50Million lifetimes sales in not a misfire. If it can sell that much and not have $1Billion RROD fiasco I think MS will call a successful gen.
| gergroy said: I don't know, I think microsoft can still pull it out (no pun here folks!). It's still pretty early, perceptions can shift. Especially if they are still shooting for a 10 year life cycle. Biggest problem the xbox one had/has was their leadership team. Mattrick was a joke, he deserves to be at zynga, not head of xbox. He was nothing but a train wreck as the head of xbox and his leadership during a console transition can be considered nothing less than a nightmare. However, Microsoft has done a lot to rectify the issues Mattrick left them. In time, with some big hitters like Halo, they can at least pull even in NA and UK. Europe may be a lost cause. However, they could still make some gains in emerging markets like China, South America, etc. It's not a completely lost cause for Microsoft, I still think they can get close to what the 360 sold, 70 million or so... |
Something that annoys me is people keep saying "I don't know, I wouldn't count MS out yet!" and then they give no reason for why we shouldn't. I am not singling you out, and I am not necessarily saying we should 100% forget Xbox already, but seriously why shouldn't we.
Let's have this discussion people! Forget marking BS from both sides! The Xbox One is a little more than half as strong as the PS4, MS has way fewer first party studios and IP's than Sony, and the Playstation brand has more staying power. How in the hell could MS dig themeselves out of this hole?
Prediction for console Lifetime sales:
Wii:100-120 million, PS3:80-110 million, 360:70-100 million
[Prediction Made 11/5/2009]
3DS: 65m, PSV: 22m, Wii U: 18-22m, PS4: 80-120m, X1: 35-55m
I gauruntee the PS5 comes out after only 5-6 years after the launch of the PS4.
[Prediction Made 6/18/2014]
Jereel Hunter said:
Yep, up to a 3% chance from 1%. Absolutely nothing other than pulled-from-their-rear numbers supports this prediction. It's ahead of the start the PS3 had, and by a company that isn't deep in the red, year over year. The X1 is selling well behind the PS4, but it's still sold very well, thus far. Once it's flagship titles start releasing, there's no reason to think it won't recover. But I'm glad people are making these predictions immediately before any sales data from the price drop. That way we can potentially see these "doom" threads crash and burn almost immediately. |
And how do you know that your 1% to 3% figure is not an axample of the bolded? I didn't even mention any numbers at all. You literally just doubly contradicted yourself.
| pokoko said: With regards to the 360, the one thing many people discount is that one year lead. That had a profound impact on last gen. Microsoft killing the original Xbox early was well worth it. Even then, people forget that the PS3 was the better selling console during most of its lifetime. It had a much higher sales rate. THAT is why I always questioned the general consensus that the "Xbox 720" would win this gen hands-down and why I always responded with the fact that Playstation is a bigger brand than Xbox. Now, as far as the Xbox One, it will be interesting to see how well Microsoft rebounds. Honestly, they've done quite well so far, though that does make me wonder how they could have screwed up so badly in the first place. If the XO never fully recovers, though, then I think we'd have to judge this as one of the worst console launches in history. That would make it worse than the PS3 by default, which did ultimately recover pretty well. It might even challenge for the top spot, depending on how you view the Wii U. |
err...the Wii U launch was FAR worse than the XBO launch in terms of sales. XBO is selling decent. When Halo MCC drops expect sales to increase and when Halo 5 drops expect the people still clinging to the 360 to switch.
I don't think you realize that there are still millions that have not upgraded from last gen.
Aura7541 said:
And how do you know that your 1% to 3% figure is not an axample of the bolded? I didn't even mention any numbers at all. You literally just doubly contradicted yourself. |
The point was, there's virtually no chance of this happening, and any increased likelihood is incredibly marginal.
| Jereel Hunter said: Yep, up to a 3% chance from 1%. Absolutely nothing other than pulled-from-their-rear numbers supports this prediction. It's ahead of the start the PS3 had, and by a company that isn't deep in the red, year over year. The X1 is selling well behind the PS4, but it's still sold very well, thus far. Once it's flagship titles start releasing, there's no reason to think it won't recover. But I'm glad people are making these predictions immediately before any sales data from the price drop. That way we can potentially see these "doom" threads crash and burn almost immediately. |
No the X1 is not selling very well. People need to be honest about its sales.
