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

Forums - Sales - MS/Sony published game sales comparison (since release of ps3)

Black_Scurge on 25 July 2011
Degausser said:
Neither way is 'fair' - the current method he used to calculate it discounts games lke GoW and Viva Pinata that sold the majority of games after the PS3 release... which is illogical. On the other hand if you include them, it's a bit distorted as you're effectively comparing PS3 software sales from a system which start on 0 userbase versus a system which started around 11m or whatever - which would obviously sell more software initially.

The fairest way to do it would be to calculate all the 360 software sales since launch in the same time frame as PS3 today.. sort of discounting the later software sales or something... as then you'd get the software sales in-sync with userbase increase. But no ones going to do that, cause it'd take too long and still be flawed.

Either way, I think the clear morale here is Microsoft are more capable then Sony at getting their big titles to sell more copies. I'm a Sony fan but there's no point denying that - Sony simply for whatever reason doesn't have the clout to launch and market a game like Microsoft... even when the product is of similiar quality and appeal.

You're right, as the comparison stands it still favors MS, since 360 had a higher installbase at the start, but I think it's insignificant enough especially since despite it favoring them they still lose 



Around the Network
Black_Scurge on 25 July 2011
dsage01 said:
Funny how this shitstorm was caused by me and no one's blaming me haha!

Nah it's just caused by people who can't accept the facts and want me to give 360 an unfair headstart



yo_john117 on 25 July 2011

These types of threads are almost always skewed towards what the OP wants to prove and this one doesn't look any different. I hate these feel good threads!

Seece and the others are right...you need to add ALL the first party published sales from the release of the PS3. Do it right or don't do it at all because then it's just a pointless biased comparison.

If you fixed that little problem this would have been a great thread buuuut as usual there's a ulterior motive. Or in fact do an aligned software launch....that would truly be the best way to do this.



Black_Scurge on 25 July 2011
yo_john117 said:

These types of threads are almost always skewed towards what the OP wants to prove and this one doesn't look any different. I hate these feel good threads!

Seece and the others are right...you need to add ALL the first party published sales from the release of the PS3. Do it right or don't do it at all because then it's just a pointless biased comparison.

If you fixed that little problem this would have been a great thread buuuut as usual there's a ulterior motive. Or in fact do an aligned software launch....that would truly be the best way to do this.

Again how exactly is counting sales for an extra years worth of games on one side only more fair, I just don't get your guys logic (or rather lack of), right now we have games that released and sold within a specific time frame the only thing better is choping off MSes last year of sales and comparing it to Sony's now, and I don't have 1 year old numbers for all the games, anything else would just make it lobsided 



yo_john117 on 25 July 2011
Black_Scurge said:
yo_john117 said:

These types of threads are almost always skewed towards what the OP wants to prove and this one doesn't look any different. I hate these feel good threads!

Seece and the others are right...you need to add ALL the first party published sales from the release of the PS3. Do it right or don't do it at all because then it's just a pointless biased comparison.

If you fixed that little problem this would have been a great thread buuuut as usual there's a ulterior motive. Or in fact do an aligned software launch....that would truly be the best way to do this.

Again how exactly is counting sales for an extra years worth of games on one side only more fair, I just don't get your guys logic (or rather lack of), right now we have games that released and sold within a specific time frame the only thing better is choping off MSes last year of sales and comparing it to Sony's now, and I don't have 1 year old numbers for all the games, anything else would just make it lobsided 

TBH neither of those options are the best possible way to go about this....aligning launches and showing Software from that is the best way. 

But with that said your way is the worst way of going about this.



Around the Network
Seece on 25 July 2011
Black_Scurge said:
yo_john117 said:

These types of threads are almost always skewed towards what the OP wants to prove and this one doesn't look any different. I hate these feel good threads!

Seece and the others are right...you need to add ALL the first party published sales from the release of the PS3. Do it right or don't do it at all because then it's just a pointless biased comparison.

If you fixed that little problem this would have been a great thread buuuut as usual there's a ulterior motive. Or in fact do an aligned software launch....that would truly be the best way to do this.

Again how exactly is counting sales for an extra years worth of games on one side only more fair, I just don't get your guys logic (or rather lack of), right now we have games that released and sold within a specific time frame the only thing better is choping off MSes last year of sales and comparing it to Sony's now, and I don't have 1 year old numbers for all the games, anything else would just make it lobsided 

Your logic is far worse and people have put it as simply as it needs to be put. You're chopping off more than the first years sales of MS games, you're chopping off a portion in 2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 and 2011.



 

Black_Scurge on 25 July 2011
yo_john117 said:
Black_Scurge said:
yo_john117 said:

These types of threads are almost always skewed towards what the OP wants to prove and this one doesn't look any different. I hate these feel good threads!

Seece and the others are right...you need to add ALL the first party published sales from the release of the PS3. Do it right or don't do it at all because then it's just a pointless biased comparison.

If you fixed that little problem this would have been a great thread buuuut as usual there's a ulterior motive. Or in fact do an aligned software launch....that would truly be the best way to do this.

