IGN had an opinion piece recently about PS3 console sales possibly overtaking the Xbox 360's next year. But, does it matter when console figures are horribly distorted anyway?
Sales are sales and each system sold is money for the companies. What is the issue is the software sales ratio. If console X sells 10mil, and console Y sells 8mil but both sell 1 million of Game A: Then who is buying more? The larger ratio of software sales goes to the system with less bought. What if Console A sells 5 mil but 2 mil gets replaced. Then it sells 7 million on record although only 5 mil have it. Same as if Console B sells 3 mil but the gamers trade in 1 mil for another system, now Console B has only 2 mil gamers but 3 mil in sales. Yes I am tlaking about Xbox and PS3 sales. Who has purchased more than 1 Xbox? I have. I know many who have back when the warranty was still developing. I know many who have upgraded to the slimmer 360 now. So are there really 15mil gamers in America? Or only 9 with 5 mil replaced or upgraded? Same with PS3 Slims? Who knows? In the end sales are sales. Sold to shops/stores versus consumers, it doesn't matter there. I think determining software sales is the best way to see how gamers are going. Systems get replaced up graded. Look at the PSN IDs and Gamer Tags, the PS+ and GOLD LIVE accounts. That is where you get good figures from. But best no worry about things like that. Ever gamer should basically own all 3 consoles buy now. 3x Christmas birthdays, jobs, etc. Raging over sales takes away from why we all are here, to game and chitty chat about gaming. *back to skyrim homies!*
Well I was gonna reply but it seems you've pretty much taken care of it.. =^/
Agreed - its attachment rate of consoles and software along with Online DLC sales etc. The sales war is old - esp in the grand scheme; if a console sales more in 10yrs than another console however it was outsold 7 out of the 10yrs; its not relevant because the war ended at 7 and next gen began at the following year. Thats like saying "Dreamcast" out sold PS2 (lol would never happen bare with me) because it went back on sale this yr and in 5 more years will sale more than PS2; but that gen in terms of all players being competitive at the same time ended yrs ago. I personally think the future is not the consoles at all; like PCs hardware will become less important and software will take over entirely both in UI \ Online and Games This is where software companies will have an edge and hardware will be less of a profit. And certainly world wide sales have always been a joke; when SONY whooped Nintendo in the US, did Japan care they still bought nintendo. When SONY whooped Xbox in Japan; did Xbox care in NA; no. It is relevant to your region past that who cares what is winning else where as long as the install base passed 12mil then it will get cross platform content. Its all ~ Relative
Something that kind of nullifies some sales are system failures. Those are unaccounted for and make up a lot of the early 360s (RROD) and at least a small percentage of PS3 systems (YLOD). I myself got the YLOD on my early model 40GB PS3 phat. I could really care less about sales though. I care about games, and Sony seems to be the best lately at delivering that. There's been over 10 or so exclusives this year from Sony for the PS3. And several coming next year with more to announce. @ForROME Well, all I know is, that I will be buying consoles until they stop offering them. Services like OnLive just don't work for me. It sucks to not have the physical copies or at the very least have digital copies locally stored on the harddrive.
now that the PS3 is closing on xbox suddenly sales dont matter anymore LMAO after years of boasting how the xbox was teh bestezt 4 all da zales...
Console sales figures were more important to people like the author of the article when the PS3 was struggling, but now that its got the superior lineup of games and the best features that are driving its growth to the point that its about to overtake the 360, Xbox friendly journalists no longer care to talk about sales figures. I hope Sony has a massive celebration when they surpass the 360 in sales, but of course Microsoft will release their next console as soon as possible just so they can say that they've won this generation(despite the one year head start lol)
Yeah, it's sad, really. Bias can be a bitch sometimes. I truly hope the PS4 and Xbox 720 both release in the same holiday season so that that "console war" can start at the same time and then we could truly see which brand holds more relevance in gaming. There would be people fighting like crazy. Little kids screaming at each other "Xbox is better!! No PlayStation is better!! ...." bahahaha Would make for some interesting Christmas headline stories. People would probably get shot. lol
^^^ Here are some interesting brand loyalty videos: Video #1 http://www.youtube.com/watc... Video #2 http://www.ebaumsworld.com/...
It's just people that love their Xbox 360. Nothing wrong with that! If it isn't an Xbox 360, it would be something else.
