Holy shit... I didn't even realize that they basically dropped the price $150 since launch...
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Microsoft FY2015 Q4: 1.4M 360+XBO Shipped
- Thread starter ZhugeEX
- Start date
Holy shit... I didn't even realize that they basically dropped the price $150 since launch...
That was a combination of launching early and Sony fucking up, Xbox 360 didn't exactly come out of the gates guns blazing and Sony's "Giant enemy crab" conference and losing third party exclusive games left and right told the public which way the wind was blowing, and despite the lead the Xbox 360 had the Wii got to 10m first.
I personally don't think Xbox launching first will have the same effect, not in this climate.
Forcing Kinect at launch cost them so much. If they had two bundles at launch, one without Kinect at $399 they would probably have sold a lot more. If they had BC at launch it would have been even more attractive. Their priorities were definitely out of order betting everything on Kinect and TV first.
I think they really need to continue focusing on migrating 360 users. Offer another 360 trade-in upgrade this holiday when BC launches. Maybe the trade-in knocks $100 -$150 off any bundle. If they couple that with game bundles already at $349 then people could get a Xbox One with games for around $200-250. They could probably move several million more units this holiday.
I'm still surprised MS hasn't included the EA Access subscription in a bundle for the first year. Getting a Xbox One with that many free games at once is a killer deal. If they could somehow add some Xbox 360 games to the vault to use BC it would be even better.
SEGAvangelist
Member
Technically it's $50. They created a new SKU without Kinect to get it down $100. But yes, $150 less to have an Xbox One.
StealthGoblin
Banned
Numbers aren't all that great really. Shows to me that the Xbox One is still struggling on a worldwide level.
I'm expecting them to have a great Xmas but I don't think the gap will close if Sony have a price cut.
I'm expecting them to have a great Xmas but I don't think the gap will close if Sony have a price cut.
despite the lead the Xbox 360 had the Wii got to 10m first.
You sure about that? The Xbox 360 shipped 10 million worldwide at the same time the Wii launched.
Just reviewed the IDG 34 million sold-through as of April 30th, 2015 estimate thread.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1048022
34m split was PS4 21.8M (minimum) Xbox One 12.2M (maximum)
Xbox would have needed to sell 800k worldwide for May/June. (very unlikely)
Even if they did, that would mean there is still a 1 million consoles sitting on shelves. (also unlikely)
14M shipped is definitely a stretch.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1048022
34m split was PS4 21.8M (minimum) Xbox One 12.2M (maximum)
Xbox would have needed to sell 800k worldwide for May/June. (very unlikely)
Even if they did, that would mean there is still a 1 million consoles sitting on shelves. (also unlikely)
14M shipped is definitely a stretch.
You just have to bring this up every time don't you.
Every single thread I post you have to come in and say how the Xbox One only sells in the US so it's "unlikely" they sell anything anywhere else.
I've proven multiple times that you don't know what you're talking about but you continue to come in and post in my threads. Give it a rest.
Also you've just made up those splits. Also perhaps you didn't see I'm the OP of that thread as well. I very much know what data is publicly available.
Go review the thread
21.8M was PS4's minimum which leave room for only 12.2M maximum for Xbox One sold through.
you also said that Xbox One sold through was 12M before the end of 2014
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=160773817&postcount=2454
Please stop attacking people because they have the audacity to question your numbers
Mate, I don't want to turn this thread into an argument like you did with some of my other threads before. Clearly you have something against me as you try to say I'm wrong about everything that puts Microsoft in any sort of positive light. (When arguably the stuff I've posted here has shown Microsoft to not be too positive)
Firstly, that post you quoted is talking about sell in. I seem to recall this is something you struggle to differentiate with from our past conversation. So again, just like before you're twisting my words.
Secondly you've got something against me because no matter what I say you refer to banned websites like Chartz to back up your points, accuse Microsoft of lying, twist my words to a different meaning, make up your own numbers in order to prove a point and keep posting in any thread I make.
Just give it a rest. Go outside or something. You've been banned like 4 times or something for having arguments with me before and not being able to back up any of your claims/slandering me.
Also wtf....? Why are you saying it must be lower than 14 million but you yourself say it's higher.
That is why I reviewed the IDG thread. I was under the assumption that GAF thought the split for Xbox One was 12.7M
As for the bolded above, if you want to dispute sales, then let's dispute sales. But stop trying to use this underhanded tactic in an attempt to somehow discredit me just so you don't have to explain your numbers. You are moving the attention away from what is actually being discussed.
