Every major analyst and game website has discussed the reasoning behind the new pricing model. It is a test to see if low income families that don't have a lump sum of cash available will be drawn into a cheaper console with a monthly fee. People are predicting it will be used in the next generation of consoles to draw people into the userbase much quicker than they would typically opt in due to price.

Even IGN had an article about this. You have to be blatantly trying to stir up shit to claim like no one knows why they would suddenly come out with this pricing model. It is simply to test the waters for next gen. Stop with the crazy theories, they look desperate.

Well I don't have access to the numbers so obviously can't show you them all but I recall Europe was around 200k under for 360. Sure someone will come along with the numbers for you.

But in regards to NPD US the last two NPDs were as follows.

feb vgc had 360 at 337k and NPD had 360 at 426k.

march vgc had 360 at 312k and NPD had 360 at 371k.

I think april npd is tonight?

You act like theories act independantly from one another.

Tell me this Mendicate.

You go to test the waters of a new pricing model. Expecting it to increase sales, should you order more consoles in expectation of higher demand?

You're obviously a smart fellow, so you don't really need to answer this.

That depends on how much of an impact you believe it will have on sales. Even if you believe it will have a sizeable increase (which I don't think it will) that does not mean the increased shipments came in almost half a year ago.

If I had said something like that no doubt you would of reported me...

But anyways so in your little mind you honestly think the ps3 right now has zero stock on shelves around the world? Because for the PS3 to not be over tracked that is what it means. You would not be able to find one anywhere. If you believe that then that shows you don't know what your talking about.

As for the pro 360 comment I find that laughable considering I use my PS3 and Vita more then my 360 or Wii. If I was anything I would be pro pc. Just because someone tries to stick up for a console on here doesn't make them pro that console. On this website there are far more Sony fans who change and bend the rules to try and make things look better for Sony then they really are. But when it comes to the other consoles those rules are magically ignored, no excuses are found for their numbers.

For example this thailand flood and tsnuami thing. How long will this get used? If people did some research into it they would see many other companies were hit by it too but are now working fine again. I suggest reading what happened to Westerne Digital and their factories as they were under 10 feet of water. They had buildings destroyed. But yet they got some of their factories back running after a month. The same goes for Honda who were probably hit the hardest. After 6 months they were fully back to normal. They estimate they lost production of 260,000 cars because of it. So the fact some people think Sony who was not hit anywhere near as hard as Honda couldn't be back to normal by now or even in the past 3 months seems silly to me.

Without people like me people like you would be able to ignore all the facts and simply make up your own results. The way this website is going that seems to be the way it is. A few of us said vgc numbers looked out last year when they said ps3 had won 2011. But we were laughed at, but now what we said looks right. We said PS3 numbers look too high and 360 numbers looked low before the recent changes and again we were laughed at. With the adjustments the 360 had an increase but so did the ps3, we said that was wrong. Again these numbers prove what we said was right. Without people like that vgc would listen more to what you people say and just keep bumping the ps3 numbers, if they want realistic numbers they need to stop listening to people like you.

Now the PS3 is 100% overtracked the question is by how much? To go back to what I said before about how it is one rule for Sony and a different one for everyone else if that was Microsoft the usual people would say at bare minimum 1m-1.5m of 360's on shelves. But with Sony and the PS3 it is ok for it to have 400k to 500k on shelves. That seems acceptable. But if you look at the facts there isn't much to back that up. Look at Sony's previous shipments, look at it's month over month sales, look at the price cuts and so on. There is no indication there at all to suggest PS3 demand is as high as they imply, and if there was would they really have less then 500k on shelves worldwide?

There was a time when official numbers on here were seen as the most important thing to judge how something is doing. But over the past year on this website it seems to have changed. If we go on official numbers given by official companies from their last report we see 360 is at 67.2m (up to 31st of march) so even after 40 days since that report and those numbers given vgc has the 360 at 66.5m  which is a 700k difference which doesn't take into account the shipments that would of been sent out in the past 40 days. So if they sent out 1.4m over the previous 3 months thats an average of 466k a month. So if we apply that to vgc numbers would indicate at minimum of 1.16m sitting on shelves right now.

Sony on the other hand have just given us their numbers of ltd and that is 63.9m. Seeing as vgc has it at 64.1 that means a difference of just 200k. So while it is okay for the 360 to have 1.2m+ pretty much on shelves it isn't okay to say PS3 has 1.2m sitting on shelves?

As I said one rule for one, and a different rule for the other. If it is okay for Sony to have such little stock on shelves why is it not okay for 360 to have as little stock on shelves?

Will this transfer? You're not only paying for XBL, but also the console itself partly

errr...

tats a nasty habit you have where sony is concerned.... lol