[QUOTE]...if a console sales more in 10yrs than another console however it was outsold 7 out of the 10yrs; its not relevant because the war ended at 7 and next gen began at the following year.[/QUOTE] I'd wager that most folk know or care nothing about these wars and their 'rules'. They just buy what they want. If veteran consoles are still strong enough to be on store shelves and have new games being released for them, then they're relevant. One company bowing out early doesn't cease&desist game development or sales for the others'. Example: God of War 2. One of the PS2's crown jewels, yet it released in 2007, 4-5 months after the PS3 launched in 2006. Well after the 360 in 2005. Does it not count towards the PS2's legacy in sales or otherwise just because it released during the PS3/360 era?
Discussions are discussions, but people with fanboy bias spew out most distorted truth. I even heard from a fanboy that he prefer less games. I mean really? So instead of having A, B, C game to choose from, you rather have A game only? Desperate fanboys comes with most ridiculous defense and it ceases to be a discussion from there.
Ah, you again! Didn't I block your one bubble account? I said, I would prefer D over A, B or C where D isn't A, B or C. Is that hard to get or should I go slower?
"each system sold is money for the companies" Not really, only in the latter half of the generation usually. But yeah well said.
But yeah....RAZOR BLADE BUSINESS MODEL. Those who don't know what that is, they should google or Wiki it. RAZOR BLADE BUSINESS MODEL is also the reason a successful full video game consoles can never be digital distribution ONLY....but that's for a different topic.
No, it is money. It may not be profit, but it is certainly money. Cash flow from sales is very important early in the life cycle of a console.
cause the companies lose so much money on R&D and then selling them below cost that the companies barely break even on console sales except for Nintendo who made cash day 1 on a low tech Wii. Software sales is where the money is at. I'm sure Ninty, Sony and MS just want to sell a certain amount of games every month for a steady flow of guaranteed revenue. the amount of consoles sold DOES NOT equal the amount of gamers using them. The Air Force bought like 3k PS3 for some test and a lot of people use the PS3 just for a Blu-ray player. a lot of 360 owners are on their 3rd or 4th 360. I know people with a well working fat 360 who bought a slim just to have one. i'm sure some PS3 fans have done the same. it would be nice to know the ACTIVE number of each console that gets used for gaming a certain amount of hours a week. like if used 15 hours a week for gaming it would count as active and then tally those numbers up as......... sold units vs. active units.
Allow me to throw an unpopular monkey wrench into the works here. I know the subject is not a favourite here on N4G, mostly because its SONY's weak point this gen, but since this is a sales article it is relevant. PS2 totally massacred GameCube in terms of console sales right?? But did you know Nintendo made alot more profit than SONY last gen? I kid you not. Don't believe me? Here you go: http://i1217.photobucket.co... As you can clearly see, PS2's massive console sales did in fact not translate into any financial lead. Also from the chart you can see that since the 360 launched, it has experienced 2 fiscal years of loss and 4 fiscal years of profit. Since ps3 launched, it has enjoyed 4 fiscal years of loss and 1 fiscal year of profit. And the ps3 has been outselling the 360 for how many years now?? Now tell me again that console sales matter. . .ps, my flamesuit is at the cleaners so please guys, be gentle.
Awesome graph. I like how it's all true and stuff! Totally true!
I agree with you here. The biggest difference this gen over the others is people are buying more than one of he same console as they offer more than just games. I have 2 360s and 2 ps3s as i use playtv and skyplayer on my 360 in my bedroom. Sales of both consoles are very good and so are the games. The 3rd party games not have many differenve between them on both consoles. To me this gen has proved thete is room for 3 companys to be in the same market and to me this is good as all 3 are going in different directions to the other with what there consoles can do and be used for so to me was are all winners.
Lol, I like how for the past six years been it's "Sales, sales, sales, "X" console is better "Y" console because it has more sales." from certain gamers and journalists (totally excluding the Wii...oops "Z" console). Now that the PS3 might outsell the 360 it's "Who cares, market shares", "Too late", and hypocritically now "Sales don't matter". Gotta love this gen. Edit: I agree with you Nuka.
