View Full Version : MS Expects to Sell 3M Xboxes within first 90 days
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051108/ap_on_hi_te/xbox_sales
Microsoft Corp. expects to sell up to 3 million of its new Xbox (http://search.news.yahoo.com/search/news/?p=Xbox) videogame consoles within 90 days of the console's launch, an executive said Tuesday.
Bryan Lee, chief financial officer with Microsoft's Home and Entertainment unit, told investors and analysts at the Harris Nesbitt Media and Entertainment Conference that the company is aiming to sell between 2.75 million and 3 million consoles worldwide within 90 days following its Nov. 22 debut in North America.
Hardknock
08-Nov-2005, 18:03
Sounds about in line with a new console launch. They want between 5 and 6 million sold by June right?
Powderkeg
08-Nov-2005, 18:05
Should not be a problem provided they can get that many shipped.
The original xbox managed to sell 1.5 million in the same launch time frame in the US alone as an unknown competitor which no one was sure would stay in the console business, and even that was limited by supplies.
Adding in Europe, the far cheaper 360 price (Comapred to the Xbox EU launch price), the added consumer confidence in the system, and I don't think 2.5-3 million is unrealistic at all.
The question is, can they deliver the supply.
Titanio
08-Nov-2005, 18:10
The question is, can they deliver the supply.
I don't think this is in question, if they're quoting figures. He wouldn't quote figures if he wasn't confident of supply.
Sounds about in line with a new console launch. They want between 5 and 6 million sold by June right?
Yeah, the precise target is 4.5-5.5m.
Hardknock
08-Nov-2005, 18:21
Here's another article:
http://money.cnn.com/2005/11/08/technology/personaltech/microsoft_xbox.reut/index.htm
Lee also said that sales of the new consoles, games, peripherals and online gaming subscriptions should total about $1.5 billion in the same period.
I've called myself extrapolating the sales of consoles and games from this figure:
2.5million Premium packs @ $400 would = $1 Billion of that figure
500k Core packs @ $300 would = $150 Million of that figure
So that leaves $350 million for games and peripherals.
I'm guessing the average price of games will be $55(the average between first party $50 and 3rd party $60).
Most launches average a tie-ratio of two games. So that would be $330 million for game sales, which leaves $20 million left for peripherals and such. Of course this is just an estimate from these very vague figures.
Powderkeg
08-Nov-2005, 18:49
, which leaves $20 million left for peripherals and such.
And at $50 for a wireless controller and another $100 for a WiFi adapter, I can see that 20 million being reached really fast.
Guden Oden
08-Nov-2005, 18:54
This is just annoying PR BS. I don't care if they sell 3 or 3 million as long as I get my console on launchday... Come on, release the damn boxes already, don't brag about how many you'll sell before a single one has been sold! :D
Powderkeg
08-Nov-2005, 18:56
This is just annoying PR BS. I don't care if they sell 3 or 3 million as long as I get my console on launchday... Come on, release the damn boxes already, don't brag about how many you'll sell before a single one has been sold! :D
I think we would all feel better if they made a press release saying they were shipping enough systems to fill all preorders on launch day.
dukmahsik
08-Nov-2005, 18:58
pretty good numbers
This is just annoying PR BS. I don't care if they sell 3 or 3 million as long as I get my console on launchday... Come on, release the damn boxes already, don't brag about how many you'll sell before a single one has been sold! :D
they've already sold a bunch , we have 28 preorders completely payed off with customers signing a paper that we will use thier credit to buy the system and place it on hold untill they can come in for it . Otherwise 48 hours and we sell to the next person
dubyateeeff
08-Nov-2005, 22:31
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051108/ap_on_hi_te/xbox_sales
Microsoft Corp. expects to sell up to 3 million of its new Xbox (http://search.news.yahoo.com/search/news/?p=Xbox) videogame consoles within 90 days of the console's launch, an executive said Tuesday.
Bryan Lee, chief financial officer with Microsoft's Home and Entertainment unit, told investors and analysts at the Harris Nesbitt Media and Entertainment Conference that the company is aiming to sell between 2.75 million and 3 million consoles worldwide within 90 days following its Nov. 22 debut in North America.
