SInce all three consoles bundles some kind of games, lets all stop the argument and include all bundled games with the attach ratio.

Did you actually read anything I typed in my last post?  The data isn't skewed in the 360's favor because attach rates are compared for the same period of time of a console lifespans.  The reason that some people make a big deal out of the 360's attach rate is that it's higher compared to other consoles when compared for the same period of their console's lifespan.  How is comparing the Wii's first year attach rate, the PS3's first year attach rate, and the 360's first year attach rate giving the 360 an advantage?  All are comparing at 12 months into their lifecycle.

Actually I tell you what Sqrl, show me how the 360's numbers are skewed.  Calculate the 360, PS3, and Wii's first year attach rates (using the method NPD and everyone else uses) and explain to me how the numbers are skewed in the 360's favor.

Actually I did explain it quite well and it is you who have failed to read what is posted. I approached the discussion with demeanor of open debate you have approached with a rude and snide demeanor. Do want a discussion or a bitch fest?

I will however indulged you and explain yet again. The comparison, as I said in my first post, is skewed because it doesn't account for reality as it stands NOW. It ignores the most recent year of 360 software sales which means that the data, while valid, is outdated. It may mean that its skewed for the 360 or against it but it does allow a skew to exist. I also pointed out that normally software sales will decline starting in the 3rd year and so this method will likely favor the 360.

If you read my post I pointed this out not to invalidate the method you chose but to illustrate that all methods have inherit flaws and shortcomings. Such things must be accounted for before meaningful and valid conclusions are to be drawn and good anlaysts do so.

Both methods are valid when used properly, the same way a gun can be a useful tool when used responsibly and a murder weapon used irresponsibly.

So in other words you aren't going to compare the first year attach rates for all three consoles.  That's all you had to say, end of discussion.

If you're only interested in making declarations and are going to avoid the issue why did you bother posting in the first place?

At least you were right about the discussion being over..then again it never started. That would have required you to listen in the first place which you have not done.

The system could be valid .But ,not using European and Pal numbers and relying on the Top 200 provided in this site (with its innacuracies ) instead in the full info of NPD or MC makes the attempt futile .

You did say that your calculation was based like this 1 * Nov05 + 1 * Nov06 + 1 * Dec07 = 41 months...

I dont see how you reached that figure.... for reference use the table below.

Take a look at my comparison..

Items marked in red are adjusted monthly figures with respect to LT figures.

Items marked in green are ones showed LT sales > actual sales in the debut month of each console. Possibly due to preorders!

NOTES:

1. This is the formula I used for attach rate --> S.W sales for a month / LT sales for each console for that month.

2. If this is to be done more correctly, this would become a complex statistical problem.

3. FYI... all figures are taken from VG charts http://vgchartz.com/amonthly.php after going thru each month data.

4. I havent taken the bundled games into consideration.