WOW...xbox360 has a 7.0 attach rate!!!?

I've made an argument trwice. It's not that hard to read. You can make unbacked claims about 360 owners constantly saying sales don't matter, so why can't I make claims that Wii owners only adopted the 'sales matter' vibe when their console of choice started dominating in said field?

Verge_6

Who said you can't make that claim? It happened when PS2 was winning in sales last gen. It's happening here when the Wii is winning in sales. I never made that counterclaim.

In fact, I'm a firm believer that sales are important and help to decide the winner of a gen. That's why I think NES, SNES, PS1, and PS2 are the winners of their respective gens because of sales. I haven't said that you can't make the claim that people have started using sales as if they suddenly mattered.

[QUOTE="excelR83"][QUOTE="neversummer75"][QUOTE="excelR83"]

Wow, what propaganda. It's a marketing pep rally from an XBox fansite (terms like "open up a new arena for game play" spring to mind). What did you expect to see?

I like that every single title listed at the bottom of the article aside from "Scene It" is available on the PS3.

neversummer75

Nice that you side step the point of the thread. We are talking about attach rate buddy. Can you say damage control? lol!!!!

I'm side-stepping it because I don't buy it. I'd like to know how they calculate their attach rate, and what they include in it. The 2 games that come with it? The 5 games bundled with the arcade unit? How is it a "record"? Which record did it break? Highest attach rate ever, highest attach rate in shortest timeframe, highest attach rate this gen?

That whole article sounds like it could be a memo from XBox PR department. "Keep up the good work guys!" It just sounds like marketing spiel to me, which is why I disregard it. It's kind of like the stickers at 360 demo kiosks that say "Play the greatest games lineup ever!" Am I to believe the 360's first year line-up is better than the lineups of the SNES, Genesis, N64, PS1, Dreamcast, PS2 line-ups over their entire lifespan? It just sounds like BS to me.

But anything that comes out of Sony or Nintendo websites are fact huh? Stop with the hate buddy and celebrate with the rest of us. This is a good thing for the gaming world.

:lol: "Good thing for the gaming world", what a bunch of hypocritical, sanctimonious baloney. Every time something good happens for some fanboys console, and he wants to pretend to take the higher ground, he pulls that "stop the hate, this is good for gaming" act. Such a cliche.

I didn't say that everything that comes out of Sony's PR department is fact either. They are a huge global corporation, they are as full of BS as anyone else is. I just happen to find their marketing strategy less repulsive than Microsoft's, but that's another tale for another day.

You are just assuming that I'm an ignorant fanboy because I'm skeptical that your Immaculately Conceived Godchild Console is selling an AVERAGE of 7 BLOODY GAMES to every Tom, Dick, and Jane that buys a 360 on the same day. I can see 7 games per total consoles sold if you include the ones bundled in, but if the numbers are supposed to suggest that each console rings out at the till with an AVERAGE of 7 games, meaning some people buy 1 and some people buy a ****load, I'm calling BS.

Yeah, yeah, good for MS, pat on the back and all that, but like I said, it sounds like a marketing pep talk, so I'm not frothing at the mouth over those numbers.

Man I knew the 360 moves software seem to always have games in the top 10, but having a attach rate of 7, that is insane.

[QUOTE="excelR83"][QUOTE="lowe0"]

[QUOTE="Ragnarok1051"]Lemmings and Sheep are out and about tonight.Zhengi

Seriously, though, what do you expect when the day brings more good news for Nintendo and MS and more bad news for Sony? Selling 7 games for each console out the door is just insane - I know some people that buy a console and only get 7 games for it, EVER. The "game of the month" phenomenon is alive and well on 360 - I know I go through 1-2 games a month on it, and I'm not the only one.

That's the thing though. The way they word it, it sounds like they are talking about the number of total games sold and total 360's sold and some sort of division. It's all so vague, which is why I don't give it much credence.

I work in a big retailer that sells a ton of consoles, and even big spenders aren't walking out with 7 games, there is absolutely no way that is the average of everyone that buys a console. That's saying that for every few people that walk out of a store with just Halo and Madden, there is some other guy walking out with a dozen games. That's just not happening. I want to know how they calculated that number before I get all excited about it.

This is how they do it.

First, they are counting games that are bundled in with the Xbox. This includes all the Forza 2 and Marvel (I belive it was this game) bundles. The Halo 3 bundle also counts. This inflates the numbers.

Secondly, the install base is not growing as fast. This is not to say they aren't selling anything. This increases the attach ratio. For example, in Japan, they've only sold 500k consoles, but the attach rate is about 5.6 or so. Those who have a console will continue to buy games. If there are no infusion of new console purchasers, then the attach rate will remain pretty high.

Lastly, they do have a user base that buys a lot of games. That does help the attach rate. However, if they had more casuals, the attach rate would fall. They haven't captured that market yet and it's the one they really want to capture.