If the Playstation 3 doesn't have a strong hold or have the lead in a particular category, that category is the de facto measure of success. First it was games at the beginning of this gen. Now that the PS3 dominates that category, the gaming media and all the fanboys on its payroll care little to nothing for games. The de facto morphed into sales. Now that the Playstation 3 is poised to take that trophy and earn the lead, are we now coincidentally seeing a lack of support for that notion? So where do they go from here? Cross-Game Chat? Ah Yes, Cross-Game Chat is what makes a console a success. Yes I'm sure.
my thoughts as well.. haha posted it before reading these... gaming journalism is a joke... and a lot of people still support this BS, seems like they even enjoy it.. cant be taken cereally
I know! No one ever acknowledges how the ps3 has a dozen times as many great games as the 360.
@NegativeCreep427 somebody give this man a Standing ovation couldn't have said it better myself.
IGN is completely whored out. Their opinions mean nothing. NPD sales figures only represent %60 of the US market. All that arguing over sales figures is for nothing.
Not to mention the European sales data doesn't even cover the whole of Europe. Japan is the only sales data that seems to be represented for Asia. We don't even know if Africa, the Middle East and South America are even properly represented in those sales data. The only thing that Sales Figure proves is how inaccurate SOLD data is. BUT! Sales figure does prove one thing. It shows: "How healthy the console industry is"
Of course. Console sales mean nothing when the PS3 is poising to take the lead. But when the 360 was like 8 million units ahead, then they mean something right? *sigh* Double standards.
True about re-buying consoles. I've had 3 ps3's and 3 xbox 360's.... end of the day though does it really matter?
Sales never mean anything, are Toyotas the best cars? Is Twilight Breaking dawn the best movie in America? the answer is no. Sales dont mean shit.
You forgot to say, is Lady Gaga the best recording artist ever? Hellz No.
This article seems to be some 360 players can't accept that in the end, they will finish last.
They will finish last? How so? Where have we been racing to? If I buy a product that nobody else does, does that mean I finished last? I'm so baffled. Also, if I'm a multi-console owner, does that mean I'm first and last? What do I win if I finish first?
You do realize that the xbox was launched during a time when Playstation reigned supreme. Playstation was unstoppable and everyone loved the brand. Fast forward to today. The xbox brand is a household name with equal or more fans then the playstation. Where did these new xbox fans come from? If you had to name one console brand that has made huge strides in commercial success this generation it is xbox without question. The fact that articles like this even exist proves how far xbox has come. Can you imagine an article on this topic years ago? Absolutely not. Oh and im no xbox fanboy, i game 99% on PC.
Sorry but Nintendo went from last to domination. They're the undisputed kings this generation.
@gaden_malak Sure nintendo sold an impressive amount of consoles but it didnt put much money in their pockets. Nintendo is in the red for the past couple years losing millions of dollars. Im not talking a few million im saying hundreds. So no nintendo isnt the king of this generation.
Thought Nintendo made money with each Wii from the beginning.
I disagree with all of you. Console sales do matter however how their sales figures stack up against one another is irrelevant. As long as each console, Nintendo's included ( im intrigued by the Wii u controller ), sells enough to stay in the game im happy. Don't care which is first, second, or third as long as each company makes enough to keep creating a new console then im happy. We need that competition. So we get better products and more varied experiences. I don't care for the Wii but without it I would have never got a new way to navigate my dashboard, without xbl we prob wouldn't have psn, and without ps3 ms prob wouldn't try at all to get exclusives ( they still haven't done a very good job yet, but at least their trying ). So in the end, all fanboys should take a step back and go by the enemy because in the end it will likely just make your fav system better and who knows, maybe you'll end up with another enjoyable console as well.
exactly, when a console sells as bad as gamecube then it matters otherwise who cares. all 3 consoles have sold plenty this time around
The gamecube sold fine, just slightly less than the xbox. It just looked bad if you compared it to the PS2's incredible sales.
Um. . . Both the Xbox and GameCube sold poorly. Video games were mainstream and the world economy was booming.
