? Your analogy above is not perfect because while MS is now facing 2 new competitors, last time Sony had a head start and the 360 co-launched with the GCN. Sony had an edge in software and even price and the GCN came in lower priced. MS also did not have a lot of game support. This time around they have a game library head start, a lower price than Sony, and Wii is not competing necessarily for the same consumers. Last time the Xbox did not have online, while this time Live co-launched. Production issues are also different, with the 360 having far more production shortages + higher demand than the Xbox1 had. Even if Sony does hit their 6M target, they are going to generate a huge stir and shortages which may also steer people to the 360/Wii.
...
exactly software and features are far and away more solid/attractive for MS this gen compared to Xbox1.
As for the casual market, they seem to be making some inroads with XBLA content that will attract a LOT more people than the hard core. (as was their plan all along)
mckmas8808
18-May-2006, 19:51
Reading the Uncloaked book, MS actually considered writing Japan off this gen. :smile:.
Really?:lol: I have a feeling I know what they meant when they probably said that. I mean seriously only selling about 105,000 or so to date is just not cool. When comparing the PS3 and 360's future worldwide sales Japan alone could give Sony that obvious push ahead quickly.
RobertR1
18-May-2006, 20:28
Really?:lol: I have a feeling I know what they meant when they probably said that. I mean seriously only selling about 105,000 or so to date is just not cool. When comparing the PS3 and 360's future worldwide sales Japan alone could give Sony that obvious push ahead quickly.
They will let Wii deal with Japan. The japanese are very loyal to their own, always have been. MS and any other US company simply has to deal with that fact. The rest of Asia is not as "loyal."
mckmas8808
18-May-2006, 20:36
They will let Wii deal with Japan. The japanese are very loyal to their own, always have been. MS and any other US company simply has to deal with that fact. The rest of Asia is not as "loyal."
The Japanese love the ipod though, so that just ruins your whole theory.
JasonLD
18-May-2006, 20:40
The Japanese love the ipod though, so that just ruins your whole theory.
Well...Ipod can be viewed as Oddity, ipod is least american looking american product..lol.
these are good sales. how do they rank up against MS's predictions?
about Japs being 'loyal'; I don't agree at all. they are probably the most people eager to try out new tech in the world. the reasons why any 'foriegn' product fails there is that it doesn't cater to Japs liking. take Xbox for example; it does everything ,except Live, wrong in the general Japanese view. and people are surprised Halos came and went in Japan without much notice, and how come those quirky games sell so much over there.
it is a totally different market from the West with its own unique marketing and spec needs. :)
More numbers: http://biz.gamedaily.com/industry/feature/?id=12725
"The driver of comp growth will be hardware launches in the fall. GameStop management expects 35 - 40% of launch quantities for the PS3 and Wii to arrive in North America, while we expect 45 - 50%. We have modeled sell-through of 6 million next generation consoles in the U.S. in GameStop's fourth quarter (2 million PS3s, 1.5 million Wiis, and 2.5 million Xbox 360s), and think that GameStop will capture at least 20% of these sales."
I don't know why MS expects to sell 5 million consoles by June. That sounds like a lot, and I don't think that they will be selling so much as we are approaching summer now...
mckmas8808
19-May-2006, 13:25
More numbers: http://biz.gamedaily.com/industry/feature/?id=12725
So when does Gamestop's fourth quarter end?
NavNucST3
19-May-2006, 14:45
So when does Gamestop's fourth quarter end?
What is GameStop's fiscal year? (http://www.corporate-ir.net/ireye/ir_site.zhtml?ticker=GME&script=1801)
GameStop's fiscal year is composed of 52 or 53 weeks ending on the Saturday closest to January 31. GameStop's fiscal 2006 will end on February 3, 2007.
mckmas8808
19-May-2006, 14:56
What is GameStop's fiscal year? (http://www.corporate-ir.net/ireye/ir_site.zhtml?ticker=GME&script=1801)
GameStop's fiscal year is composed of 52 or 53 weeks ending on the Saturday closest to January 31. GameStop's fiscal 2006 will end on February 3, 2007.
And they expect 2 million USA PS3s to sell between 11/17/06 - 02/03/07? I wonder if they are basing that off of Sony's announcement?
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.