One thing they don't count is arcade games. So if anyone says this, then they are wrong.

The Halo 3 Xbox doesn't actually include Halo 3. So that's not a bundle there. Also, you assume that people buy games in addition to Forza 2 and Marvel: UA, when they well might choose not to get other games when they get the console because those two games are already packed in.

The install base is still growing, especially in North America. Those seem to be the numbers this press release is concerned with, after all. The 360 sold a lot this holiday season, didn't it? All this shows is that people are buying games faster than they are buying consoles. And that's a good thing.

Microsoft makes money every time a game is sold. If they have a console with a userbase that buys lots of games (including third-party games), that is a good thing. It helps them make profits. And having a console with a high attach rate encourages third parties to continue to produce games for the 360, which should keep people interested in the console.

:lol: "Good thing for the gaming world", what a bunch of hypocritical, sanctimonious baloney. Every time something good happens for some fanboys console, and he wants to pretend to take the higher ground, he pulls that "stop the hate, this is good for gaming" act. Such a cliche.

I didn't say that everything that comes out of Sony's PR department is fact either. They are a huge global corporation, they are as full of BS as anyone else is. I just happen to find their marketing strategy less repulsive than Microsoft's, but that's another tale for another day.

You are just assuming that I'm an ignorant fanboy because I'm skeptical that your Immaculately Conceived Godchild Console is selling an AVERAGE of 7 BLOODY GAMES to every Tom, Dick, and Jane that buys a 360 on the same day. I can see 7 games per total consoles sold if you include the ones bundled in, but if the numbers are supposed to suggest that each console rings out at the till with an AVERAGE of 7 games, meaning some people buy 1 and some people buy a ****load, I'm calling BS.

Yeah, yeah, good for MS, pat on the back and all that, but like I said, it sounds like a marketing pep talk, so I'm not frothing at the mouth over those numbers.

excelR83

What's so hard to comprehend that some people actually buy games to play on a videogame system? Face reality, if people were actually buying games for the PS3, Sony wouldn't have to bundle their games on it.

[QUOTE="Verge_6"]

Not a single thread made by an MS fan stating that sales don't matter. And one thread doesn't count as evidence that the entire fanbase has such a mentality. You may accuse me of 'turning a blind eye', but maybe you should question whether you are in fact seeing things that aren't even there.

Zhengi

Hey, since you like looking at history, maybe you can do a search for other threads since there have been plenty of times that MS fanboys have attacked sales. Arguments such as:

"You can't play sales"

"Sales don't determine the best"

Etc.

Plenty of these arguments have been used. Like I said, I'm nobody's personal Google. I'm just too apathetic about doing any searching right now :)

Well, if these arguments are to be representative of all of the lemmings on this forum, are we to believe all of the "Sales are all that matter" arguments are representative of every sheep on this forum?

[QUOTE="Zhengi"]

This is how they do it.

First, they are counting games that are bundled in with the Xbox. This includes all the Forza 2 and Marvel (I belive it was this game) bundles. The Halo 3 bundle also counts. This inflates the numbers.

Secondly, the install base is not growing as fast. This is not to say they aren't selling anything. This increases the attach ratio. For example, in Japan, they've only sold 500k consoles, but the attach rate is about 5.6 or so. Those who have a console will continue to buy games. If there are no infusion of new console purchasers, then the attach rate will remain pretty high.

Lastly, they do have a user base that buys a lot of games. That does help the attach rate. However, if they had more casuals, the attach rate would fall. They haven't captured that market yet and it's the one they really want to capture.

One thing they don't count is arcade games. So if anyone says this, then they are wrong.

sonicmj1

The Halo 3 Xbox doesn't actually include Halo 3. So that's not a bundle there. Also, you assume that people buy games in addition to Forza 2 and Marvel: UA, when they well might choose not to get other games when they get the console because those two games are already packed in.

The install base is still growing, especially in North America. Those seem to be the numbers this press release is concerned with, after all. The 360 sold a lot this holiday season, didn't it? All this shows is that people are buying games faster than they are buying consoles. And that's a good thing.

Microsoft makes money every time a game is sold. If they have a console with a userbase that buys lots of games (including third-party games), that is a good thing. It helps them make profits. And having a console with a high attach rate encourages third parties to continue to produce games for the 360, which should keep people interested in the console.

Okay, I wasn't sure if Halo 3 came with the Halo edition. Thanks for the correction.

As for the bundled games, I'm not saying that peopel buy additional games to those that are included. Rather, I'm saying that MS counts those bundled games as being sold. So if they sell 1.3 million consoles in Dec., and assuming about 30% of them have the bundled games (I think it would be higher), that would mean an extra 780k combined sales for both games. That helps to keep the attach rate up.