Let's be honest here, there is no way you know what i was banned for. Also what you're implying is that anyone who disagrees with your numbers is subsequently banned.
Now if you followed the IDG thread you will see that the consensus was:
PS4 21.8 minimum
Xbox One 12.2 maximum
Explain why this is wrong without resorting to character deformation.
I saw exactly one person give those numbers. And someone say they were similar to his numbers. That's not a consensus. If you're using that 1 thread as a basis, it seems you're on very shaky ground.
IDG 34 million estimate was the most current sold-through we received as far as I am aware of. I said it was a consensus meaning there were no other numbers to compare it to and the number wasn't disputed.
It was sold through so why wouldn't I use that as a basis for my argument?
provide link to post. I may have overlooked it. Are you referring to the Xbox One 12.5M?
The split was highly disputed though. You gave numbers that were in dispute as facts. In a sales thread. That is not right.
fallingdove
Member
I can appreciate that your interpretation of those actions may qualify the term turnaround but the way you see the world doesn't automatically give you a pass to be a condescending dick nor does it make your opinion any more valid than mine.
But let's dive into your thoughts on the matter since you chose to call me out.
-'focusing the Xbox on games' - how does one objectively quantify this. Does the Xbox One have a higher quantity of games with higher quality since Phil took over?
- 'Removing Kinect' - this might contribute to a Sales turnaround, but it does absolutely nothing for me as an Xbox owner. In fact, because I was an early adopter, I own a worthless piece of tech that I paid for. A turn around here (in my mind) would have been in delivering compelling content for Kinect owners while de prioritizing the device overall. not getting rid of it entirely to allow for a $150+ price cut.
- 'Monthly system updates' turns around what exactly? I like the monthly updates, but my experience with the Xbox One isn't significantly better because these exist and I surely wouldn't define the policy as a component of a turn around.
- 'Addressing Xbox user feedback requests' - so because of Phil, team Xbox has started to listen to user feedback where they hadn't previously? Serious question as I haven't felt the need to provide feedback directly to Microsoft for the many years I have owned their systems.
-'Spencer' just being generally favored among Xbox fans' - this constitutes a turn around?
I feel like the "turn-around" really ties back to a Microsoft e3 press conference format change and the removal of Kinect; but when I look at objective evidence, there isn't much that is being done today that wouldn't have been done had Microsoft's original platform strategy rolled forward. And let's be honest, Phil wasn't the only one involved with the decision to change the 'always online' direction of Xbox One.
You took what 1 person said and claimed it was a consensus? And you want proof from me? Here, this proves it was not a consensus.
I like what you did there. You know they were under the assumption that the report was from the beginning of April.
Cosmic later clarified that that the report tracked until April 30th, 2015
Welfare went on later to address Allan's post.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=164466333&postcount=219
Neither post contradicted ethomaz's analysis
Also that's the 12.5M I inquired about earlier that you might have been referring to.
Then there is this...
Neither post agrees with it either. And Welfares post to me reads that 13 million at the end of April makes sense.
The fact that Ethomaz gave an estimate does not make it a consensus. Yet you came into this thread and stated it as fact. There is a large difference of quoting numbers and a split as a consensus versus stating one persons guess as a consensus.
See. I knew this thread would just turn into a back and forth once death showed up.
Anyway, just to give him what he wants I've just typed up a quick bit of info on how someone can come to the 14m figure just using all publicly available data.
I'm not saying this is the method I used as I have my own spreadsheets + work with other data and models as well. This is just something I put together now in order to explain in simple terms-
Anyway, just to give him what he wants I've just typed up a quick bit of info on how someone can come to the 14m figure just using all publicly available data.
I'm not saying this is the method I used as I have my own spreadsheets + work with other data and models as well. This is just something I put together now in order to explain in simple terms-
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
I don't think the X1 will sell world-wide like the PS3 did. MS can't rely on Europe and Asia the same way the PS3 could.
Xbone also can't relly on Japan where PS3 sold ~10M.
Might have been the US only, I remember the quote with the "first to 10m wins" and the hilarious ice skating gif where Nintendo got over the finish line from behind while Sony and MS trip each other up on the last turn.
Welfare
Member
The Xbox 360 still got to 10 million in the US first, with the Wii getting there 1 month later.
