Xbox 360 Software Attach Rate Is 'Alarming'

[AzBat]

But even with a pricedrop a 449$/549$ (or 399/499 if you want to think of a more extreme pricedrop)
the ps3 will still not be in the "mass market" price range while a 199/299 xbox360 will be much closer.

True, but with the PS3 it has the brand name, the 1 year later launch(newer & better tech) and the inclusion of the BluRay player, so it can sustain a higher perceived value than a Xbox 360 in the minds of average gamers.

Unless the ps3 starts dominating in 2007(which i have my doubts cause i think that a 600$ console can't have crazy sales outside of the holiday season and Sony won't be able to have more than 300k units per month on the U.S market for a very long time) and the xbox360 drops to dremacast/gamecube levels(80-130k per month), i don't see MS doing a pricedrop before Sony.

Hmm. I can see your point. Kinda hard to come to an opinion with some many variables. On one hand I believe Microsoft needs to drop the price first to start roping in average gamers, but on the other hand as long as Microsoft sees the PS3 being $100-$200 more expensive then they will probably stay where they are.

Does anybody think that there's a point where Microsoft can stay at its original launch prices for _too_ long? Is a year and a half too long? How about 2 years? How long before it adversely affects growing more market share?

Plus, do they need to be concerned about Wii and it's lower price? Are they going to want to keep their pricing higher than the Wii for the remainder of the 360 life cycle?

Tommy McClain

 

[NavNucST3]

That means that if the average is 5, for every you, there's someone with -18 games!


wait...


Anyway yes i ageee with the analyst. 5 bad. 4 good. 6 better.

I have about 10-15 games out on loan now and still have another 10-15 games or more stacked up. The games I have bought through Arcade stands at 38 now I believe.

I'm thinking of giving some games away for the less fortunate...we'll see...I hate when gamers are "I'm too poor" that breaks my heart, because gaming is an expensive habit.

 

[Joe DeFuria]

Does anybody think that there's a point where Microsoft can stay at its original launch prices for _too_ long? Is a year and a half too long? How about 2 years? How long before it adversely affects growing more market share?

Hey Tommy.

Yeah, I think there is a point where it can be too long...but I don't think they're there yet. I'm sure MS has internal sales target nubers, and as long as the units are selling at that rate, there is no need drop the price.

Competition of course will impact demand for the XBox 360, but the primary competition (PS3) is in such short supply that it really has little impact on XBox360 sales....and probably won't until Sony gets to the point where people can just walk into a store and expect to find both PS3 and Xbox sitting on the shelf side-by-side.

So, for the U.S. at least, I'm not expecting that to happen until maybe Q2 next year. Definitely by X-Mas season '07 at the very latest.

If the timing work out for MS, by the time Sony has ramped up production to reasonable volumes, MS will be releasing version 2 of X-Box 360 (with smaller, lower cost chips)....

 

[fulcizombie]

True, but with the PS3 it has the brand name, the 1 year later launch(newer & better tech) and the inclusion of the BluRay player, so it can sustain a higher perceived value than a Xbox 360 in the minds of average gamers.



Hmm. I can see your point. Kinda hard to come to an opinion with some many variables. On one hand I believe Microsoft needs to drop the price first to start roping in average gamers, but on the other hand as long as Microsoft sees the PS3 being $100-$200 more expensive then they will probably stay where they are.

Does anybody think that there's a point where Microsoft can stay at its original launch prices for _too_ long? Is a year and a half too long? How about 2 years? How long before it adversely affects growing more market share?

Plus, do they need to be concerned about Wii and it's lower price? Are they going to want to keep their pricing higher than the Wii for the remainder of the 360 life cycle?

Tommy McClain

"newer and better tech"-Sorry i just don't see that.Until ps3 games start blowing 360 games out of the water,the difference(if it exist,i doubt that) won't be visible to the average gamer.

About the perceived value,i agree that for hardcore buyers the ps3 represents great value.Hell,i agree with them.The problem is that i don't see the average cosumer buying a 599$ console(oh and the availability of the 499$ also comes in question here) or thinking about how blue-ray justifies that cost.The fact that GTA is multiplatform now,is a real loss for Sony,IMO.They don't have an equilevant to halo3 for holiday 2007 and the fact that the 2 biggest games in the west will be available on the "cheap" console could play a big role.I will definately not underestimate the Sony brand and the Playstation name commersial power though.

 

[swanlee]

Yea seems everyone including alot of people on this board want to turn something like a high attach rae into something bad. The PS3 then will be kicking butt with it's 1.5 attach rate.

Come one guys at this stage if MS is considered to be doing badly then we need to create and entire new grading scale for how poorly Sony is doing right now.

It's not even a contest

Xbox 360 has the cheaper price, better looking and better running games, better online, better media and digital entertainment capabilities, better PC integration, and a 7 million person user base in the first year.

I know some of you hate to admit it but MS is doing very well with the 360 right now.

 

[22psi]

high attached rate is bad?

 

[Phil]

"newer and better tech"-Sorry i just don't see that.Until ps3 games start blowing 360 games out of the water,the difference(if it exist,i doubt that) won't be visible to the average gamer.

It doesn't matter what you see - Azbat was commenting on the perceived value by casual consumers. Undoubtedly, a later launch and more features are perceived as "newer and better tech" (though more knowledgable people like many of the posters here know that it's perhaps not that simple).

 

[fulcizombie]

Yea seems everyone including alot of people on this board want to turn something like a high attach rae into something bad. The PS3 then will be kicking butt with it's 1.5 attach rate.