Oh, this means there is no shortage? Kinda confirms that there is an artificial shortage. Or does it mean, there is a shortage and that unforfilled pre-orders counts towards the 3 million?
EDIT: Or... they have a hard time shipping out units to cover the supply in all areas. Which is more likely. I mean, the demand should always be higher than the supply for a console like X2.
PARANOiA
08-Nov-2005, 23:53
I'm interested in seeing the uptake of Live Gold. Who will pay for it when it's partially free? What are MS banking, and are they on the money?
I think it's a very big x.
scooby_dooby
09-Nov-2005, 00:07
Anyone who wants to game online will have to pay. Unless you want to wait around for random "free weekends", or play MMO's.
Also there's a trial of Gold with the X360, so anyone who went online, then after 30days is downgrade to silver, could potentially have liked what they saw, and want to go back to gold.
Johnny Awesome
09-Nov-2005, 00:09
Sounds like they've been making 500,000 units/month since September.
This would allow them to ship about 1.5 million on launch and another 1.5 million by the end of February. Then another 2 million by the end of June for a total of 5 million as expected. If they don't ramp up any further then they will be on track for about 8 million by the end of '06, but chances are they'll ramp up and push 10 million out by then.
scooby_dooby
09-Nov-2005, 00:11
Last I heard in an intyerview it was 10,000/day, which is much lower than they would like. They(sorry can't remember who was talking) said they were expecting an extremely steep ramp up of production in the weeks/months following launch.
Johnny Awesome
09-Nov-2005, 00:20
While I'm on a roll:
Sony can probably produce about 6 million PS3s by the end of '06 and they will sell them all.
MS will probably put Gears of War and a couple other 2nd string games up against the PS3 launch. They won't waste Halo 3 on the PS3 launch, because Sony will be supply limited anyway.
The big battle will come during holiday '07 in the US, where we'll have MGS4 + Killzone + GT4 vs. Halo 3 + Fable 2 + Forza 2.
This is where the PS3 will start to pull ahead of the X360 on a world-wide basis, mainly on strength in Japan, but MS manages to keep pace with PS3 in the US and maintain their userbase lead. They will slowly lose market share in Europe to end in a virtual tie with Sony. MS will do much better in Japan (maybe 2-3 million systems), but will get creamed by PS3 (20 million).
That was fun. :)
Fable 2 + Forza 2 ?? they arent multimillion sellers as far as i'm aware off...
rests only halo3 ........
Johnny Awesome
09-Nov-2005, 00:31
They're million sellers on a system with 1/5th the userbase of the PS2. They'll do just fine.
I don't think Forza is anywhere near a million seller, but it has more than it needs to compete with GT, as a game...
PARANOiA
09-Nov-2005, 00:43
If next gen is fought between sequels rather than great new games, I think I'll sit it out :sad:
I'm hoping Summer 2007 is fought between PS3's "Great New Game #1" vs Xbox's "Great New Game #2".
Hardknock
09-Nov-2005, 01:29
While I'm on a roll:
The big battle will come during holiday '07 in the US, where we'll have MGS4 + Killzone + GT4 vs. Halo 3 + Fable 2 + Forza 2.
That was fun. :)
I think a much more interesting show down would be:
MGS4 + Killzone + Granturismo 4 vs. Halo 3 + Ninja Gaiden 2 + Lost Odyssee/Too Human
Man would that holiday season ROCK :cool:
therealskywolf
09-Nov-2005, 02:25
Lololol...based on this gen alone only GT in those holydays only GT would be able to compete with Halo3.
And Ps3 won't start pulling away on a worldWide Basis that easilly, and call me a fool But Revolution is going to take Japan with it.
drpepper
09-Nov-2005, 03:20
on topic: It seems microsoft is setting themselves up for a "better than expected" performance for the next 90 days. 3 million is just too conservative. Grow some balls and just say 5 million. Which is something I think they can pull off as long as supply is steady.
Off topic: I think you guys are confused, it's Gran turismo 5 that will be out for the PS3. I already have Gran Turismo 4 thank you very much. ;)
Currently I think it's refered to as Vision GT. Just to end the confusion. :)
BTW, also slated for the PS3 and highly anticipated:
Final Fantasy 13, I don't know when this will be released but I think it's a PS3 exclusive.
