By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sales - Major Nelson: Kinect Sold 2.5 million in first 25 days

OntheEdgeofthemirror on 30 November 2010
nightsurge said:
You are misunderstanding again.  The percentage of error would ONLY be on the small amount of untrackable locations.  That means out of 2.5 million, only a small portion would have to be estimated, and only of that small portion would the margin of error apply, making it meaningless and would not dilute the overall numbers at all.

 

Do you have any proof of any of that, so far you have no proof MS even has a tracking system, and no proof it has any reliability if it does, everything you say is an assumption based on something which isn't even clearly stated, nowhere in the article does it say the 2.5 is sold to consumers, nowhere does it say MS tracked it, nowhere does it say where they are even getting their numbers from and yet you want to take it at less then face value (since they didn't even clearly say it was sold to consumers)



Around the Network
nightsurge on 30 November 2010
OntheEdgeofthemirror said:
nightsurge said:
You are misunderstanding again.  The percentage of error would ONLY be on the small amount of untrackable locations.  That means out of 2.5 million, only a small portion would have to be estimated, and only of that small portion would the margin of error apply, making it meaningless and would not dilute the overall numbers at all.

 

Do you have any proof of any of that, so far you have no proof MS even has a tracking system, and no proof it has any reliability if it does, everything you say is an assumption based on something which isn't even clearly stated, nowhere in the article does it say the 2.5 is sold to consumers, nowhere does it say MS tracked it, nowhere does it say where they are even getting their numbers from and yet you want to take it at less then face value (since they didn't even clearly say it was sold to consumers)

Goodness. The ENTIRE article is focused around sales to consumers.  Do you really need it spelled out to you?

"We are thrilled about the consumer response to Kinect"

"With sales already exceeding two and a half million units in just 25 days, we are on pace to reach our forecast of 5 million units sold to consumers this holiday."

Combine these with their statement after 10 days which was sold to consumers, and Aaron Greenberg's confirmations.

You are arguing with me about proof when you can provide no proof to the contrary...



OntheEdgeofthemirror on 30 November 2010
nightsurge said:
Opinion of ONE person, one rather young Sony Engineer, who only deals with PS Move.

How do you know this?  Bill Gates had been talking about controller-less gaming since 2007 and earlier for Xbox 360.

Sony chose the less costly path and the more convenient "copy-cat" method of "if something already works and sells tons, let's continue and refine that".

Also, do you really think the last thing Sony wanted was to introduce something that would add another $150 to the purchse price of their already more expensive system?  No.  There are tons of reasons why they passed on a controller-less setup and went with more of a Wii copy-cat.

MS is the one that took the risk of removing controllers completely.

Sony has had controllers-less gaming since 2004, and it was conceived in 1999(according to wiki), and they even upgraded it with the pseye, they no doubt have had their eye on 3D cameras since before they were even beginning  development, and how is ps-move "copy-cat" where kinect isn't? The tech in move isn't like wii in anyway camera tracks a ball perfectly accurately and tracks you fairly accurately, and the controller has tumble sensors and other things, wii mote is basically a pointer, kinect is a pseye with better depth perception and recognition software. And yes move was cheaper, but more then that was capable of more then the 3D camera as made quite clear by the article don't reply again unless you read the article 



OntheEdgeofthemirror on 30 November 2010
youarebadatgames said:
OntheEdgeofthemirror said:

opinion of highly qualified people in this exact field, which is pretty much as close to fact as you get on things like this, and if it is such a major upgrade why didn't Sony make another ps camera and make it a 3D one? They were looking into it long before MS 


If you actually understood the article they said it wasn't cost effective because they either didn't have the money or the talent to make it work.  But it's not like you actually understand the field of vision research, or read any peer reviewed articles or even bothered to look at what the PC hackers are doing with it.

I hope you go back to being banned.

It wasn't cost effective because it provided very few benefits over the pseye and the ones it did could be achieved through the wand which came with a ton of benefits of it's own including lower price, read the whole article before replying again 



OntheEdgeofthemirror on 30 November 2010
nightsurge said:
OntheEdgeofthemirror said:
nightsurge said:
You are misunderstanding again.  The percentage of error would ONLY be on the small amount of untrackable locations.  That means out of 2.5 million, only a small portion would have to be estimated, and only of that small portion would the margin of error apply, making it meaningless and would not dilute the overall numbers at all.

 

Do you have any proof of any of that, so far you have no proof MS even has a tracking system, and no proof it has any reliability if it does, everything you say is an assumption based on something which isn't even clearly stated, nowhere in the article does it say the 2.5 is sold to consumers, nowhere does it say MS tracked it, nowhere does it say where they are even getting their numbers from and yet you want to take it at less then face value (since they didn't even clearly say it was sold to consumers)

Goodness. The ENTIRE article is focused around sales to consumers.  Do you really need it spelled out to you?