The install base continues to grow in NA. I didn't say it didn't. However, the rate that it's growing at for the first half of the year was very slow as evidence by how very few consoles were moved from a month to month basis (according to NPD). During that time, it's obvious the install base isn't going to stop buying games. That keeps the attach rate high.

Last part, pretty irrelevant to how MS keeps its attach rate up. It's true they make money and third parties are making money, but I didn't argue against those points.

[QUOTE="Zhengi"][QUOTE="Verge_6"]

Not a single thread made by an MS fan stating that sales don't matter. And one thread doesn't count as evidence that the entire fanbase has such a mentality. You may accuse me of 'turning a blind eye', but maybe you should question whether you are in fact seeing things that aren't even there.

The_Game21x

Hey, since you like looking at history, maybe you can do a search for other threads since there have been plenty of times that MS fanboys have attacked sales. Arguments such as:

"You can't play sales"

"Sales don't determine the best"

Etc.

Plenty of these arguments have been used. Like I said, I'm nobody's personal Google. I'm just too apathetic about doing any searching right now :)

Well, if these arguments are to be representative of all of the lemmings on this forum, are we to believe all of the "Sales are all that matter" arguments are representative of every sheep on this forum?

You can go ahead and do it. No one is stopping you :)

[QUOTE="The_Game21x"]

[QUOTE="Zhengi"][QUOTE="Verge_6"]

Not a single thread made by an MS fan stating that sales don't matter. And one thread doesn't count as evidence that the entire fanbase has such a mentality. You may accuse me of 'turning a blind eye', but maybe you should question whether you are in fact seeing things that aren't even there.

Zhengi

Hey, since you like looking at history, maybe you can do a search for other threads since there have been plenty of times that MS fanboys have attacked sales. Arguments such as:

"You can't play sales"

"Sales don't determine the best"

Etc.

Plenty of these arguments have been used. Like I said, I'm nobody's personal Google. I'm just too apathetic about doing any searching right now :)

Well, if these arguments are to be representative of all of the lemmings on this forum, are we to believe all of the "Sales are all that matter" arguments are representative of every sheep on this forum?

You can go ahead and do it. No one is stopping you :)

And you accuse ME of having selective vision and being hypocritical. Priceless.

[QUOTE="The_Game21x"]

[QUOTE="Zhengi"][QUOTE="Verge_6"]

Not a single thread made by an MS fan stating that sales don't matter. And one thread doesn't count as evidence that the entire fanbase has such a mentality. You may accuse me of 'turning a blind eye', but maybe you should question whether you are in fact seeing things that aren't even there.

Zhengi

Hey, since you like looking at history, maybe you can do a search for other threads since there have been plenty of times that MS fanboys have attacked sales. Arguments such as:

"You can't play sales"

"Sales don't determine the best"

Etc.

Plenty of these arguments have been used. Like I said, I'm nobody's personal Google. I'm just too apathetic about doing any searching right now :)

Well, if these arguments are to be representative of all of the lemmings on this forum, are we to believe all of the "Sales are all that matter" arguments are representative of every sheep on this forum?

You can go ahead and do it. No one is stopping you :)

Well, okay. I guess all of the worst things that can be said about the vocal minority of fanboys can be applied to those with far less radical views...interesting...

And you accuse ME of having selective vision and being hypocritical. Priceless.

Verge_6

You do have selective vision and are hypocritical :)

All I'm saying is it's a free country... at least where I'm at... and he can do whatever he wants. I don't care what he says about Nintendo fanboys :)

[QUOTE="sonicmj1"][QUOTE="Zhengi"]

This is how they do it.

First, they are counting games that are bundled in with the Xbox. This includes all the Forza 2 and Marvel (I belive it was this game) bundles. The Halo 3 bundle also counts. This inflates the numbers.

Secondly, the install base is not growing as fast. This is not to say they aren't selling anything. This increases the attach ratio. For example, in Japan, they've only sold 500k consoles, but the attach rate is about 5.6 or so. Those who have a console will continue to buy games. If there are no infusion of new console purchasers, then the attach rate will remain pretty high.

Lastly, they do have a user base that buys a lot of games. That does help the attach rate. However, if they had more casuals, the attach rate would fall. They haven't captured that market yet and it's the one they really want to capture.

One thing they don't count is arcade games. So if anyone says this, then they are wrong.

Zhengi

The Halo 3 Xbox doesn't actually include Halo 3. So that's not a bundle there. Also, you assume that people buy games in addition to Forza 2 and Marvel: UA, when they well might choose not to get other games when they get the console because those two games are already packed in.

The install base is still growing, especially in North America. Those seem to be the numbers this press release is concerned with, after all. The 360 sold a lot this holiday season, didn't it? All this shows is that people are buying games faster than they are buying consoles. And that's a good thing.

Microsoft makes money every time a game is sold. If they have a console with a userbase that buys lots of games (including third-party games), that is a good thing. It helps them make profits. And having a console with a high attach rate encourages third parties to continue to produce games for the 360, which should keep people interested in the console.

