Quantcast
PlayStation+Ninty+Xbox shipment history since 1995, UPDATED May 2015.

Forums - Sales Discussion - PlayStation+Ninty+Xbox shipment history since 1995, UPDATED May 2015.

Tagged games:

Intrinsic said:

Now you are talking about a completely new can of worms. Streaming. For the most part I agree with you. But understanding what goes into making that work will give you an idea of how far off it is. You are basically talking about gaming as a service. I use my surface a my  primary PC too, even though I have a much more power dedicated PC. So I understand where you are coming from. But lets break this down.

Game streaming doesn't just automagically happen. If you want a streamed game to have PS4 level graphic fidelity, then you basically should have PS4 level hardware somewhere that runs that game. Now if you want to provide a stream for lets say, 30M people simultaneously, taking into account that they could all be playing 50 different games, you literally have to have 30M dedicated PS4 level hardware hubs to run the games for those 30M people. If your audience is 100M large, then thats 100M PS4s. Difference being that these PS4s aren't in your home, you aren't paying for it. They are in a massive server room somewhere.

This brings us to the next part, they will still sell you dedicated hardware. Much simpler on their part compared to what they have to do now from the end consumer perspective. What they will seel you is a small box that allows you connect your controllers or what not. Most importantly though, this box will have extremely cutting egde video processing hardware to process and playback in realtime what may heavily compressed 1080p/4k streams. At 60fps. But thats not really a problem, such a box probably wouldn't cost more than $100. This hardware however wouldn't be something that could just be in every tablet/tv or PC cause its dedicated hardware built to handle codec that nothing else needs to deal with on its level. You can't just use traditional streaming methods. Long story....

But now the real problem, how would such a model work as a business. Lets say MS sells you and XBO for $400. And it cost them $400 to make and ship it to you, they have broken even the second you buy the console. If they make say 100M consoles. Thats $40B right there. But its ok cause they sell all those consoles and start making money from the games. But who pays for the $40B worth of hardware that is in the server room to stream games to a 100M people? And that is not including the additional $100 box they still have to make and sell  to you so you can recieve and process the stream. It emans right off the bat, there is a $400 loss they are taking everytime someone buys that $100 box. 

An easy fix, or actually the only fix... would be something that most would not like. Start charging a subscription fee. And I am not talking about $50/yr. Doing that would take them 8yrs to make back that $400 per user investment. No, they will have to charge around $40/month. Now after paying 440/month do you think gamers will still want to spend $60/game? That they never own and can only stream? No. So that would mean that the games available become part of the service too, which will mean that you won't even be paying $40/month but more like $80/month. 

Then now imagine how they will feel when in say 8yrs they have to spend god knows how much more to upgrade their entire server. Streaming games sound really good on paper. But the business of it is just a disaster all round because of how hardware dependent games are. Think of it this way, in 10 yrs MS tells you to buy a small $50 box or better yet, download an app to your phone or tablet that will let you connect it to your TV so you can play games from XBL, but you will have to pay $80 every month to do so and you don't own any of these games. Sony, tells you that you can buy hardware for $400 that will have IQ that is much higher than what XBL servers can give you and you don't pay $80/month... you just buy your games. Which do you think you would do?

Well, you are actually describing the very idea that MS seem to have had when starting the next gen with X1. They are the company that actually has the capacity to have servers near almost everyone on this planet. They created 300000 servers, virtual or not, that aim to support a huge online community. They also aimed to make X1 online/only, in my view laying the groundwork for an always/online service. It backfired somewhat but MS are the ones to have the capacity to make this a reality.



Around the Network
Puppyroach said:

Well, you are actually describing the very idea that MS seem to have had when starting the next gen with X1. They are the company that actually has the capacity to have servers near almost everyone on this planet. They created 300000 servers, virtual or not, that aim to support a huge online community. They also aimed to make X1 online/only, in my view laying the groundwork for an always/online service. It backfired somewhat but MS are the ones to have the capacity to make this a reality.

This is not even remotely close to what MS was trying to do. And as far as laying the groundwork for something like this, the people activey and literally doing it is actually sony. Playstation Now. Thats exactly what they are doing. Thats why they bought Gaikai and they are probably using it as a test bed to see how game streaming could work.

All that server talk? Be we advised to not believe everything that MS says. What MS was doing was simply trying to ensure that it got a cut from used games sales and the only way to gurantee that is to make sure every console has to be always online. Nothing more nothing less.

No one has the capacity to do this yet, not even MS, the amount of money that would be required to sink into something like this to do it effectively is just too much for something that you couldn't even be sure of.

What sony would do, is they will run PS2 and PS3 games on playstation now for a few years, then at some point you would start seeing indi PS4 games on PS now. Or they could use the service as a way to allow game rentals.



Intrinsic said:
Puppyroach said:

Well, you are actually describing the very idea that MS seem to have had when starting the next gen with X1. They are the company that actually has the capacity to have servers near almost everyone on this planet. They created 300000 servers, virtual or not, that aim to support a huge online community. They also aimed to make X1 online/only, in my view laying the groundwork for an always/online service. It backfired somewhat but MS are the ones to have the capacity to make this a reality.

This is not even remotely close to what MS was trying to do. And as far as laying the groundwork for something like this, the people activey and literally doing it is actually sony. Playstation Now. Thats exactly what they are doing. Thats why they bought Gaikai and they are probably using it as a test bed to see how game streaming could work.

All that server talk? Be we advised to not believe everything that MS says. What MS was doing was simply trying to ensure that it got a cut from used games sales and the only way to gurantee that is to make sure every console has to be always online. Nothing more nothing less.