My responses in line.
BC is still one of the strangest decisions to push forward this late in a console's life. They must have seen the conversion rate of 360 users to PS4 went into panic mode. BC isn't something we've been asking for, it's a play at user conversion.
It's an interesting choice, but the video game hardware industry is all about momentum. MS tied their shoelaces together before the races even begun in 2013. =(
At this point, their #1 priority isn't to be the "#1 console this gen", but to prove to MS that they shouldn't abandon the games industry.
As Welfare says-
https://news.microsoft.com/2008/05/...million-in-u-s-console-sales-this-generation/
Xbox 360 at 10 million install base in the US as of April 2008.
The Wii hit 1 month later in May and by June because the cumulative leader in the US.
http://www.engadget.com/2008/07/17/npd-wii-hits-10-9m-us-sales-becomes-console-leader/
Worldwide the Xbox 360 shipped 10 million units before the end of 2006 to "win the console war"in response to Sony's famous "Console war is over" from the PS2 era.
Welfare
Member
MS are probably expecting a large migration from last gen to the current gen with all the "exclusive" games only coming to the current gen, like Battlefront, Fallout 4, Halo 5, what's going to be the definitive versions of Tomb Raider and Black Ops 3 (in relation to old consoles), and more.
With BC, they can get these gamers that were on the 360 to look at the Xbox One this holiday, "Hey look here! Not only do you get these amazing games, but you can play your 360 games as well!"
We are going to see price wars this holiday with lots of game bundles, so in the midst of it all, BC could get someone to lean towards the Xbox One. It won't be THE factor, but it will be a factor.
StealthGoblin
Banned
If I were Microsoft I'd do a deal with Gamestop to get them to stick 'Play me on Xbox One too' stickers on the used/new 360 games that are compatible with Xbox One.
a) Microsoft will convert more gamers
b) Gamestop will sell more games.
I'll take a cheque Microsoft.
What's interesting about BC is that it is the number one requested feature by far on Xbox User Feedback. If you look at the top feature or game requests you can see they've worked on a lot of them in one way or another.
I think the choice of theirs to work on it has a lot to do with creating good will with the Xbox community, proving they are listening.
I don't think Phil alone enacted it. It's part of a much bigger Nadella-driven initiative where he wants people to go from using Windows, to choosing Windows, to loving Windows. They have to be crowd pleasers to do that.
I think if Sony continues to do this well with PS4, and MSmtries to shortcut the generation and launch XB2 early, Sony could pull a dreamcast spoiler party and tease the PS5 and ask people to wait, and they would.
slavesnyder
Member
That's smart.
Even if MS gets no penny from the game sales this would be nice advertising.
Didn't they try to do this when they were doing just as well with the PS2? The whole "the next generation starts when we say" talk? They lost a lot of ground with 360 launching a year early.
Because "next generation starts when we say it does" worked out so well for PS3?
Let's be honest with each other and acknowledge that interactive entertainment is hit based and disruptions can come from anywhere.
slavesnyder
Member
The industry was ready and willing. And the graphical jump from old to new gen was huge.
Don't know if 3rd party would be happy to leave this gen too early. Games are more costly than ever, and splitting production for the sake of one new console seems a risky investment.
Only thing that would ease the jump would be a new feature like AR/VR done right.
joecanada
Member
I suspect (with a small tinfoil hat on) that MS was hell bent on getting everyone on kinect because they saw a chance for tons of ad revenue and consumer data tracking. If you wanted to sell new advertising space or data to companies what could possibly be better than ...
"yes it listens and records the user, tracks what they do , what they say, what they play, their habits, their friends, everything.
not unlike a Google phone by the way , but still I don't see any groundbreaking software that they introduced with it, it just looked like one big tracking device to me. If they released it with full no motion games AAA variety and stuff maybe people would have been apt to buy it. But as it was, it makes no sense to actually pay for.
Perhaps that was part of it.
I believe that the early success of Kinect and how it gave 360 its second wind went to their head, as well as stats like 40% of 360 usage was non-game fueled the drive for TV functionality as a primary feature. The two combined helped fulfill the vision you described of gathering more user data and more personalized advertising.
What I think they missed was how people grew tired of Kinect's handful of tricks and that the non-game usage was so high because it was convenient, not because it was so special that it would sell systems. We weren't crazy about Kinect and we could very easily go without the TV functionality. And somehow they decided to integrate with the cable box despite crystal clear reports showing people leaving cable.