Devil May Cry 4
God of War 2, this is purely speculation but considered a safe bet.
I think FF13 will be the competitor of the Lost Odyssey release. i foresee some impressive titles in the coming 2 years. :grin:
It's pointless to speculate who will sell more until we know the PS3's true power.
That's the deciding factor here.
Once we get a true picture of the hardware power of the PS3 as it relates to X360, then we'll know.
drpepper
09-Nov-2005, 03:38
It's pointless to speculate who will sell more until we know the PS3's true power.
That's the deciding factor here.
Once we get a true picture of the hardware power of the PS3 as it relates to X360, then we'll know.
Power only influences the hardcore gamer. In the grand scheme of things the PS3 could still be technically inferior and still come out the winner (in terms of sales(take a look at the current gen)). It's all about the games, hence the reason why people brought out the titles in the thread.
Powderkeg
09-Nov-2005, 03:41
It's pointless to speculate who will sell more until we know the PS3's true power.
That's the deciding factor here.
Once we get a true picture of the hardware power of the PS3 as it relates to X360, then we'll know.
Power makes no difference.
There is one, and only one truth in the console wars. The system with the most games wins.
Launch time doesn't matter, power doesn't matter, advertising doesn't matter, established franchises don't matter......
It's all about the games.
And that has held true every generation since the Atari 2600.
I think a much more interesting show down would be:
MGS4 + Killzone + Granturismo 4 vs. Halo 3 + Ninja Gaiden 2 + Lost Odyssee/Too Human
Man would that holiday season ROCK :cool:
no it wouldn't cause i couldn't buy all of them (though i didn't like the first kill zone and too human doesn't interest me )
Inane_Dork
09-Nov-2005, 03:47
It's pointless to speculate who will sell more until we know the PS3's true power.
That's the deciding factor here.
Once we get a true picture of the hardware power of the PS3 as it relates to X360, then we'll know.We'll know what? Which fanpersons have yelled the right combination of words?
Power is secondary and won't be accurately measured for at least 2 years. By that time, the PC will make any difference negligible. Look for games to buy. That is what makes the difference.
PARANOiA
09-Nov-2005, 03:49
Power makes no difference.
There is one, and only one truth in the console wars. The system with the most games wins.
Launch time doesn't matter, power doesn't matter, advertising doesn't matter, established franchises don't matter......
It's all about the games.
And that has held true every generation since the Atari 2600.
If that was true, no one would move off their initial platform.
Another way to put it... more games at what stage in the machine's life? A year? A month? The end of it? Dreamcast had more games than PS2 six months the PS2 launch but lost.
Powderkeg
09-Nov-2005, 03:57
If that was true, no one would move off their initial platform.
It's absolutely true. Look it up.
Another way to put it... more games at what stage in the machine's life? A year? A month? The end of it? Dreamcast had more games than PS2 six months the PS2 launch but lost.
The end of the generation.
The #1 system each generation had the most games at the end of that generation.
Systems have ended in the #1 spot by launching earlier than their competition, later than their competition, with less power, more power, including extra features, as a game-only system, coming from no where or following up to an industry leading system.
In the end, it really is all about the games. They don't even have to be the best games, just the most.
PARANOiA
09-Nov-2005, 04:08
It's absolutely true. Look it up.
The end of the generation.
Yes I agree with you now, but your clarification makes your point purely rhetorical.
Why? The most successful system has the most games at the end of the generation, but the devs had to make the decision during the generation.
Eg, I have a machine A with 10 games, and machine B has 5 games. However, everyone loves machine B for other factors, and it sells ten times as many machines as machine A. Developers will make more new games for machine B, so at the end of the generation, machine B will have more games.
So I agree, at the end of this generation, the higher selling machine will be the one with more games. However, the Xbox360 will have more games at end of 2006 (excluding backwards compatability of course) but this in no way means it will win, and your point ends up being circular and meaningless.
you'd be kidding yourself if you claim it didn't come down to a combination of things .
The question is how important are they ?
In the end i think price (hardware and software) and game library are the biggest factors . However franchises , name brands and advertising all play a part in it .
I agree with Powderkeg. I don't think raw power is going to make a difference.