Come one guys at this stage if MS is considered to be doing badly then we need to create and entire new grading scale for how poorly Sony is doing right now.

It's not even a contest

Xbox 360 has the cheaper price, better looking and better running games, better online, better media and digital entertainment capabilities, better PC integration, and a 7 million person user base in the first year.

I know some of you hate to admit it but MS is doing very well with the 360 right now.

You know i only wish for one thing:that we had an NPD for europe,so all the silly comments i see in various forums would stop.

Oh well,creating an alternate reality on forums won't stop publishers from supporting the xbox360 at full force and being very happy with how their games are performing and that's all i care when it comes to sales' threads:having as many games released for a console as possible.

 

[3dilettante]

I don't have the full numbers, but I can see why a high attach rate could be a sign of trouble for the companies involved.

Unless we can prove that the average gamer's buying habits have changed, so that people are just buying more games, a high attach rate this early on could indicate the console is nearing some kind of peak.

The attach rate is always kept somewhat lower by the influx of new console purchases. If gamers are buying games at a similar rate to what they were doing earlier, the high attach rate is more an effect of the console's adoption slowing down or that the segment of gamers it has captured is limited to a smaller segment of the buying public.

As was said earlier, gamers don't care about total numbers, they just buy what they want to buy.
Their collective behavior, however, is the concern of Microsoft and the businesses that desire large volumes of sales, especially against a PS3 that isn't likely to continue having these problems for the full 5 year lifespan of the 360.

Have gamers on average been buying more than they did in the previous generation, or has the 360 become penned into a much smaller niche than Microsoft and its investors wanted? Remember, this isn't just a gamer's console, it's part of a larger strategy that Microsoft is pinning its hopes to.

If 360 only winds up attracting hardcore gamers, it will be a lesser result than the company wanted.

 

[Maintank]

It doesnt surprise me, these things are going for 300-600 bucks. The PS2 and xBox didnt start flying off the shelf until it was in the lower price point.

So it doesnt surprise me if they are having issues moving large volumes of their product.

 

[London Geezer]

It doesnt surprise me, these things are going for 300-600 bucks. The PS2 and xBox didnt start flying off the shelf until it was in the lower price point.

So it doesnt surprise me if they are having issues moving large volumes of their product.

Uhm PS2 was flying off shelfs pretty much all the time after shortages, with obvious peaks here and there due to certain games or xmas.

I don't think anyone could say the Xbox ever flew off shelves, but i guess it's all about different perceptions.

 

[RancidLunchmeat]

I don't think anyone could say the Xbox ever flew off shelves, but i guess it's all about different perceptions.

Dec 02, 03, & 04?

 

[SPM]

Isn't this just a function of higher new gen console costs? Fewer can afford the consoles and those who can afford them can also afford more games.

 

[London Geezer]

Isn't this just a function of higher new gen console costs? Fewer can afford the consoles and those who can afford them can also afford more games.

To be honest the prices are not THAT much different. A 360 now is more or less as much as a PS2/Xbox were at the beginning of their lives... The Core system is cheaper.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

But that's not how consumers perceive the market IMO. I know a few people that have $80k per year salaries that are waiting for the X360 premium to hit $299 instead of $399. At each lower pricing level MS will have more potential customers. Even though it's only $100. Shocking, but true.

Even hardcore gamers who will buy 50 games over the life of the system ($3000) complain that the PS3 price is out of wack and refuse to pay $600 to get a PS3, even though it's only $200 more than an X360. Shocking, but true.

Pricing is an interesting issue. It's been debated quite a bit on these forums from time to time and I'd like to reveal one of my own theories about it sometime later in the week when I have more time.

 

[dobwal]

Who needs quarterly numbers from MS and monthly tracking estimates from NPD?

Lets find a way to extrapolate console sales trend based off attachment rates.

Observer 1: "Ohh look, it look likes a sandwich meat, its round and have that red plastic material around its edge it must be boloney. What do you conclude?"

Observer2: "I concluded the same thing when I read 'Oscar Meyer Bologna' on the printed package."

 

[dlm]

This article should be in the running for most pathetic piece of "analysis" of 2006.

This whole article is upside-down FUD. It sounds to me like someone thought this:

"We need to write some gloom and doom for the 360, but the publically available NPD sales figures don't provide any support for that claim, what complete lie can we come up with? I KNOW!!! We'll just post a bunch of garbage saying that attach rate is an indicator of known sales while completely ignoring the actual facts so that we can generate traffic to our site"

Great journalism there. The writer should be sacked.

 

[3dilettante]

They may be comparing the trends in attachment rates to previous generations of hardware.
It doesn't sound too concrete to me, but few things are when trying to guess at the future.

A shift in the trend may be one of the indicators for when the console enters another phase in its life-cycle.

Perhaps the trend-watchers are worried its timing looks too fast compared to the previous generation. If the 360 is showing signs of middle-age, it's about a year and a half early.

There's also Microsoft's desire to thwart Sony's attempt at getting ahead in the "race for the living room" or whatever marketers call it. Hardware sales have more weight, since houses tend to have just one living room, while gamers can have stacks of games.

 

[22psi]

Who knows, maybe 'next-gen' hardware wise won't beat last gen in total sales but software sales will be far superior?

 

[3dilettante]

If that's the case, then both Sony and Microsoft would have been dealt a severe setback, since they wanted their products to take a more central role in more people's living rooms/entertainment centers, not just be used as a game device.

Nintendo would be doing pretty well, though.