It's like they were ignoring how people felt and even ignored market trends, so they missed the big picture. Had they been tuned in they would have realized people want new IP, they want Rare to stop working on Kinect games and get back to their old IP, that people actually like voice commands but want them without Kinect, that TV isn't high on the list of reasons to buy a $500 console, etc.
Wow that post was long and informative. So you must have a ball park number for sold-through if 14M is the bare minimum? 13M? 13.1M?
Here is my understanding, indulge me:
20.2M (hard sell-through number) as March 1st, 2015.
At that time cumulative sales for ps4 in the US were ~7.8M and Japan was ~1.1M
This would give us a combined ~8.9M for both US/JPN which only makes up 44% on ps4's install base
This mean that ROTW makes up 56% of ps4 install base: base line of my argument
From March 1st to May 2nd US + JPN sold 756k alone (756k is ~44% of 1.7M) Now saying the ROTW won't make up 56% difference with the launch of Bloodborne is a little outlandish.
Add 1.7M to 20.2M and you are just shy of 22M. Now this is under the assumption PS4 sales trend remained the same for March/April.
So my ,and other's, assumption that ps4 was probably around 21.8M is mathematically feasible.
This is an approximation of course. Now where is the flaw in that logic
Sources: GAF sales archive/ Math/ Eurogamer
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...reater-than-90-per-cent-in-continental-europe
The ship for backwards compatibility having an impact this console generation has already sailed. Maybe it would have been a big deal around launch. Now that both systems have games coming out on a regular basis, I see it as not much more that a chip to use in marketing and fanboy wars.
I agree. Only a small minority of people will care about playing their old Xbox 360 games on the new Xbox console.
The point is these are all estimations. You can't go around and use these as facts to prove your point. It's highly likely that the XB1 sold in figures is ~14 million. Period.
I wanted to buy and Xbox one for the BC, but then I saw it was only In selected titles. In the end when I put in on a weight spending 399$ for bc didn't make much sense, its cheaper to buy a PS3/360. So yea, its more of a bullet point now, the only people that are gonna benefit are the ones that already bought an xbone at lunch and sold their last gen console or it broke.
They remove esram from the box and they have a PC already. Devs could create a config profile specific to the new box and there would be next to no porting costs. Especially if they use the exact same DX12 api with no deviation. Allows for the simplicity of a console for those wanting that and the ease of deployment for devs.
"For 14M shipped to make sense, Xbox One's sold through would have to be _________."
Fill in the blank with a number, and then a legitimate discussion can be had. Have a good night GAF
Whilst these numbers are related.
They are also very much unrelated.
Just look at the Xbox 360 during 2006 or look at BlackBerry now, or perhaps the Dreamcast.
My point is that shipments don't always equate to a certain amount being sold through. Just ask Nintendo that. I'm sure you remember they ended up having a minus number in europe one quarter because they over shipped.
Even the PS4 had around 1.4 million in channel at the end of last year which is a lot compared to the 300,000 units they had in channel end of 2013.
There are so many factors at play between sell in and sell through.
Welfare
Member
Shipped numbers are at or above 14 million. Sell through is somewhere below that but above 10.5 million.
Leave it at that. If we get a sell through number, we'll get it. Getting a near precise number is sorta worthless when we already have a pretty good range, and we'll be going back and forth trying to see which guess is "right".
Leave it at that. If we get a sell through number, we'll get it. Getting a near precise number is sorta worthless when we already have a pretty good range, and we'll be going back and forth trying to see which guess is "right".
From what I remember, people were willing to wait.
Then the $599 price point was announced.
Never before or since have I seen anticipation turn into revulsion and dread so fast...
slavesnyder
Member
Nevertheless, even if you safe on the development side, you have to split production, QA, manufacturing, marketing etc.
Plus, I am sure the next next gen would like to have certain extras and additions.
You would not want to have the same game as on PS4, would you?
The likely scenario would be that the Win10 store would be completely common between a new box they make and PCs. Devs would deploy one place. They are already there basically, but for the next round it will be 100% all titles. This means dev time, qa, etc for pc and next box are basically completely shared. This also opens up the capability to do a SteamBox sort of thing where other manufacturers can create Xbox hardware. Which is where MS is heading, being a platform and services company.