Again how exactly is counting sales for an extra years worth of games on one side only more fair, I just don't get your guys logic (or rather lack of), right now we have games that released and sold within a specific time frame the only thing better is choping off MSes last year of sales and comparing it to Sony's now, and I don't have 1 year old numbers for all the games, anything else would just make it lobsided 

TBH neither of those options are the best possible way to go about this....aligning launches and showing Software from that is the best way. 

But with that said your way is the worst way of going about this.

How so? They both have the exact same amount of time to release games and sell those games



Black_Scurge on 25 July 2011
Seece said:
Black_Scurge said:
yo_john117 said:

These types of threads are almost always skewed towards what the OP wants to prove and this one doesn't look any different. I hate these feel good threads!

Seece and the others are right...you need to add ALL the first party published sales from the release of the PS3. Do it right or don't do it at all because then it's just a pointless biased comparison.

If you fixed that little problem this would have been a great thread buuuut as usual there's a ulterior motive. Or in fact do an aligned software launch....that would truly be the best way to do this.

Again how exactly is counting sales for an extra years worth of games on one side only more fair, I just don't get your guys logic (or rather lack of), right now we have games that released and sold within a specific time frame the only thing better is choping off MSes last year of sales and comparing it to Sony's now, and I don't have 1 year old numbers for all the games, anything else would just make it lobsided 

Your logic is far worse and people have put it as simply as it needs to be put. You're chopping off more than the first years sales of MS games, you're chopping off a portion in 2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 and 2011.

How many times do I have to explain this to you, those games were launched with NO opposition on the ps3 because the ps3 wasn't out, it doesn't matter that they sold in later years, because Sony didn't release anything on ps3 during that year, if they did those games would of sold in recent years too, why don't you understand that? I'm not giving MS a years worth of games headstart and the only reason I can see someone would is to make MS have more sales 



Seece on 25 July 2011
Black_Scurge said:
Seece said:
Black_Scurge said:
yo_john117 said:

These types of threads are almost always skewed towards what the OP wants to prove and this one doesn't look any different. I hate these feel good threads!

Seece and the others are right...you need to add ALL the first party published sales from the release of the PS3. Do it right or don't do it at all because then it's just a pointless biased comparison.

If you fixed that little problem this would have been a great thread buuuut as usual there's a ulterior motive. Or in fact do an aligned software launch....that would truly be the best way to do this.

Again how exactly is counting sales for an extra years worth of games on one side only more fair, I just don't get your guys logic (or rather lack of), right now we have games that released and sold within a specific time frame the only thing better is choping off MSes last year of sales and comparing it to Sony's now, and I don't have 1 year old numbers for all the games, anything else would just make it lobsided 

Your logic is far worse and people have put it as simply as it needs to be put. You're chopping off more than the first years sales of MS games, you're chopping off a portion in 2006,2007,2008,2009,2010 and 2011.

How many times do I have to explain this to you, those games were launched with NO opposition on the ps3 because the ps3 wasn't out, it doesn't matter that they sold in later years, because Sony didn't release anything on ps3 during that year, if they did those games would of sold in recent years too, why don't you understand that? I'm not giving MS a years worth of games headstart and the only reason I can see someone would is to make MS have more sales 

There is no point in carrying on. Let's just put it like this.

First party game sales released since the PS3 launch, are in PS3's favour.

First party game sales since the PS3 launch are in X360's favour.

The latter is the more logical, and what everyone would use in debates, who has sold the most SW since the PS3 launched, nobody would use this as an argument whether you think your way is corret or not, as everyone in this thread has displayed.



 

Reasonable on 25 July 2011
Black_Scurge said:
Reasonable said:
Interesting and good list. Personally I'd add Gears due to release dates but I would leave KA out as you noted.

Pretty much confirms a similar state of affair SW to HW - MS has sold more overall in terms of LTD but time adjusted it's pretty even overall, with a slight lead for MS. The major difference is that MS strategy is around a smaller (comparative to Sony but still fairly large in its own right) number of titles and a very small number of huge sellers.

Sony has a smaller number of huge sellers but pushes out a lot more titles (much the same strategy as with PS2, try for blanket coverage of lots of genres/demographics).

Both approaches have their pros and cons and it's interesting to see they come to such a similar result overall.

One thing though, seeing GT5 at the top of the list and still way below its probable LTD you really have to figure Sony should have worked harder to get that title out earlier in the consoles life.

Really, with HW/SW so similar and a similar feature set across both HD consoles now there's just no point hating on whichever HD console you don't own. Not that the core haters will change their tune now, but really, if you dislike the PS3 or 360 and prefer the other you're basically hating on something that's over 90% identical to the thing you love. But that's deindividualism (amongst other things) for you.

I probably would add gears in if it didn't mean having to recalulate the majority of the accumulative 


Just add a total for partial others at the bottom then and another total with that.  Include an estimate of Gears and any other major titles that probably have more than 100K sales after PS3 launch.  Or ask Seece or someone others will trust with that to give you an estimate of partial others and add that.

That way you'll have a total for complete sales titles and a final total including partial sales.

Again, I think the basic idea is good you just need to add in a decent estimate of sales from partial titles such as Gears who got a lot of sales while the PS3 was out.  On a sales site an analysis of first party published makes sense, just try and reduce the amount of flak over the grey areas (there will always be grey areas between 360 and PS3 for a whole host of reasons).



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...