"We are thrilled about the consumer response to Kinect"

"With sales already exceeding two and a half million units in just 25 days, we are on pace to reach our forecast of 5 million units sold to consumers this holiday."

Combine these with their statement after 10 days which was sold to consumers, and Aaron Greenberg's confirmations.

You are arguing with me about proof when you can provide no proof to the contrary...

lol thats your argument, thats your point, thats it, making it misleading like that without actually saying it is the perfect way to get people like you to think it's sold to consumers numbers without risking being caught in a lie, they don't actually say sold to consumers and I see no way how they could know how much is sold to consumers thats the bottom line where you just assume it's sold to consumers based on how it's worded 



Around the Network
nightsurge on 30 November 2010
OntheEdgeofthemirror said:
nightsurge said:
OntheEdgeofthemirror said:
nightsurge said:
You are misunderstanding again.  The percentage of error would ONLY be on the small amount of untrackable locations.  That means out of 2.5 million, only a small portion would have to be estimated, and only of that small portion would the margin of error apply, making it meaningless and would not dilute the overall numbers at all.

 

Do you have any proof of any of that, so far you have no proof MS even has a tracking system, and no proof it has any reliability if it does, everything you say is an assumption based on something which isn't even clearly stated, nowhere in the article does it say the 2.5 is sold to consumers, nowhere does it say MS tracked it, nowhere does it say where they are even getting their numbers from and yet you want to take it at less then face value (since they didn't even clearly say it was sold to consumers)

Goodness. The ENTIRE article is focused around sales to consumers.  Do you really need it spelled out to you?

"We are thrilled about the consumer response to Kinect"

"With sales already exceeding two and a half million units in just 25 days, we are on pace to reach our forecast of 5 million units sold to consumers this holiday."

Combine these with their statement after 10 days which was sold to consumers, and Aaron Greenberg's confirmations.

You are arguing with me about proof when you can provide no proof to the contrary...

lol thats your argument, thats your point, thats it, making it misleading like that without actually saying it is the perfect way to get people like you to think it's sold to consumers numbers without risking being caught in a lie, they don't actually say sold to consumers and I see no way how they could know how much is sold to consumers thats the bottom line where you just assume it's sold to consumers based on how it's worded 

Wow...

I give up.

It's sold to consumers.  They said it themselves, Aaron Greenberg confirmed it.  I'm repeating myself to someone who obviously refuses to believe it.



OntheEdgeofthemirror on 30 November 2010
nightsurge said:
OntheEdgeofthemirror said:
nightsurge said:
OntheEdgeofthemirror said:
nightsurge said:
You are misunderstanding again.  The percentage of error would ONLY be on the small amount of untrackable locations.  That means out of 2.5 million, only a small portion would have to be estimated, and only of that small portion would the margin of error apply, making it meaningless and would not dilute the overall numbers at all.

 

Do you have any proof of any of that, so far you have no proof MS even has a tracking system, and no proof it has any reliability if it does, everything you say is an assumption based on something which isn't even clearly stated, nowhere in the article does it say the 2.5 is sold to consumers, nowhere does it say MS tracked it, nowhere does it say where they are even getting their numbers from and yet you want to take it at less then face value (since they didn't even clearly say it was sold to consumers)

Goodness. The ENTIRE article is focused around sales to consumers.  Do you really need it spelled out to you?

"We are thrilled about the consumer response to Kinect"

"With sales already exceeding two and a half million units in just 25 days, we are on pace to reach our forecast of 5 million units sold to consumers this holiday."

Combine these with their statement after 10 days which was sold to consumers, and Aaron Greenberg's confirmations.

You are arguing with me about proof when you can provide no proof to the contrary...

lol thats your argument, thats your point, thats it, making it misleading like that without actually saying it is the perfect way to get people like you to think it's sold to consumers numbers without risking being caught in a lie, they don't actually say sold to consumers and I see no way how they could know how much is sold to consumers thats the bottom line where you just assume it's sold to consumers based on how it's worded 

Wow...

I give up.

It's sold to consumers.  They said it themselves, Aaron Greenberg confirmed it.  I'm repeating myself to someone who obviously refuses to believe it.

link? and again what method do they have to track consumer purchases, let me guess you think 360 was within industry standards when it launch right?



Booh! on 30 November 2010
nightsurge said:
OntheEdgeofthemirror said:
nightsurge said:
You are misunderstanding again.  The percentage of error would ONLY be on the small amount of untrackable locations.  That means out of 2.5 million, only a small portion would have to be estimated, and only of that small portion would the margin of error apply, making it meaningless and would not dilute the overall numbers at all.