Okay, I wasn't sure if Halo 3 came with the Halo edition. Thanks for the correction.

As for the bundled games, I'm not saying that peopel buy additional games to those that are included. Rather, I'm saying that MS counts those bundled games as being sold. So if they sell 1.3 million consoles in Dec., and assuming about 30% of them have the bundled games (I think it would be higher), that would mean an extra 780k combined sales for both games. That helps to keep the attach rate up.

The install base continues to grow in NA. I didn't say it didn't. However, the rate that it's growing at for the first half of the year was very slow as evidence by how very few consoles were moved from a month to month basis (according to NPD). During that time, it's obvious the install base isn't going to stop buying games. That keeps the attach rate high.

Last part, pretty irrelevant to how MS keeps its attach rate up. It's true they make money and third parties are making money, but I didn't argue against those points.

It would be a lot higher. The highest selling versions are the Pro and the Elite, both of which come with Forza 2/Marvel: UA. The Halo edition is generally a dust-gatherer, and the Arcade's are somewhat hard to get rid of as well.

It's still an impressive attach, I wish PS3 owners would buy some games (I own 20+, get on it, slackers), but the way the whole article is worded and structured just makes it sound like a PR memo, so vague terminology like "record-breaking" doesn't knock my socks off.

[QUOTE="Zhengi"][QUOTE="The_Game21x"]

[QUOTE="Zhengi"][QUOTE="Verge_6"]

Not a single thread made by an MS fan stating that sales don't matter. And one thread doesn't count as evidence that the entire fanbase has such a mentality. You may accuse me of 'turning a blind eye', but maybe you should question whether you are in fact seeing things that aren't even there.

Verge_6

Hey, since you like looking at history, maybe you can do a search for other threads since there have been plenty of times that MS fanboys have attacked sales. Arguments such as:

"You can't play sales"

"Sales don't determine the best"

Etc.

Plenty of these arguments have been used. Like I said, I'm nobody's personal Google. I'm just too apathetic about doing any searching right now :)

Well, if these arguments are to be representative of all of the lemmings on this forum, are we to believe all of the "Sales are all that matter" arguments are representative of every sheep on this forum?

You can go ahead and do it. No one is stopping you :)

And you accuse ME of having selective vision and being hypocritical. Priceless.

You're as guilty as the rest of us. We all do it from time to time.

[QUOTE="Verge_6"]

And you accuse ME of having selective vision and being hypocritical. Priceless.

Zhengi

You do have selective vision and are hypocritical :)

All I'm saying is it's a free country... at least where I'm at... and he can do whatever he wants. I don't care what he says about Nintendo fanboys :)

Went right over his head. Give him a hand, folks. :lol:

Well, okay. I guess all of the worst things that can be said about the vocal minority of fanboys can be applied those with far less radical views...interesting...

The_Game21x

Just so you know, my posts were addressed to those who were MS fanboys. I didn't make it inclusive and say it was all 360 owners who have used that argument :)

You're as guilty as the rest of us. We all do it from time to time.

excelR83

I don't go around trolling every pro-Wii topic I find, now do I? ^_^

[QUOTE="Verge_6"]

I've made an argument trwice. It's not that hard to read. You can make unbacked claims about 360 owners constantly saying sales don't matter, so why can't I make claims that Wii owners only adopted the 'sales matter' vibe when their console of choice started dominating in said field?

Zhengi

Who said you can't make that claim? It happened when PS2 was winning in sales last gen. It's happening here when the Wii is winning in sales. I never made that counterclaim.

In fact, I'm a firm believer that sales are important and help to decide the winner of a gen. That's why I think NES, SNES, PS1, and PS2 are the winners of their respective gens because of sales. I haven't said that you can't make the claim that people have started using sales as if they suddenly mattered.

Well Sales do matter, right now the Wii is kicking everyone butt in hardware, can not deny that. But in Software the 360 is doing great, and with the PS2 it owned both hardware and software (IIRC)

With the NPD 360 games are in the top 10 in the software sales, and I remember afew times they take up more than 50% of it, and also a number of months ago EA realseed their records of what systems they are making money off of the 360 is alittle bit over half. Looking at that I am not surprised that it would be very high.

I have about 25 360 games personally. :)

Only 7 PS3 games. I didn't get my PS3 until Nov 2nd of last year though so 7 is fairly good IMO.

In terms of software, 360 destroys the competition. Hands down.

[QUOTE="Zhengi"][QUOTE="Verge_6"]

I've made an argument trwice. It's not that hard to read. You can make unbacked claims about 360 owners constantly saying sales don't matter, so why can't I make claims that Wii owners only adopted the 'sales matter' vibe when their console of choice started dominating in said field?

Chaos_HL21

Who said you can't make that claim? It happened when PS2 was winning in sales last gen. It's happening here when the Wii is winning in sales. I never made that counterclaim.