No one has the capacity to do this yet, not even MS, the amount of money that would be required to sink into something like this to do it effectively is just too much for something that you couldn't even be sure of.

What sony would do, is they will run PS2 and PS3 games on playstation now for a few years, then at some point you would start seeing indi PS4 games on PS now. Or they could use the service as a way to allow game rentals.

Your last two paragraphs appear to be very contradictory.  MS cant afford it but perhaps Sony could at some point?

MS are one of only 3 companies (with Google and Amazon) that can even get close to achieving this.  Sony cant and I doubt ever will be able to go global on this.  It would be too expensive for them to lease that many servers, let alone build their own.  I believe we will see Now having major issues if take up is large.

 



I'm not really here!

Link: Shipment History Since 1995


kowenicki said:
Intrinsic said:

This is not even remotely close to what MS was trying to do. And as far as laying the groundwork for something like this, the people activey and literally doing it is actually sony. Playstation Now. Thats exactly what they are doing. Thats why they bought Gaikai and they are probably using it as a test bed to see how game streaming could work.

All that server talk? Be we advised to not believe everything that MS says. What MS was doing was simply trying to ensure that it got a cut from used games sales and the only way to gurantee that is to make sure every console has to be always online. Nothing more nothing less.

No one has the capacity to do this yet, not even MS, the amount of money that would be required to sink into something like this to do it effectively is just too much for something that you couldn't even be sure of.

What sony would do, is they will run PS2 and PS3 games on playstation now for a few years, then at some point you would start seeing indi PS4 games on PS now. Or they could use the service as a way to allow game rentals.

Your last two paragraphs appear to be very contradictory.  MS cant afford it but perhaps Sony could at some point?

MS are one of only 3 companies (with Google and Amazon) that can even get close to achieving this.  Sony cant and I doubt ever will be able to go global on this.  It would be too expensive for them to lease that many servers, let alone build their own.  I believe we will see Now having major issues if take up is large.

 

Don't get me wrong... I dont think  sony can do it. But in answering his comment, I was just pointing out that of Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony, sony are the only ones actively doing it and that what MS announced for XBO had nothing to do with this. Not once did they mention that they were gona be doing game streaming. I in no way believe that sony can do it at a scale that would support adoption that can cater to their entire user base as a service that is the primary way to play games. Nope, they can't. 

However, they can do it for things like BC, and even at that they will control how many games will be in the BC list (exactly like they are doing with PSnow). This way you limit the user size by only providing older games that won't generate too much traffic and by limiting the amount of games on the service. I doub't tehre will ever be more than 100-200 games on the PSnow service much less having an entire generations catalouge. Honestly, thats the only way I see it being done cause even to use it for game rentals will be too much.

And this is not something that can work by you "leasing servers" anyone doing this doesn't just have to build servers, they have to build servers that really only serve to do just the one thing. To explain for example, if sony wanted to make it possible for 1M people to be able to stream PS4 games on PSnow, then they specifically have 1M PS4s making up the "PS4 server". Granted, this will not look anything like consumer hardware, it will basically just be stacks on stack of racks holding the PS4 MB with nothing but the APU and RAM on the board connected to high bandwidth storage that has the game installed on it. But you don't just take a xenon server rack and call it a day.

When you start to look at all these things then the cost starts to climb really fast, and the problem isn't about it being cost inhibitive. What companies as big as sony, ms, google...etc; they don't look at money the way we look at it. We say things like oh this or that company has this or that amount of billions so they can do this or that or they cant afford this or that. It doesn't work that way. If such a service requires $100B to set up and you can guarantee that you can make that money back and then some in say 3yrs, even sony has the "resources" to be able to get that kinda funding. How this thing becomes cost prohibitive isn't about who can afford it, its about there not being any acceptable way to make it profitable that will sit well with gamers. So its just bad business.

Look at Gaikai or onlive... they didnt need to be anywhere as big as anyone to start up something like this, their model was to make enough to cater to maybe 10k gamers and then grow accordingly.  The issue is that the only way to make this model work is to offer it as a service. And thats where the problem comes. You can't just do a netflix and offer $10/month gaming services for "original content". It would cost more..... a lot more. Gamers would say no. Thus, you can't invest the tens of billions required just to have gamers say no. And that is why no one can do it on that scale, maybe "no one can do it" isn't the right way to put it; maybe I should be saying "no one should do it". 



nice thread thanks for the update.

 

 

Around the Network

@OP:
Nice thread kow! But don't be too pessimistic too early, there have already been highs and lows, new highs could follow the current low as middle classes' income in developing countries grows. Also, last gen lasted a lot and its sales are now low for PS3, lower for XB360 and almost dead for Wii (killed by Ninty with a clumsily planned and executed generation switch, IMVHO), while new gen isn't able to fully replace their sales yet, as new ben libraries widen and HW prices drop, we could see an overall healthier market. And PC and consoles never were so close, so there could be bigger savings in multiplat development, this could help too a little.



Stwike him, Centuwion. Stwike him vewy wuffly! (Pontius Pilate, "Life of Brian")

A fart without stink is like a sky without stars.

TGS, Third Grade Shooter: brand new genre invented by Kevin Butler exclusively for Natal WiiToo Kinect. PEW! PEW-PEW-PEW!

 

OP updated with full year figs for MS.


I'm not really here!

Link: Shipment History Since 1995


lovely thread. I can't wait for 2014 to be added to the charts.

Meh. Software was always more important than hardware.

Updated with recent full year date for Ninty and Sony plus 3/4's for Microsoft.

Illuminating.

I'm not really here!

Link: Shipment History Since 1995