I just recently played the COD2 demo at an XB360 kiosk. I guess the things that struck me the most were twofold: how much better the graphics looked than Xbox, and how much the visual gap between consoles and PC has closed.
I think it's clear PCs will always have the visual edge, but the XB360 impressed me. Even if it turns out to be the least powerful of the three (XB360, PS3, and PC), it looks like it'll set a pretty high bar graphically. And if the hardware/dev tools make it easier for PC devs to port games to it, then it's definitely a win-win situation for gamers.
The most powerful console always wins.
SNES>Genesis.
Playstation>Saturn and N64
Xbox>PS2 and Gamecube (in 2004 in USA sales, anyway)
Amd the number one complaint of Xbox360 games on this forum? About graphics. "It looks like an Xbox game". That is 90% of the negative comments if not more.
Also, many people claim PS2 is more powerful than Xbox, sooo...which is it?
Every generation has at least one system that was mocked for being underpowered. Turbografx, Saturn, Dreamcast. If not power, then the perception of power plays a role into sales, along with as games, hype, timing, etc.
In the next generetion, if the 360 can at least hang with the PS3 in terms of graphics, we might see parity not seen since the Genesis vs. SNES, which is really good for everybody.
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=24848
Complaints all about graphics of DOA4
http://www.beyond3d.com/forum/showthread.php?t=23576
I dont see much discussion of MGS4 gameplay here..so what are all those people screaming about?
Just DL it....looks like Unreal demo on steroids.....
MAN>>>BEST>>>**** video ever....now I must clean the drool from my face...
-Josh378
The most powerful console always wins.
SNES>Genesis. wrong the neogeo was more powerfull
Playstation>Saturn and N64Na the n64 was more powerfull
Xbox>PS2 and Gamecube (in 2004 in USA sales, anyway) way to ignore the fact that the ps2 has sold 60-70million more units than the xbox world wide. Power means nothing and it has been proven many times before
Amd the number one complaint of Xbox360 games on this forum? About graphics. "It looks like an Xbox game". That is 90% of the negative comments if not more.
Also, many people claim PS2 is more powerful than Xbox, sooo...which is it?
I also believe the master system was more powerfull than the nes and that didn't help it .
The Neo Geo was not backed by a big enough company. Although with decently priced games, it might still have won now that I think about it LOL. but really 200 dollar games, forget the system price, made it unreasonable.
N64 I dont think was more powerful than PSX.
PS2 won on the strength of Japan and headstart. Still, Xbox made strong inroads, won 2004 in NA, and soundly defeated the GC which was cheaper and had far more games at the beginning +Nintendo support.
You said the most powerfull console wins each gen.
Now you are saying it needs backing and proper pricing .
You change your claims
And yes the n64 was moer powerfull than the psone .
The ps2 also won the generation . Xbox made inroads i guess but it still lost .
So we have 3 generations in which the most powerfull console did not win
HOnestly if you want to troll about sony winning and giving a reason why its forgone conclusion its not going to happen
randycat99
09-Nov-2005, 06:38
This should not be confused with "the most powerful console cannot win."
Maybe he meant N64 pushed lower polys than PSX. Still that doesn't mean N64 wasn't the most powerful console in the 32bit gen. N64 had the more powerful version of CPU that went into PSX. Polygon is only one factor. I could easily say Saturn is the most powerful fillrate-wise and cite Virtua Fighter2 (640*480, 60FPS) as an example and ask for any PSX or N64 games that can also push the same framerate at said resolution while pushing the reasonable polys as VF2.
And I don't believe Xbox has gotten the most sales in 2004. I'll need to see some sales figure to be proved wrong. I can also be selective and argue the opposite, saying Genesis was also ahead of SNES during 1991~1993.
Shifty Geezer
09-Nov-2005, 09:18
The console that wins is the one with more pipes. SNES must have had more pipes than Master System. Only logical reason for it selling better... :???:
Sounds like they've been making 500,000 units/month since September.
This would allow them to ship about 1.5 million on launch and another 1.5 million by the end of February. Then another 2 million by the end of June for a total of 5 million as expected. If they don't ramp up any further then they will be on track for about 8 million by the end of '06, but chances are they'll ramp up and push 10 million out by then.
