Ugh! If numbers speak for themselves, then why does 360 do extremely well in America and the Uk and not so well in many (not most, many) other places? How can 360 sell well in the us and bad (?) in Spain? What do the numbers say in each case?

I actually agree with you on that.  I think the thing that really pushed Xbox Live early on was it's rapid adoption rate.  By launching early MS was able to get enough people rolled into their service that everyone else got into it because their friends were.

the main reason I worded it like that was there has been some major negativity on this site towards Xbox Live recently.  While I understand why some people don't want to pay for it or don't think it's worth it I think many of the complainers are bashing to the service for other reasons.

I never claimed to be neutral. I have yet to collectively insult Microsoft, Nintendo or Sony fans, so I guess that's something. "Coming from you?" Got a problem with something I've said recently? PM me.

I better leave this thread, things are getting petty.

Make as many as you like, it's still not going to change my perspective of you.

I didn't mean it as an insult, I just found it funny that Sales2099 was dictating who was neutral and who was not.

the numbers say the importance of knowing your market, both america and uk are known for liking fps, which microsoft has pushed, halo, exculsive dlc, blah blah, and they have pushed media, in the states it was the first to have netflix in uk i believe it has sky movies and some other providers, i need to double check but im sure that neither of these services are provided to spanish customers, i sure when a spanish customer sees whats available on xbox live it must seem barren i cant blame them for deciding xbox live is not worth it. 

I think you have an odd idea that this is a bad thing. It doesn't really matter, and isn't something to get all up in arms about.

but why were the friends on live, at some point on this chain of friends someone picked live and like it without having any friends already onlive, i agree live purchases have been made because this same reason, shoot im sure some loser bought live just so he could stalk some girls gamer profile, but saying because it came out first and therefore it was given i dont know about that.

Of course, I believe most users try to be objective and intelligent when they post about topics, but that's eliminate their biases. 

It has nothing to do with Sony. Live isn't horrible in its entirety. It's only "paying for playing online" that is horrible. This has nothing to do with people being Sony loyalists or anything stupid like this. People see what is available out there, Steam, PSN, Miiverse, and they realise that MS is the only one charging for online gaming. It doesn't take more than that to call it a rip-off. MS is charging people for what is readily available for free everywhere else.

Now, you have people like you who can't accept that people won't find value in Gold [because the same is available everywhere else for free with similar quality] who come up with all kinds of apologetics to justify their investment in the service. 

Paying for Live is just sending the message to the industry that you're fine paying for online play for any games you purchase. As if we didn't already have to pay enough to get complete games in the first place, with on disc DLCs, ending chapters, etc... MS is basically locking multi-player out for most games, and we should be ok with this and be all sunshine and rainbows? You really can't understand how people may have actual legitimate reasons not to support that kind of practice? All of this must fall on fanboyism or pure blind hate? 

Gee thanks, sales2099.

Key market penetration and past loyalties.

Microsoft have put an ~80% focus on leading in the Western markets. Mainly English speaking countries. Its worked for them in a pretty big way. The other added focus on markets primarily dominated by Sony and Nintendo (mainland Europe and Japan) have worked out well enough too, as can be seen by the 360's huge gains there over last generation.

In Europe, the Xbox 360 has sold over 23 Million units. The original Xbox sold 7.17 Million units. The 360 has sold over 3 times as many units in Europe as the original Xbox had sold.

In Japan, the Xbox 360 has sold 1.64 Million units. The original Xbox sold 530,000 units. The 360 has sold over 3 times as many units in Japan as the original Xbox had sold.

In North America, the Xbox 360 has sold 42.7 Million units. The original Xbox sold 15.7 Million units.. By the end of the generation, the 360 will have sold 3 times as many units in North America as the original Xbox sold.

Areas outside of the main 3 markets, the Xbox 360 has sold 7.4 Million units. The original Xbox sold 1.2 Million units. Thats an increase of over 6 times the original Xbox outside of America, Europe and Japan.

Overall, the Xbox 360 has sold 3 times more units than the Xbox. The huge increases havent been exclusive to America and the UK. Its been a worldwide boost. The Xbox brand is now a serious brand in the videogame market. Its maintaining 

The 360 sells "bad" in Spain because it is a Sony dominated market. Its loyal. Sony put a fairly big focus on Spain, Portugal and in general anywhere that speaks Portugese and Spanish. The Kinect impact also wasnt felt as strong in many countries at the time of release. It only supported 3 languages - "English, Japanese and Mexican". Yes. Mexican, not Spanish. I shit you not. The lack of French and German support also really hindered the launch of Kinect in Europe, and as we know Kinect has been key to the 360's success from 2010 onwards.