 

Do you have any proof of any of that, so far you have no proof MS even has a tracking system, and no proof it has any reliability if it does, everything you say is an assumption based on something which isn't even clearly stated, nowhere in the article does it say the 2.5 is sold to consumers, nowhere does it say MS tracked it, nowhere does it say where they are even getting their numbers from and yet you want to take it at less then face value (since they didn't even clearly say it was sold to consumers)

Goodness. The ENTIRE article is focused around sales to consumers.  Do you really need it spelled out to you?

"We are thrilled about the consumer response to Kinect"

"With sales already exceeding two and a half million units in just 25 days, we are on pace to reach our forecast of 5 million units sold to consumers this holiday."

Combine these with their statement after 10 days which was sold to consumers, and Aaron Greenberg's confirmations.

You are arguing with me about proof when you can provide no proof to the contrary...

That's just PR spreading confusion. Let's take the report from Nintendo: "Nintendo sold 900,000 combined units in the Nintendo DS™ family of systems and 600,000 Wii™ consoles between Sunday, Nov. 21, and Saturday, Nov. 27, according to the company’s internal sales estimates."

It's clear, readable, you cannot spin it, it says "we sold that much to consumers according to our company estimates". On the other hand MS report is just a bad advertisement, it doen't explain anything.



nightsurge on 30 November 2010
Booh! said:
nightsurge said:
OntheEdgeofthemirror said:
nightsurge said:
You are misunderstanding again.  The percentage of error would ONLY be on the small amount of untrackable locations.  That means out of 2.5 million, only a small portion would have to be estimated, and only of that small portion would the margin of error apply, making it meaningless and would not dilute the overall numbers at all.

 

Do you have any proof of any of that, so far you have no proof MS even has a tracking system, and no proof it has any reliability if it does, everything you say is an assumption based on something which isn't even clearly stated, nowhere in the article does it say the 2.5 is sold to consumers, nowhere does it say MS tracked it, nowhere does it say where they are even getting their numbers from and yet you want to take it at less then face value (since they didn't even clearly say it was sold to consumers)

Goodness. The ENTIRE article is focused around sales to consumers.  Do you really need it spelled out to you?

"We are thrilled about the consumer response to Kinect"

"With sales already exceeding two and a half million units in just 25 days, we are on pace to reach our forecast of 5 million units sold to consumers this holiday."

Combine these with their statement after 10 days which was sold to consumers, and Aaron Greenberg's confirmations.

You are arguing with me about proof when you can provide no proof to the contrary...

That's just PR spreading confusion. Let's take the report from Nintendo: "Nintendo sold 900,000 combined units in the Nintendo DS™ family of systems and 600,000 Wii™ consoles between Sunday, Nov. 21, and Saturday, Nov. 27, according to the company’s internal sales estimates."

It's clear, readable, you cannot spin it, it says "we sold that much to consumers according to our company estimates". On the other hand MS report is just a bad advertisement, it doen't explain anything.

It didn't say sold to consumers anywhere in what you quoted...



nightsurge on 30 November 2010
OntheEdgeofthemirror said:
nightsurge said:
OntheEdgeofthemirror said:
nightsurge said:
OntheEdgeofthemirror said:
nightsurge said:
You are misunderstanding again.  The percentage of error would ONLY be on the small amount of untrackable locations.  That means out of 2.5 million, only a small portion would have to be estimated, and only of that small portion would the margin of error apply, making it meaningless and would not dilute the overall numbers at all.

 

Do you have any proof of any of that, so far you have no proof MS even has a tracking system, and no proof it has any reliability if it does, everything you say is an assumption based on something which isn't even clearly stated, nowhere in the article does it say the 2.5 is sold to consumers, nowhere does it say MS tracked it, nowhere does it say where they are even getting their numbers from and yet you want to take it at less then face value (since they didn't even clearly say it was sold to consumers)

Goodness. The ENTIRE article is focused around sales to consumers.  Do you really need it spelled out to you?

"We are thrilled about the consumer response to Kinect"

"With sales already exceeding two and a half million units in just 25 days, we are on pace to reach our forecast of 5 million units sold to consumers this holiday."

Combine these with their statement after 10 days which was sold to consumers, and Aaron Greenberg's confirmations.

You are arguing with me about proof when you can provide no proof to the contrary...

lol thats your argument, thats your point, thats it, making it misleading like that without actually saying it is the perfect way to get people like you to think it's sold to consumers numbers without risking being caught in a lie, they don't actually say sold to consumers and I see no way how they could know how much is sold to consumers thats the bottom line where you just assume it's sold to consumers based on how it's worded 

Wow...

I give up.

It's sold to consumers.  They said it themselves, Aaron Greenberg confirmed it.  I'm repeating myself to someone who obviously refuses to believe it.

link? and again what method do they have to track consumer purchases, let me guess you think 360 was within industry standards when it launch right?

Already provided earlier in the thread or on other threads on here.

Also, any proof of Nintendo's tracking method yet?