In fact, I'm a firm believer that sales are important and help to decide the winner of a gen. That's why I think NES, SNES, PS1, and PS2 are the winners of their respective gens because of sales. I haven't said that you can't make the claim that people have started using sales as if they suddenly mattered.

Well Sales do matter, right now the Wii is kicking everyone butt in hardware, can not deny that. But in Software the 360 is doing great, and with the PS2 it owned both hardware and software (IIRC)

With the NPD 360 games are in the top 10 in the software sales, and I remember afew times they take up more than 50% of it, and also a number of months ago EA realseed their records of what systems they are making money off of the 360 is alittle bit over half. Looking at that I am not surprised that it would be very high.

I agree that MS has the US market on lock down. The other markets are a toss up, at least in countries other than Japan. They have certainly had good holiday sales. COD4 and Assassin's Creed have done great. The only thing missing is continuous successful console sales. Judging by past hardware sales performances, the 360 is on track to sell as much as the N64 at around 34 million.

So the 360 will definitely continue getting a lot of Western games. It'll be missing the Japanese games though and that will definitely hurt it. It will get its share of Japanese games, but the bulk of it will go to the other two consoles since their install base is a lot higher in Japan.

Software sales are definitely great, but it doesn't mean that every company will be able to take advantage of it. An excellent example is a company like SE that specializes in RPGs. With the low sales of games like Blue Dragon and Eternal Sonata, they just can't bring their specialized games to the console. That's why the president announced the main platforms as the Nintendo platforms and the PS3.

[QUOTE="sonicmj1"][QUOTE="Zhengi"]

This is how they do it.

First, they are counting games that are bundled in with the Xbox. This includes all the Forza 2 and Marvel (I belive it was this game) bundles. The Halo 3 bundle also counts. This inflates the numbers.

Secondly, the install base is not growing as fast. This is not to say they aren't selling anything. This increases the attach ratio. For example, in Japan, they've only sold 500k consoles, but the attach rate is about 5.6 or so. Those who have a console will continue to buy games. If there are no infusion of new console purchasers, then the attach rate will remain pretty high.

Lastly, they do have a user base that buys a lot of games. That does help the attach rate. However, if they had more casuals, the attach rate would fall. They haven't captured that market yet and it's the one they really want to capture.

One thing they don't count is arcade games. So if anyone says this, then they are wrong.

Zhengi

The Halo 3 Xbox doesn't actually include Halo 3. So that's not a bundle there. Also, you assume that people buy games in addition to Forza 2 and Marvel: UA, when they well might choose not to get other games when they get the console because those two games are already packed in.

The install base is still growing, especially in North America. Those seem to be the numbers this press release is concerned with, after all. The 360 sold a lot this holiday season, didn't it? All this shows is that people are buying games faster than they are buying consoles. And that's a good thing.

Microsoft makes money every time a game is sold. If they have a console with a userbase that buys lots of games (including third-party games), that is a good thing. It helps them make profits. And having a console with a high attach rate encourages third parties to continue to produce games for the 360, which should keep people interested in the console.

Okay, I wasn't sure if Halo 3 came with the Halo edition. Thanks for the correction.

As for the bundled games, I'm not saying that peopel buy additional games to those that are included. Rather, I'm saying that MS counts those bundled games as being sold. So if they sell 1.3 million consoles in Dec., and assuming about 30% of them have the bundled games (I think it would be higher), that would mean an extra 780k combined sales for both games. That helps to keep the attach rate up.

The install base continues to grow in NA. I didn't say it didn't. However, the rate that it's growing at for the first half of the year was very slow as evidence by how very few consoles were moved from a month to month basis (according to NPD). During that time, it's obvious the install base isn't going to stop buying games. That keeps the attach rate high.

Last part, pretty irrelevant to how MS keeps its attach rate up. It's true they make money and third parties are making money, but I didn't argue against those points.

I don't know if the bundled games make as big a difference as you say they do, though. Do they boost the attach rate? Sure they do. But if there weren't bundled games, do you think people would bring the console home with nothing to play on it? I'd expect that they'd buy a game or two with the console, in which case, it'd all balance out. I'm sure the bundle helps a bit, but I don't think it's an enormous difference-maker.

The second point is basically accurate, especially given that the 360 apparently sold less in 2007 than in 2006.

The reason I included the last part is because I was trying to focus on the importance of the number. I know it's not too relevant in a response to what you're saying, at least on the surface, but the tone I was getting from your post was that this attach rate happened because of a number of outside factors that didn't relate to anything positive for Microsoft (the first point could be read as "Microsoft is cheating the statistics by bundling", and the second as "This number is spin to cover up that they didn't sell consoles"). I just wanted to point out why this 7.0 attach rate was worth making a thread about.

