YLOD is something which some one came up with to encounter the RROD & E74 errors from Microsoft. If there was serious issues with PS3 hardware, we would have a same replacment thing like Xbox. so please stop talking about YLOD, it is very minor, unlike RROD, it is widespread.

Some people are running on thier six or seventh xbox, which is unheard of in gaming history.

Good Luck. 

LOL, that's fucked up, and yet I chuckle. Look at the people in the background talking some shit about this guy. Poor bastard probably had a real experience.

OT: I have a friend who has a friend who knows a kid who's mother's boyfriend walked in on him jerking off and the kid freaked out and ended up knocking over a coffee can of chewing tobacco spit onto his 360. Then he got a new one.

OT, again. I'm curious as to why I have 3 360's  currently in use( 2 fats, 1 Reach) and a 4th Reach NIB just waiting to either be sold or swapped out for one of the fats. I'm also curious as to why I want a black S for the living room. Wait what are we talking about again?

why on earth do people get away trolling/flame baiting the xbox360 yet any other console they get slammed straight away... I just don't get it.

This is a clear troll, not really even subtle, what it just happened to fall under the 50 million announcement, wow what a coincidence... errr

some people said 7/8 consoles. What absolute horse$hit. There is no way in hell 6-7 have broken, if they replaced them themselves for upgrading that is not for breaking purposes. I think it is common knowledge that MS is under the acceptable line for faulty units now. You guys really need to move on from this topic.

The attach rate for a given console may be a bit more indicative of how many users are double, triple or higher repeat buyers, although in most of these cases, those who buy multiples of the same console buy several times more games than the average attach rate.

If you buy 3 of the same console, but bought over 50 games for them and the console had an average attach rate of (random number) say ten, you'd still be almost 7 games over the average attach rate on each console. 

If the number of multiple console buyers was unusually high (ie assuming 25% of the user base owns multiple consoles), the average attach rate would likely be noticeably lower than its competitors'. In the case of the 360, there is no significant gap in attach rates, so unless everyone who buys more than one Xbox also happens to have bought at least double the average attach rate in games... it's probably not extremely significant. 

It should also be noted that a lot of secondary consoles, broken or not, do end up with secondary buyers on the used/trade market, which still counts as a separate individual user who is presumably also buying games for that used console.

A small minority of the replaced consoles likely end up in the landfill, are recycled, stripped for parts, or permanently thrown into a closet. These are really the only consoles that are removed from circulation, effectively reducing the overall user base. 

My XBox 360 died, and I bought a replacement on boxing day for $129 ...

While I have known people to buy several versions of handheld systems to replace working systems, I suspect that this is far less common for home consoles; in a large part because new versions of home consoles rarely have a significant advantage over previous versions. What this means is that people tend to replace consoles because the old version no longer worked; and with the high failure rate of early XBox 360 systems it is likely more XBox 360 systems have been sold as replacements than any of the other systems.

With that said, the older a modern gaming system gets the more likely it is to need to be replaced; and after 4 or 5 years it starts to become likely that you will see a major component fail. This (of course) doesn't mean that at 5 years of age your console will fail, but at this age replacement systems become a larger and larger portion of the number of units sold.

Not too surprised to see PS3 enthusiasts trying to inflate the 360's failure rate issue, or to see 360 enthusiasts downplay the 360's failure rate issue and call the PS3's own stability into question. As long as stuff like this continues, we'll likely never make any progress on the issue (or any issue, for that matter), and we'll all be stuck here bickering back and forth for 20 pages until the thread's finally locked or forgotten about and sinks to the bottom of the forums.

Getting back to the topic at hand, to figure out the number of 360 owners who have purchased multiple consoles, a number of factors need to be considered:

-As pointed out earlier in the thread, Microsoft extended the warranty period for the 360 to three years from the date of purchase. This alone significantly cuts into the number of people who would have otherwise purchased a second console, as the temporary inconvenience of not having access to their console far outweighs the alternative of shelling out another $300 for a brand new console for most consumers.