Exactly I don't want one to win, I want competition
When you look at it on the whole console sales are not reflective 1:1 with software sales. Game companies are not going to look at 'consoles sold' they're going to look at which console sells the most of the type of games they want to make and which console they can profit the most from (remember profit margins are different in different countries per sale). The thing about Xbox360 now is, you have to wonder how many consoles are being sold because of kinect and whether those people are going to buy the traditional core games. If they're not then that customer's sale is almost meaningless to core game developers unless they think they can sell to that group. And also if you're a core gamer you don't want them to dumb their games down to try to sell to that group either because it's emerged as a new demographic on the system. When a software maker looks at the platform, they're going to put more resources usually to where they get the most return, and they are more likely to consider exclusivity to a platform where they get the most return. If you're arguing that sales = more investment; therefore are relevant - you have to look more closely at regional profit margins and which type of games you like are selling on which console - that's where the investment will come in. For example if a console is only selling shooters well - if you like shooter that's great. Companies will invest in your type of game. If you aren't found of shooters, that's not good because companies will invest in games you don't like.
I can just see it now, the headlines read Sony confirms they have overtaken the XBOX360 in total sales and N4G erupts to 1 million degrees. What does that say about us? That's why I spend little time here on the forums.
Sales for consoles by year may mean something, but not a lot. Console sales overall...mean absolutely nothing. The numbers aren't accurate at all, and for Xbox 360 users, a lot of them just bought a new one. For example, take all the sales of 2005, all of those users got a Red Ring by now, and the estimated number is 70% of those users went out and bought a brand new system. That's probably 7million users or more. That's just 1 example.
For those saying console sales don't matter...............look at the Dreamcast. Low sales killed it. Low sales mean little 3rd party support.
thats very true mate, sales do matter...... awww my poor dreamcast lol
Lol xbox fanboy damage control article just as the Ps3 is about to surpas the xbox 360 sales number,And it's true lots of people had the $200 ps3 bundle @ best buy ,LOTS ( on black Friday), I would be surprised If the ps3 didnt surpass the xbox 360 sales this holiday season.
This article should get a lot of 'in-depth' reasoning. Considering the countless shareholders we have here, you'll get enough responses, don't you worry. If a game, or console, attracts you as a consumer, you'll buy it. If it doesn't, or you like another console, so be it.
The title of this article should be "This Article Proves nothing". Honestly, all this guy did was rant for a few minutes about how people probably have 3-4 of every console and that consoles used as supercomputers over-inflate sales. Really a tasteless article from the dumbing-down of internet journalism...This guy needs to go back to school and learn how to write!
Between Microsoft and Sony, MS clearly won. The real battle isn't so much about hardware sales; that's important to a degree. It's all about mindshare and that's where MS won. They needed Xbox to become cemented in the mind of gamers as the go to machine and that's exactly what they did. They've sold enough units but more importantly they got the mindshare. No one would've considered MS comp for Sony a generation ago and look what happened. I have all three so as someone said above me: as long as they sell enough to keep making new games and hardware, I don't care who's winning. I just want the games to keep coming. If you have good games, I'll buy. That's the bottom line.
MS wouldn't have even had that lead or even the "mindshare" as you call it, which isn't even a word, if they hadn't released their console a year early. You can also thank their marketing dept for the "mindshare" too. Give me a break.
very true, i think sony have proved time and time again that the playstation is the best GAMING colsole, consoles are for gaming and sony have all the games, its inevitable the ps3 will overtake the 360, i think untill microsoft start actually buying game companys they will never win a generation, its the basics to developing a great console, u need games!!!!
OMGZ please stop with with the "nobody would have considered MS to be compared with Sony this gen" excuses. ive heard it so many times. Will fanboys just accept that sony will beat MS again this gen?
Mindshare? Don't you mean brain wash? This only applies to America by the way. Why talk about sales? Lets talk about the quality of the console, its lifecyle and the games the system have to offer. That is "winning" in by book.
@Mendicant... FYI... I own all three consoles. That makes your reply to my comment moot.
he has a good point! Though sales figure are always sales figure. That goes for online revenue which xbox live wins. At this moment I give PS3 credit for all kinds of opportunity to have everything in PS3. Same as XBOX, online shouldn't be paid, but people buy and see their value, then I give credit for MS for letting consumer know how value the live can be, where I say **** that, I'm getting PS3 for free online and full set, that I don't have to worry in the future. And oh yea Blu Ray too. My old line! The better the competition, the better the choice gets for consumer :) So please Sony or MS, don't lose :)
Well console sell sure is everything to business. For gamer wise, games sell do mean something --> more sell -> more support for games that u love -> more games.