Last I heard in an intyerview it was 10,000/day, which is much lower than they would like. They(sorry can't remember who was talking) said they were expecting an extremely steep ramp up of production in the weeks/months following launch.
I'm pretty sure it was Allard. Here's one of the reasons...
Microsoft has contracted with three electronics manufacturers to build the Xbox 360: Flextronics International Ltd. (FLEX.O: Quote, Profile, Research), Wistron Corp. (3231.TW: Quote, Profile, Research) and Celestica Inc. (CLSsv.TO: Quote, Profile, Research)(CLS.N: Quote, Profile, Research). The Celestica plant is expected to come online in early 2006.
http://today.reuters.com/business/newsArticle.aspx?type=technology&storyID=nN08621231
Edit: found the Allard quote...
GI: How many Xbox 360s do you think will sell in North America in the first year and how will you go about shipping them all over the world?
Allard: We have a technical term for this. It’s called a very hard problem. It’s just hard. So the first thing is I can’t comment on numbers at all because we’re only in the beginnings of manufacturing and the ramp rate that we’re aiming for is very, very steep. We’re opening the manufacturing ramp more aggressively than anyone has done before and it’s going very well.
http://www.gameinformer.com/News/Story/200510/N05.1005.1820.37210.htm
* Warning - Spong! *
...retailers in the UK have stated that they collectively expect around 50,000 units for Blighty, a well-balanced figure that walks the line between shortage and availability perfectly.
http://news.spong.com/detail/news.asp?prid=9291
Powderkeg
09-Nov-2005, 14:05
Yes I agree with you now, but your clarification makes your point purely rhetorical.
Why? The most successful system has the most games at the end of the generation, but the devs had to make the decision during the generation.
Eg, I have a machine A with 10 games, and machine B has 5 games. However, everyone loves machine B for other factors, and it sells ten times as many machines as machine A. Developers will make more new games for machine B, so at the end of the generation, machine B will have more games.
So I agree, at the end of this generation, the higher selling machine will be the one with more games. However, the Xbox360 will have more games at end of 2006 (excluding backwards compatability of course) but this in no way means it will win, and your point ends up being circular and meaningless.
Not true.
My point is you cannot point to a single factor and claim that's what will make the system win. They ONLY factor that has ever been consistent is one that cannot be determined until the end of the generation, not before it even starts.
Any single factor you point out and claim "this is what will make it win" and I can give you an example of the exact opposite being true.
Shifty Geezer
09-Nov-2005, 14:49
Not true.
My point is you cannot point to a single factor and claim that's what will make the system win. They ONLY factor that has ever been consistent is one that cannot be determined until the end of the generation, not before it even starts.
Any single factor you point out and claim "this is what will make it win" and I can give you an example of the exact opposite being true.You seem to be contradicting yourself. On the one hand you say 'the winner has the most games' and on the other say 'there's no one deciding factor'. Most games alone doesn't decide which platform a person buys, but at the end of a generation the most popular platform has the most games because it had the biggest market for developers to tap. Which seems to be what you're saying, and PARANOiA's saying, only you say to PARANOiA 'not true'.
:???:
Most games alone doesn't decide which platform a person buys
Course they do. Well in my case I bought a PS2 for tekken 5 as I knew it wouldnt ever be coming out for my Xbox. I'm sure there are many many peeps who bought a console purely on a single game
Shifty Geezer
09-Nov-2005, 15:00
That's not most games. IT wasn't the fact PS2 had the most games that you bought it. It's that it had the game(s) you wanted. Anyone who wanted to play Mario and MP wouldn't have bought a PS2 because it has more games than GC.
Yeh true... cant argue with that, its the system with the most number of games people want not the total number in itself !!!
PLaying all these PS2 RPG's that I never could find on my xblox, ohhh its like RPG dweeb heaven for me
Powderkeg
09-Nov-2005, 15:05
You seem to be contradicting yourself. On the one hand you say 'the winner has the most games' and on the other say 'there's no one deciding factor'.
There is no one deciding factor that can be claimed before the generation even starts. There is only one factor that holds true, and it won't be known until the end of the generation.
Most games alone doesn't decide which platform a person buys, but at the end of a generation the most popular platform has the most games because it had the biggest market for developers to tap. Which seems to be what you're saying, and PARANOiA's saying, only you say to PARANOiA 'not true'.