The attach rate number, combined with the relatively high sales of 360 titles relative to Wii and PS3 titles, seems to point to your third and most obvious reason for the attach rate being the most important. It really seems that 360 owners buy more games.

[QUOTE="The_Game21x"]

Well, okay. I guess all of the worst things that can be said about the vocal minority of fanboys can be applied those with far less radical views...interesting...

Zhengi

Just so you know, my posts were addressed to those who were MS fanboys. I didn't make it inclusive and say it was all 360 owners who have used that argument :)

I never said you did.

Just thought I'd get my thoughts out there.

I have about 25 360 games personally. :)

Only 7 PS3 games. I didn't get my PS3 until Nov 2nd of last year though so 7 is fairly good IMO.

In terms of hardware failure rate, 360 destroys the competition. Hands down.

Puckhog04

Nah, but really,

there are good games for all the consoles out currently,

fighting and comparing is silly.

[QUOTE="Puckhog04"]

I have about 25 360 games personally. :)

Only 7 PS3 games. I didn't get my PS3 until Nov 2nd of last year though so 7 is fairly good IMO.

In terms of hardware failure rate, 360 destroys the competition. Hands down.

Andrew_Xavier

Nah, but really,

there are good games for all the consoles out currently,

fighting and comparing is silly.

I'm talking in terms of software sales, not the quality of the games. :roll: Deny it all you want but it's true at this point.

O.o a hardware failure rate comment...must've taken you a full minute to come up with that comeback. :roll:

Whining about a failure rate when it's in the process of trying to be fixed and you get a free replacement is silly as well. But, hey, you whined about it...others can do what they want regarding game library.

[QUOTE="Zhengi"][QUOTE="The_Game21x"]

Well, okay. I guess all of the worst things that can be said about the vocal minority of fanboys can be applied those with far less radical views...interesting...

The_Game21x

Just so you know, my posts were addressed to those who were MS fanboys. I didn't make it inclusive and say it was all 360 owners who have used that argument :)

I never said you did.

Just thought I'd get my thoughts out there.

Okay, just pointing out that anything said by the vocal minority isn't applied to those with far less radical views :)

I agree that MS has the US market on lock down. The other markets are a toss up, at least in countries other than Japan. They have certainly had good holiday sales. COD4 and Assassin's Creed have done great. The only thing missing is continuous successful console sales. Judging by past hardware sales performances, the 360 is on track to sell as much as the N64 at around 34 million.

So the 360 will definitely continue getting a lot of Western games. It'll be missing the Japanese games though and that will definitely hurt it. It will get its share of Japanese games, but the bulk of it will go to the other two consoles since their install base is a lot higher in Japan.

Software sales are definitely great, but it doesn't mean that every company will be able to take advantage of it. An excellent example is a company like SE that specializes in RPGs. With the low sales of games like Blue Dragon and Eternal Sonata, they just can't bring their specialized games to the console. That's why the president announced the main platforms as the Nintendo platforms and the PS3.

Zhengi

Well even in Japan the attach rate is impresstive, it is about the only good thing to say (and kinda like saying at least didn't break all your bones after falling off that cliff).

While I would like for the 360 to have more Japanese games, it does have a number of interesting ones coming out. Such as the big name ones. But also some that haven't been getting that much hype, like Operation Darkness (a WW2 SRPG, with Nazi Vampires and Dragons), also I remember reading something about NIS is making a game for the 360, sofar nothing on it (but a game from the makers of Disgaea I am hyped)

Also bringing up SE, they are publishing one game Infinite Undiscovery, and The Last Remnant. If those sell well on the 360 I have a they will open up more. Having the Square name on those games will help sell.

[QUOTE="Zhengi"]

Okay, I wasn't sure if Halo 3 came with the Halo edition. Thanks for the correction.

As for the bundled games, I'm not saying that peopel buy additional games to those that are included. Rather, I'm saying that MS counts those bundled games as being sold. So if they sell 1.3 million consoles in Dec., and assuming about 30% of them have the bundled games (I think it would be higher), that would mean an extra 780k combined sales for both games. That helps to keep the attach rate up.

The install base continues to grow in NA. I didn't say it didn't. However, the rate that it's growing at for the first half of the year was very slow as evidence by how very few consoles were moved from a month to month basis (according to NPD). During that time, it's obvious the install base isn't going to stop buying games. That keeps the attach rate high.

Last part, pretty irrelevant to how MS keeps its attach rate up. It's true they make money and third parties are making money, but I didn't argue against those points.

sonicmj1

I don't know if the bundled games make as big a difference as you say they do, though. Do they boost the attach rate? Sure they do. But if there weren't bundled games, do you think people would bring the console home with nothing to play on it? I'd expect that they'd buy a game or two with the console, in which case, it'd all balance out. I'm sure the bundle helps a bit, but I don't think it's an enormous difference-maker.

The second point is basically accurate, especially given that the 360 apparently sold less in 2007 than in 2006.

