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

Forums - Gaming - (Edited) Using Amazon isn't entirely accurate to judge NPD sales. Here's why...

SWORDF1SH on 17 February 2015
Protendo said:
SWORDF1SH said:
Protendo said:
SWORDF1SH said:

Yes I agree with you about the trying to use the Amazon sales ranking to distinguish the amount of sales between each. But there is logic to what I'm saying. Maybe I didn't explain well in OP but read some of the other comments.

There is no logic trying to distinguish gap size by rank. No matter how you justify it. As someone with a Statistics background, the thought makes me cringe.

Also, Amazon has unequal prices depending on the platform fairly frequently. Just look at Far Cry 4 right now. Just a few hours ago Far Cry 4 was cheaper on the Xbox One by $10. Last month GT4 was cheaper on the PS4 by $10. With slickdeals.com these $10 discounts for one version get a lot of traction. There have been instances where Xbox One software sales showed higher on Amazon ranking than they did on NPD, it didn't happen in the chart you posted, but it has happened.

Yes I agree. I've said so and in several posts.

You need to read what I've written when I say my theory has logic. I wasn't referring the gap size by rank when I'm talking about my theory having logic.

Data on Amazon is offset in favour of PS4 for the following reason; Software - X1 wins on Amazon it always wins on NPD. X1 wins on NPD, a lot of the time PS4 still wins on Amazon. Get you head around that fact. That is a clear trend. Yes I understand that sales do happen but that doesn't effect the overal theory. In fact if anything it could go against my theory and I expect if a strong enough X1 Amazon exclusive deal comes along, we might see the first game to go against my theory. Even then that doesn't disprove it. You get abnormal results when other factors come into play. But apples for apples comparison, I believe my theory will stand. Like I said 15 months of software or hardware data hasn't disproven my theory. That a lot of software thats been released.

Out of curiosity, what statistics background do you have?


That's not how this works.  You can't derive a logical theory out of something that defies logic. 

Amazon has ranked Xbox One above PS4 on multiple occasions which counter NPD. While Microsoft has retail-specific sales that are superior to amazon, software sales are shifted as a result of people buying the Xbox One where there is a better deal and picking up games for their new console. There are 2 facts that counter your argument. 

I double-majored in computer forensics/statistics. I use statistics on a daily basis.

Somebody with some knowledge on statistics. Do you mind if I probe you further on my theory? I believe there is some logic in what I'm saying.

I do understand what you're saying about MS having more deals at other places but this backs up my claim that Amazon data is offset in favour of PS4.

Also I've expanded a little on what I mean in another post. I'll copy and paste.

"Amazon is a good representation, I do not deny that but I'm just saying it's slightly offset (maybe for reasons in OP and discussed already). If PS fans do indeed prefer to buy on Amazon, let's say for argument sake, 50% of PS fans buy from amazon and 45% of xbox fans but from amazon. A games sell 110k on X1 and the equivalent game sells 100k on on PS4. On NPD it will show the X1 ahead. On amazon the PS4 version would of sold 50k while the X1 version would of sold 49.5k and be lower ranked. So it can sometimes show PS4 lead on Amazon but be behind on NPD but because of the way it's offset, it will hardly happen the other way around."

Let me know what you think.



Around the Network
Dr.Henry_Killinger on 17 February 2015
SWORDF1SH said:

 

 

Dr.Henry_Killinger said:

If you are going to engage in debate, the first thing you should do is make sure you understand both sides.

The fact that you mistook my response as a counterargument proves that you did not understand. A counterargument requires an argument.
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:

You gave a theory, I countered.

Would you prefer if I call it countertheory??

Then I read the next bit where you say I'm saying 1+1=3 and stopped reading. I can see where this is going. It will be a post full of seeing it from one way, ignoring important fact, misunderstanding and twisting to suit you.

We will leave it at that.

So then you admit that you refuse to understand on the grounds that you don't. I love that line "stopped reading". You claim to wish to engage in debate and yet you "stop reading" anything that might contradict you. Even if it is just a matter of faulty logic. Lucky for you that you keep your "arguments" out of actual debate and discussion, they'd get shot down in an instant.

It would be funny if it weren't so unfortunate, here I am explaining to you your mistakes and you refuse to comprehend them on the basis that you do not understand them.

The greatest irony is that you say "It will be a post full of seeing it from one way, ignoring important fact, misunderstanding and twisting to suit you." when this is EXACTLY what you are doing.

You can only see my posts, from your way.

You are ignoring the important facts about statistics, actual logic, actual reason.

You are misunderstanding and twisting, so that instead actually going back revaluating and thinking, you can just repeat the same nonsense but louder.

The worst part is when your comprehension is put into such question, I'm not even sure you even fathom your errors. What a shame.



In this day and age, with the Internet, ignorance is a choice! And they're still choosing Ignorance! - Dr. Filthy Frank

SWORDF1SH on 17 February 2015
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:

So then you admit that you refuse to understand on the grounds that you don't. I love that line "stopped reading". You claim to wish to engage in debate and yet you "stop reading" anything that might contradict you. Even if it is just a matter of faulty logic. Lucky for you that you keep your "arguments" out of actual debate and discussion, they'd get shot down in an instant.

It would be funny if it weren't so unfortunate, here I am explaining to you your mistakes and you refuse to comprehend them on the basis that you do not understand them.

The greatest irony is that you say "It will be a post full of seeing it from one way, ignoring important fact, misunderstanding and twisting to suit you." when this is EXACTLY what you are doing.

You can only see my posts, from your way.

You are ignoring the important facts about statistics, actual logic, actual reason.