:???:
Conversational context.
The whole coversation can be broken down to this:
It's pointless to speculate who will sell more until we know the PS3's true power. That's the deciding factor here.
Launch time doesn't matter, power doesn't matter, advertising doesn't matter, established franchises don't matter......It's all about the games.
The rest was just clarification of what I meant, which is again, no single pre-launch factor determins a systems success. Power is not the deciding factor because quite often it's the less powerful console that wins, such as the PS2 last gen. There is no deciding factor. The only factor that is constant is one that isn't known until the decision has been made.
Shifty Geezer
09-Nov-2005, 15:07
Right. Which is what I read PARANOiA as saying.
Powderkeg
09-Nov-2005, 15:12
That's not most games. IT wasn't the fact PS2 had the most games that you bought it. It's that it had the game(s) you wanted. Anyone who wanted to play Mario and MP wouldn't have bought a PS2 because it has more games than GC.
The system that sells the best will have the most games of a type that most people want to play.
Sure anyone who wanted a Mario game bought a GC, but if only 10% of the gaming market wants a Mario game, well....
You have to have lots of games for lots of different gamers taste. You have to have every genre, every sex, and every age group covered with a wide selection of games tailored for them, and yet most of your game library should appeal to most of the gaming market, which is composed of adult males in their mid-20's.
And the only you can do that is by having the most games.
london-boy
09-Nov-2005, 15:21
^^ I agree.
It's easy to say "i only had 20 games this generation and my friends too".
There are millions upon millions of people out there playing PS2 games. 7000 games doesn't sound that much when compared to the number of people out there, all of different age, sex, culture and everyone with slightly different taste than the next one.
Sure within those 7000 games there are a LOT of crappy ones, but that's not the point.
Personally i don't think i've seen even 1000 games for PS2 (or know of more than 1000 games), so that's even less.
Japan gets many games that are only released there, not sure how many exactly though.
Nothing personal, but it seems every thread is about marketing and sales...
I think a 'console hardware' next to the 'console software' forum might clean things up.
Or leave this one for the hardware and add a new forum for 'console wars / PR / marketing / blah' or something.
Hm?
london-boy
09-Nov-2005, 15:57
Nothing personal, but it seems every thread is about marketing and sales...
I think a 'console hardware' next to the 'console software' forum might clean things up.
Or leave this one for the hardware and add a new forum for 'console wars / PR / marketing / blah' or something.
Hm?
Sonic and Vysez tried to focus all PR/marketing posts into specific threads, but well unsurprisingly it all went pear-shaped.
Shifty Geezer
09-Nov-2005, 16:27
With a total dearth of hardware to talk about, we fall back to anything even vaguely related such as marketting. Blame Sony and Nintendo for not releasing tasty tech details for us to dissect!
Guden Oden
09-Nov-2005, 17:05
Course they do.
Atari had the most games when the bottom went out of the console market in '83, much good it did them...
london-boy
09-Nov-2005, 17:11
Atari had the most games when the bottom went out of the console market in '83, much good it did them...
Gee Guden, that was 22 bloody years ago!! (I'M 23!!)
That's almost as bad as the car engine comparisons that keep coming up on the forum!!
blakjedi
09-Nov-2005, 17:29
The system that sells the best will have the most games of a type that most people want to play.
The thread (and the post) could have ended right there. This is the only answer. If more people want to play the Halo(s) than the MGS4(s) or vice versa, over the lifetime of the system it will win.
Hardknock
09-Nov-2005, 17:31
The thread (and the post) could have ended right there. This is the only answer. If more people want to play the Halo(s) than the MGS4(s) or vice versa, over the lifetime of the system it will win.
Yep. Just imagine if MS hadn't turned down publishing GTA3 :wink:
Shifty Geezer
09-Nov-2005, 17:46
The thread (and the post) could have ended right there. This is the only answer.Answer to what? The thread was supposedly talking about MS launching with 3M consoles.
Powderkeg
09-Nov-2005, 18:20
Yep. Just imagine if MS hadn't turned down publishing GTA3 :wink:
I'm not sure that was a bad idea for MS.