The author is completely underestimating RROD if he's even putting it in the same sentence of YLOD, out of 5 people I know who had 360s all of them broke - either RROD or a bad DVD drive that stopped reading discs. 360 was probably one of the most faulty electronic devices every released. I've never met anyone with YLOD although I acknowledge that it exists. Also, I have heard that early 60 gig owners were affected disproportionately, but otherwise PS3 failure rates have always been within electronic standards. Also, 'upgraded hardware syndrome' only affect 360 because it had no wifi, or HDMI?! and hard drives are a complete rip off. PS3 on the other hand allowed you to upgrade you HD for cheap and hasn't really added anything requiring an new console upgrade - in fact, there's more incentive to keep you old console.
My launch 60g is on 6-10 hrs a day. No problems. Can't wait for "skyhawk" and "last guardian"!
Ah, so this must be the new "All of a sudden console exclusives don't matter" type article
I guess sales is more important than the quality of games on the system, the value for money, the build quality and life cycle of the console... Yeah? Its ridiculous how these issues don't get brought up when talking about who "won" this generation. For pure build quality and sales Nintento cleary won. For game quality and value for money it's Sony. For Online its Microsoft. No one can argue with any of this. And why Sony gets the "value"? The blu ray player was the cheapest at one time, with free online and built in Wifi. Also the swapple HD. Seems people only care about the cost of the box and not the added "extras" that needs to be purchased for the full experience, which actually cost more in the long run. Fanboys talk about sales. Gamers talk about the things that matter to them which are the gameplay experiences on the consoles. If you really want to talk about sales... The 360 is leading Sony for one reason... Earlier release. What is the gap now? Two to three million? And that's even with the PSN downtime and negative press. But how do these volumes affect us? Its doesn't. The games do. So STFU already about this.
"For pure build quality and sales Nintento cleary won. For game quality and value for money it's Sony. For Online its Microsoft." Totally agree, remember now that every PS3 comes with a free game too - DC Universe, which is surprisingly good. Sony should put that on the front of every box "Free DC Universe". I've never liked Warcraft but for some reason, I keep playing DC - my 360 doesn't even have an MMO.
Yes it matters and why is it now that the PS3 is over taking the Xbox that we see an article saying sales doesn't matter because the numbers are distorted. We all know the average Xbox user is on his/her 2nd or 3rd Xbox. Aren't those numbers a little off too or have been for years?
MS releases a console a full year ahead of Sony and hit 50 million units sold 3 months ahead of Sony and a few years behind the Wii. If that's something to be proud of, good for you MS. MS also released a console built with spit and bubble gum. They sold 24 million units last year and doubled that this gen. It doesn't take a genius to figure out why they doubled sales. You had a choice of continuously repairing a broken product or upgrading to the slim. A ton of people chose the latter or worse, bought another broken fat 360 only to repeat the process. As for the PS3 Slim, it's nothing like going from 360 to 360 slim. It's actually a downgrade with more memory. The YLOD is nowhere near the scale of the RRoD and the PS3 phat + upgraded HDD eliminates the need for a PS3 slim. The fact that the PS3 is also a blu ray player does not matter. The author is a college student and probably too young to remember the fact that the PS2 was also the best available DVD player at the time...so should we take away from those sales as well? The Super computer thing was just stupid, so no comment on that. Lastly, Sony handicapped itself with it's absurd pricing and arrogance. Were it not for those two things, I doubt the Wii would have a comfortable 30m lead like it has now and MS would have tanked again. Let's be honest here. 2nd place means you're the first loser. The Wii is #1 and the rest does not matter. If any of you think MS or Sony cares about beating each other at this point, you're fooling yourselves. Kinect and Move were created for the sole purpose of convincing Wii owners to move into the HD era of console gaming. #1 is all that matters and both Sony and MS know this. Gamers haven't got the message.
lol i dont care who sales the most all i care is for the video games sales. I all ready have a PS# and now im gonna wait for a good christmass sale to get an xbox...P.s did anyone seen the TARGET STORE ADD? they are selling the PS3 1yre subcrition to plus for 14.39 it a print mistake by the store. but you can get it for the price on the add
as most things are - Sales are a factor however not the whole picture, but they do count they just arent a final verdict.
who ever wrote this is desperately trying to feed his family.
Of course the console sales mean nothing this gen, microsoft is leading. Last gen it meant everything.