You are misunderstanding and twisting, so that instead actually going back revaluating and thinking, you can just repeat the same nonsense but louder.

The worst part is when your comprehension is put into such question, I'm not even sure you even fathom your errors. What a shame.

I think I explained why I haven't or will not read your post. Pretty much the first thing you said was

"If you say:

1+1= 3 and so 3 blah blah blah.

I'm saying:

1 + 1 does not equal 3"

You're saying that your one track mind is right and I'm wrong and there is no other outcome. Not going any further into with you. What's the point? You haven't come here open minded since your first post. What a shame!



Dr.Henry_Killinger on 17 February 2015
SWORDF1SH said:
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:

So then you admit that you refuse to understand on the grounds that you don't. I love that line "stopped reading". You claim to wish to engage in debate and yet you "stop reading" anything that might contradict you. Even if it is just a matter of faulty logic. Lucky for you that you keep your "arguments" out of actual debate and discussion, they'd get shot down in an instant.

It would be funny if it weren't so unfortunate, here I am explaining to you your mistakes and you refuse to comprehend them on the basis that you do not understand them.

The greatest irony is that you say "It will be a post full of seeing it from one way, ignoring important fact, misunderstanding and twisting to suit you." when this is EXACTLY what you are doing.

You can only see my posts, from your way.

You are ignoring the important facts about statistics, actual logic, actual reason.

You are misunderstanding and twisting, so that instead actually going back revaluating and thinking, you can just repeat the same nonsense but louder.

The worst part is when your comprehension is put into such question, I'm not even sure you even fathom your errors. What a shame.

 

I think I explained why I haven't or will not read your post. Pretty much the first thing you said was

"If you say:

1+1= 3 and so 3 blah blah blah.

I'm saying:

1 + 1 does not equal 3"

You're saying that your one track mind is right and I'm wrong and there is no other outcome. Not going any further into with you. What's the point? You haven't come here open minded since your first post. What a shame!

I never said your conclusion was wrong, only your method. You keep calling me closed minded and one tracked, but your the one being closed minded about the possibility of an error in your reasoning. Its not that complicated. 

You claim to be open minded, but you refuse to understand me because you believe me to be closed minded. I don't think you know what open minded  means.



In this day and age, with the Internet, ignorance is a choice! And they're still choosing Ignorance! - Dr. Filthy Frank

SWORDF1SH on 17 February 2015
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:
SWORDF1SH said:

 

I think I explained why I haven't or will not read your post. Pretty much the first thing you said was

"If you say:

1+1= 3 and so 3 blah blah blah.

I'm saying:

1 + 1 does not equal 3"

You're saying that your one track mind is right and I'm wrong and there is no other outcome. Not going any further into with you. What's the point? You haven't come here open minded since your first post. What a shame!

I never said your conclusion was wrong, only your method. You keep calling me closed minded and one tracked, but your the one being closed minded about the possibility of an error in your reasoning. Its not that complicated. 

You claim to be open minded, but you refuse to understand me because you believe me to be closed minded. I don't think you know what open minded  means.

Have no been reading my replies to other people?

It seems like you do not want to discuss anything just shut it down. I'm not proposing an outrageous theory here and you seem to be aggressively trampling all over my theory instead of trying do discuss anything. I think it might of got off on the wrong foot. You seemed to concentate heavily on subjective stuff I wrote and I didn't explain the facts or data properly.  I will update the OP anyway.

If you want to discuss anything you will have to start with me again. So far from discussing with a few people I will tell you all my amendments to my theory and what points I discovered and/or I didn't explain well or didn't elaborate enough on.

The theory

Amazon data is offset in PS4s favour.

Reason for theory

Sofware sales between NPD and Amazon showed that Amazon monthly ranking had the PS4 version of numerous amounts of games ahead  while NPD revealed the X1 version winning. It never, not once, showed the opposite since the launch of both consoles. Also, even though Amazon and NPD matched winners of hardware for every month, it doesn't do against the theory. But on the hardware frount it's too weak to use until we have a PS4 winning hardware on Amazon with NPD showing that the X1 won.

Explanation of how data being offset can show conflicting results in favour of one platform

(copy and paste from other reply) I do not deny that but I'm just saying it's slightly offset (maybe for reasons in OP and discussed already). If PS fans do indeed prefer to buy on Amazon, let's say for argument sake, 50% of PS fans buy from amazon and 45% of xbox fans but from amazon. A games sell 110k on X1 and the equivalent game sells 100k on on PS4. On NPD it will show the X1 ahead. On amazon the PS4 version would of sold 50k while the X1 version would of sold 49.5k and be lower ranked. So it can sometimes show PS4 lead on Amazon but be behind on NPD but because of the way it's offset, it will hardly happen the other way around.

Then you need to reread because I've already said this in my response to you, you DO NOT have the data to make the conclusion, so the only thing you can conclude is that there is a correlation between Amazon Rank and NPD.

To answer your reply, my data used is the conflicting results between Amazon and NPD, I've explained to you in other replies (again in this post under reason for theory)

Why is this happening?

Originally I thought it could be to do with average age of fanbase being different. Because the Xbox fanbase used to be a lot younger, chances are they still are. Is the shopping habbits different for younger gamers? Do they prefer brick and mortar shops? Do they prefer gaming specific online retailers? Teens less likely to have credit cards for online shopping? God knows! but I did think there was a link but not sure why. Someone mentioned about MS consistently having stronger X1 related deals outside of Amazon. Not sure that is true but reason like this is what can cause this offset in data on Amazon

DHK I'm trying my best to explain to you my theory, backed up with data used from NPD and Amazon