Sure it cost them a lot in game sales and Xbox sales, but in the grand scheme of things these are just side-projects for MS. I'm not sure that publishing GTA would have helped their overall corporate image.
They might have found some current corporate customers would be looking for alternative software if MS had published GTA. As much as I would like to dismiss them, there are a lot of ultra-conservatives out there would push for a boycott of all MS products if they had published GTA, and it doesn't take too many copies of Office XP to make up for the lack of GTA sales.
Guden Oden
09-Nov-2005, 19:54
Gee Guden, that was 22 bloody years ago!! (I'M 23!!)
That's almost as bad as the car engine comparisons that keep coming up on the forum!!
Why should anything have changed just because some time has changed? Assuming the biggest library automatically will mean victory is a fundamentally flawed reasoning now as it was in '83...
What the heck is all this childish "win" - "lose" crap mean. These terms don't usually apply well to product markets that support mutliple players. Has Ford "Won"? Should Chevrolet stop selling cars and trucks or vice-versa? Get a grip people.
The console market has and will continue to support more than one major player, unless you think the market will shrink as a whole and I don't see that happening.
Besides, the only real gauge by which any should be measured is exactly how much profit each system brings to the manufacturer. I don't think we have direct access to those number so arguing about it is pointless. It doesn't matter if they only sold 1 console if they made money and the company that sold 50 million didn't even recoup their R&D costs.
Powderkeg
09-Nov-2005, 20:12
What the heck is all this childish "win" - "lose" crap mean. These terms don't usually apply well to product markets that support mutliple players. Has Ford "Won"? Should Chevrolet stop selling cars and trucks or vice-versa?
Ask Coleco, or Intellivision, or Magnovox, or 3DO, or Atari, or Sega what the "win-lose" crap means.
eDoshin
09-Nov-2005, 21:00
If cars were like consoles, then Chevy fuel requirements would not be compatible with Ford's. Then Chevron may have an exclusive with Ford, while Shell would make multi brands. If there were 90 million Chevys on the road vs 10 million Fords, Shell would allocate more pump stations for Chevys. Eventually if everyone stopped supporting Ford, they would have to close shop .. unless they were propped up by an insanely rich geek.
Shifty Geezer
09-Nov-2005, 21:16
How's about next time someone needs an analogy, they go with Baseball/Soccer teams for a change?
PARANOiA
09-Nov-2005, 22:57
How's about next time someone needs an analogy, they go with Baseball/Soccer teams for a change?
We're computer nerds, we hate sports :sad:
blakjedi
09-Nov-2005, 23:29
How's about next time someone needs an analogy, they go with Baseball/Soccer teams for a change?
He who scores the most homeruns ( like GTA, Jak and Dexter, DMC, MGS, FF) will win.
Phew! That was easy.
london-boy
10-Nov-2005, 00:21
Does the size of the bat and the balls matter?
/runs
dubyateeeff
10-Nov-2005, 01:02
Does the size of the bat and the balls matter?
Ah, a virgin ;)
Does the size of the bat and the balls matter?
But bat and balls are of uniform size.
Ask Coleco, or Intellivision, or Magnovox, or 3DO, or Atari, or Sega what the "win-lose" crap means.
If you honestly think Microsoft or Sony will abandon the games console market this far in to a booming industry then you obviously don't have a grasp of the market.
If you honestly think Microsoft or Sony will abandon the games console market this far in to a booming industry then you obviously don't have a grasp of the market.
Let me spell it out for you, neither of them (or Nintendo for that matter) are going to "lose". All systems will sell and make money in the long run. The only question is how much money they will make.
blakjedi
10-Nov-2005, 20:44
Answer to what? The thread was supposedly talking about MS launching with 3M consoles.
The answer to MS' elusive goal of gaining further traction in the market and selling through all planned 3M consoles. A woman once gave me wisdom she said "If your fishing and the fish dont take the bait, nothings wrong with the fish, somethings wrong with the bait." Now of course we were really talking about women but... some analogies are universal - as long as there are fish (and women) on your planet! :razz:
Same applies here to MS. Its not the gamers who are wrong for buying any other console instead of a xbox or x360, its that the games being sold for it dont appeal to a wide enough audience for some reason. Note that this is futurespeak and not any condemnation of the system as it stands.
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.