-Even 360 consoles that are past their warranty periods are repairable at the cost of the consumer. While some people may opt for a brand new console in this case for the convenience factor, the fact remains that it's still cheaper to have a 360 repaired than it is to purchase a brand new one. Money talks for most consumers, which will lead to the vast majority of them opting to pay for a repair and enduring temporary inconvenience rather than purchasing a brand new console.

-Xbox 360 consoles manufactured from late 2007 and onward are far less prone to hardware failure than previous models were, making the failure problem less significant than it would be had the issue not been mitigated.

-The slim model. How many people upgraded to the slim and traded in their old 360 in the process?

-Tying in with the last factor, how many used 360 consoles were picked up by somebody after people traded in their old PS3 for a slim model? Are they still actively being used?

-For one reason or another, whether it be for having them in multiple rooms, two separate locations entirely, or so on, people occasionally own multiple 360 consoles.

When it comes to the PS3, there's also a few factors to consider:

-PS3 hardware failure issues are far more difficult to get repaired than 360 hardware failure issues are. As the so-called "Yellow Light of Death" issue isn't as prevalent for Sony as the "Red Ring of Death" was for Microsoft, there wasn't as robust a console repair operation set up. This leads to anybody who gets the Yellow Light of Death on a PS3 to have far fewer options than somebody with the Red Ring of Death, and in turn will lead to a far higher percentage of people who are forced to buy a new PS3. As mentioned earlier, though, the Yellow Light of Death was far less prevalent than the Red Ring of Death, leading to a far smaller pool of people to potentially sell two consoles to due to hardware issues.

-The slim model. How many people upgraded to the slim and traded in their old PS3 in the process?

-Tying in with the last factor, how many used PS3 consoles were picked up by somebody after people traded in their old PS3 for a slim model? Are they still actively being used?

-For one reason or another, whether it be for having them in multiple rooms, two separate locations entirely, or so on, people occasionally own multiple PS3 consoles.

When it truly comes down to it, I don't believe that hardware failures have been a significant boon to either Microsoft or Sony when it comes to the total number of consoles sold. The number certainly isn't zero, but it's most likely negligible to the point where neither side gains a substantial advantage of any sort. Not to mention, any gain that one company gains from failed hardware is likely somewhat comparable and offset by the gains made by the other company in the same area.

The largest variables in play for the user bases of both sides are most likely people who own multiple 360 or PS3 consoles, and if the used consoles from people who upgraded to a slim model were picked up and are currently in active use by somebody else, as brought up earlier.

The hardware failure issue is oft-cited to explain the sales disparity between the two consoles, but I truly don't believe that it substantiates meaningfully in any tangible way when it comes down to the hard numbers. Of course, we'll likely never have any concrete figures from either Microsoft or Sony on the failure rates of their consoles so nobody will be able to scientifically or incontrovertibly prove anything one way or the other. With that in mind, all that we can do is take all of the factors into consideration and make our own judgments on the issue. This post is simply my own personal take on the subject, and while I could very well be off-base with my evalutation, in my eyes, this seems to be the most logical analysis, and the most reasonable resolution to the debate in the end.

Followed immediately by the anecdotal evidence brigade ;)

I reckon the second hand console market definately keeps the attache rate up.  It's telling how much retailers seem to be pushing second hand both in terms of trade in deals and purchase deals.

I also figure that, in percentage terms to the noted consumer sales (first hand of course), the impact of replacing broken units is actually relatively small.  I figure the 360 has the most double dipping, then the PS3, then the Wii with almost none.  But even the 360 double dipping is likely to be only a fraction of the entire base, easily offset by second hand sales.

I just traded in my fat PS3 for a Slim, and by now my old fat is probably out there with a new owner already keeping the tie ratio up - unless they're buying all their games second hand too!

How many times has this been posted? what is it like a few week period till you can waste another topic asking the same question about the 360 over and over again with flame bait written all over it?