| nightsurge said: Who in the world decided to use such a stupid method for their graph? "Average number of weeks between software purchases"? Please....... Also, there is one critical flaw I see in this whole attempt to make the PS3 and Wii look like software selling phenoms... and that's multiple games/software sold at the same moment. It seems more likely to me that Xbox 360 gamers have historically bought games in large packages. They purchase 2-3 at one time, thus why they go longer in between before buying more. Just something to think about before believing this very deceiving graph. How else could you explain the 360's much higher overall games per console sold, if they were buying games less often? It's simply because 360 gamers tend to purchase multiple titles at once. |
There is perhaps some logic missing here.
If X360 gamers do as you say, and buy 2 or 3 games but with longer periods between, then there would still be no way to find out looking at this graph.... because this averages it out.
What this method does is eliminate the advantage the X360 gets by being out longer.... time always sells more games.... and this takes the extra time out of the argument by working out how many weeks each owner has had the system (which then gets the total weeks of ownership) then we already have the software figures here on VGC
It does arguably put the X360 at a SLIGHT disadvantage, because in it's first year it was still competing against the PS2... but it is a minute disadvantage compared to the advantage it gets using simple attach ratios.
----
There is another problem that is perhaps going against the X360... and that is that the graph uses VGC figures.... which are less complete for the X360 in "others" region than they are for the other two consoles.