The reason I included the last part is because I was trying to focus on the importance of the number. I know it's not too relevant in a response to what you're saying, at least on the surface, but the tone I was getting from your post was that this attach rate happened because of a number of outside factors that didn't relate to anything positive for Microsoft (the first point could be read as "Microsoft is cheating the statistics by bundling", and the second as "This number is spin to cover up that they didn't sell consoles"). I just wanted to point out why this 7.0 attach rate was worth making a thread about.

The attach rate number, combined with the relatively high sales of 360 titles relative to Wii and PS3 titles, seems to point to your third and most obvious reason for the attach rate being the most important. It really seems that 360 owners buy more games.

Actually, I think the bundled games make a lot of difference. The reason for that is because a person only has to pay $350 for the console and games instead of $470 for a console and games. In fact, they might have more incentive to spend money on purchasing another game since they saved $120 with the bundled console. Also, considering that most of the consoles sold in Dec. were the bundled versions of the Pro and Elite (I'm just assuming w/the Elite), those bundled games add quite a bit to the attach rate.

[QUOTE="sonicmj1"][QUOTE="Zhengi"]

Okay, I wasn't sure if Halo 3 came with the Halo edition. Thanks for the correction.

As for the bundled games, I'm not saying that peopel buy additional games to those that are included. Rather, I'm saying that MS counts those bundled games as being sold. So if they sell 1.3 million consoles in Dec., and assuming about 30% of them have the bundled games (I think it would be higher), that would mean an extra 780k combined sales for both games. That helps to keep the attach rate up.

The install base continues to grow in NA. I didn't say it didn't. However, the rate that it's growing at for the first half of the year was very slow as evidence by how very few consoles were moved from a month to month basis (according to NPD). During that time, it's obvious the install base isn't going to stop buying games. That keeps the attach rate high.

Last part, pretty irrelevant to how MS keeps its attach rate up. It's true they make money and third parties are making money, but I didn't argue against those points.

Zhengi

I don't know if the bundled games make as big a difference as you say they do, though. Do they boost the attach rate? Sure they do. But if there weren't bundled games, do you think people would bring the console home with nothing to play on it? I'd expect that they'd buy a game or two with the console, in which case, it'd all balance out. I'm sure the bundle helps a bit, but I don't think it's an enormous difference-maker.

The second point is basically accurate, especially given that the 360 apparently sold less in 2007 than in 2006.

The reason I included the last part is because I was trying to focus on the importance of the number. I know it's not too relevant in a response to what you're saying, at least on the surface, but the tone I was getting from your post was that this attach rate happened because of a number of outside factors that didn't relate to anything positive for Microsoft (the first point could be read as "Microsoft is cheating the statistics by bundling", and the second as "This number is spin to cover up that they didn't sell consoles"). I just wanted to point out why this 7.0 attach rate was worth making a thread about.

The attach rate number, combined with the relatively high sales of 360 titles relative to Wii and PS3 titles, seems to point to your third and most obvious reason for the attach rate being the most important. It really seems that 360 owners buy more games.

Actually, I think the bundled games make a lot of difference. The reason for that is because a person only has to pay $350 for the console and games instead of $470 for a console and games. In fact, they might have more incentive to spend money on purchasing another game since they saved $120 with the bundled console. Also, considering that most of the consoles sold in Dec. were the bundled versions of the Pro and Elite (I'm just assuming w/the Elite), those bundled games add quite a bit to the attach rate.

Now you're just guessing.

Take the Wii, for example. It retails for $100 less than the Premium 360, and it comes bundled with a game. To have two games and a console with the Wii, you'd only have to pay $300. That means you'd have even more money to buy games with than you would if you got a 360 Premium.

Why, then, does the Wii have a lower attach rate then the 360? Why, then, does the Wii have fewer top 20 selling games than the 360? Because Wii owners buy less games than 360 owners. It's the simple, obvious solution.

The bundle naturally helps, but it's just dancing around the main reason, if you ask me.

[QUOTE="Zhengi"][QUOTE="sonicmj1"][QUOTE="Zhengi"]

Okay, I wasn't sure if Halo 3 came with the Halo edition. Thanks for the correction.

As for the bundled games, I'm not saying that peopel buy additional games to those that are included. Rather, I'm saying that MS counts those bundled games as being sold. So if they sell 1.3 million consoles in Dec., and assuming about 30% of them have the bundled games (I think it would be higher), that would mean an extra 780k combined sales for both games. That helps to keep the attach rate up.

The install base continues to grow in NA. I didn't say it didn't. However, the rate that it's growing at for the first half of the year was very slow as evidence by how very few consoles were moved from a month to month basis (according to NPD). During that time, it's obvious the install base isn't going to stop buying games. That keeps the attach rate high.