Yes the flagships, as if PS4 does not have its own and more of them.
| Mystro-Sama said: I think it will do better than the 360 :P |
Won't even touch it. Won't be on the market as long as the 360. It isn't the market leader and it won't catch a second wind with kinect
Eddie_Raja said:
Something that annoys me is people keep saying "I don't know, I wouldn't count MS out yet!" and then they give no reason for why we shouldn't. I am not singling you out, and I am not necessarily saying we should 100% forget Xbox already, but seriously why shouldn't we. Let's have this discussion people! Forget marking BS from both sides! The Xbox One is a little more than half as strong as the PS4, MS has way fewer first party studios and IP's than Sony, and the Playstation brand has more staying power. How in the hell could MS dig themeselves out of this hole? |
The answers why we shouldn't, should be obvious. This is a profitable part of Microsoft, a company with almost limitless resources. Why would a profitable product, on decent track, by a AAA company be counted out? The X1 is in a way better position than the PS3 was. It was a company who's stock had been in freefall for years, was in the red constantly, and was billions in the hole as a product, and receiving similar poor sales. It recovered from a much worse position than the X1 is in at present. Especially since MS could absolutely afford to tank the price, if necessary to keep the brand alive. Sony would have a tough time following suit.
I just wanna say one thing about all this. Last gen was reeeeally freakin' long. Crazy long. Does anyone expect this gen to be shorter? I'd bet at least MS and Sony will try and push this gen even longer.
Before we get all these (And I mean about all the consoles. Especially Nintendo/MS though..) ridiculous, "Lol 30M lifetime tops rolfmao worst flop ever", think about how much time they will have to get high sales.
Console gaming isnt dead, and there are a lot of strong forces in the industry that will keep it alive for a long time.
| Jereel Hunter said: "but it was is things No one actualy asked for from a gaming console." No, many of it's planned features were things people asked for... Most people weren't ready for what that entailed, however. "Cloud gaming? yes please. Oh wait, in order for a machine built for cloud based gaming? I have to always be online??? WTF???" "It will struggle mightly to even achice half the sales 360 did." It's on better pace than the PS3 was. Did it struggle in the long run? It's doing fine, just not as fine as the PS4. Xbox's initial misteps were, granted - mismarketting. All of it's awesome features were easily painted as restrictions by the competition. And changing it's focus greatly limited some potential. (i.e. A system always connected can offload to the cloud any time, and can have games that function requiring the cloud. A non connected console can't) Ultimately, they swung for the fences, while Sony doubled down on consumer ignorance. And if there's one thing history teaches us, that's the safest bet. |
Bolded is not true, and is a complete exaggeration of the point.
MS wanted to give gamers what they wanted, but only in the way MS saw profit to be made.
There was no reason to tie PHYSICAL OWNERSHIP to a digital ownership. MS controlled everything! And if you wanted to do a trade-in, you had to do it at an authorized retailer who had integrated MS' new retailer Azure system INTO their retail sales software, and MS would get a cut! There was no reason to require MS to be paid for trade-ins at gamestop for used games. It would only increase consumer costs, or hurt gamestop.
Fact: There was NO way to trade your disc-based games that you physically own on ebay or any other marketplace. MS got a cut of every used sale because it HAD to be done through Azure at an authorized retailer. Look it up. This isn't FUD. There was no reason for this.
Fact: You couldn't play your disc-based games without an online check-in. A certain someone was even fired for mocking people about being always online. Yet somehow steam is able to allow offline play of digital games. MS couldn't do it WITH physical discs. Funny.
Fact: You could not play your disc game on a friend's xb1. There were literally arguments defending this saying "oh I'll just bring my xb1 to my friend's house, big deal". Or "I can if I log-in with my profile", yet if you let a friend borrow game A and you wanted to play game B, you physically could not play different games at the same time on different xb1s, because you could not use the same login at two places at once. It's like "*ring ring* Hey bill, it's me, I let you borrow halo, but I want to play fifa now, so can you please log out of my account. I'll text you when I'm done".
Fact: The family share has literally NEVER EVER BEEN FULLY EXPLAINED. EVER. IN HISTORY.
There were no features that had to be done the way MS wanted to do them. And we know this because most of them are already done, a better way, by their competition. MS just decided what the most profitable way was, and made all their decisions based on that. That's not a terrible way to make money, but it's also important to wonder whether a consumer will actually support that. They did not.
Sony gave gamers what they wanted. MS tried to take physical ownership away from gamers.
That is what happened.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