Last part, pretty irrelevant to how MS keeps its attach rate up. It's true they make money and third parties are making money, but I didn't argue against those points.

sonicmj1

I don't know if the bundled games make as big a difference as you say they do, though. Do they boost the attach rate? Sure they do. But if there weren't bundled games, do you think people would bring the console home with nothing to play on it? I'd expect that they'd buy a game or two with the console, in which case, it'd all balance out. I'm sure the bundle helps a bit, but I don't think it's an enormous difference-maker.

The second point is basically accurate, especially given that the 360 apparently sold less in 2007 than in 2006.

The reason I included the last part is because I was trying to focus on the importance of the number. I know it's not too relevant in a response to what you're saying, at least on the surface, but the tone I was getting from your post was that this attach rate happened because of a number of outside factors that didn't relate to anything positive for Microsoft (the first point could be read as "Microsoft is cheating the statistics by bundling", and the second as "This number is spin to cover up that they didn't sell consoles"). I just wanted to point out why this 7.0 attach rate was worth making a thread about.

The attach rate number, combined with the relatively high sales of 360 titles relative to Wii and PS3 titles, seems to point to your third and most obvious reason for the attach rate being the most important. It really seems that 360 owners buy more games.

Actually, I think the bundled games make a lot of difference. The reason for that is because a person only has to pay $350 for the console and games instead of $470 for a console and games. In fact, they might have more incentive to spend money on purchasing another game since they saved $120 with the bundled console. Also, considering that most of the consoles sold in Dec. were the bundled versions of the Pro and Elite (I'm just assuming w/the Elite), those bundled games add quite a bit to the attach rate.

Now you're just guessing.

Take the Wii, for example. It retails for $100 less than the Premium 360, and it comes bundled with a game. To have two games and a console with the Wii, you'd only have to pay $300. That means you'd have even more money to buy games with than you would if you got a 360 Premium.

Why, then, does the Wii have a lower attach rate then the 360? Why, then, does the Wii have fewer top 20 selling games than the 360? Because Wii owners buy less games than 360 owners. It's the simple, obvious solution.

The bundle naturally helps, but it's just dancing around the main reason, if you ask me.

Well, the only thing I'm assuming is that they buy another game after they purchase a bundled console. However, you can't say that a person paying $350 for a console and games isn't better than paying $420 for a console and games. So the bundle definitely helps since the reason why any company would put the games in the console is to make them more appealing.

[QUOTE="Zhengi"][QUOTE="sonicmj1"][QUOTE="Zhengi"]

Okay, I wasn't sure if Halo 3 came with the Halo edition. Thanks for the correction.

As for the bundled games, I'm not saying that peopel buy additional games to those that are included. Rather, I'm saying that MS counts those bundled games as being sold. So if they sell 1.3 million consoles in Dec., and assuming about 30% of them have the bundled games (I think it would be higher), that would mean an extra 780k combined sales for both games. That helps to keep the attach rate up.

The install base continues to grow in NA. I didn't say it didn't. However, the rate that it's growing at for the first half of the year was very slow as evidence by how very few consoles were moved from a month to month basis (according to NPD). During that time, it's obvious the install base isn't going to stop buying games. That keeps the attach rate high.

Last part, pretty irrelevant to how MS keeps its attach rate up. It's true they make money and third parties are making money, but I didn't argue against those points.

sonicmj1

I don't know if the bundled games make as big a difference as you say they do, though. Do they boost the attach rate? Sure they do. But if there weren't bundled games, do you think people would bring the console home with nothing to play on it? I'd expect that they'd buy a game or two with the console, in which case, it'd all balance out. I'm sure the bundle helps a bit, but I don't think it's an enormous difference-maker.

The second point is basically accurate, especially given that the 360 apparently sold less in 2007 than in 2006.

The reason I included the last part is because I was trying to focus on the importance of the number. I know it's not too relevant in a response to what you're saying, at least on the surface, but the tone I was getting from your post was that this attach rate happened because of a number of outside factors that didn't relate to anything positive for Microsoft (the first point could be read as "Microsoft is cheating the statistics by bundling", and the second as "This number is spin to cover up that they didn't sell consoles"). I just wanted to point out why this 7.0 attach rate was worth making a thread about.

The attach rate number, combined with the relatively high sales of 360 titles relative to Wii and PS3 titles, seems to point to your third and most obvious reason for the attach rate being the most important. It really seems that 360 owners buy more games.

Actually, I think the bundled games make a lot of difference. The reason for that is because a person only has to pay $350 for the console and games instead of $470 for a console and games. In fact, they might have more incentive to spend money on purchasing another game since they saved $120 with the bundled console. Also, considering that most of the consoles sold in Dec. were the bundled versions of the Pro and Elite (I'm just assuming w/the Elite), those bundled games add quite a bit to the attach rate.

Now you're just guessing.

Take the Wii, for example. It retails for $100 less than the Premium 360, and it comes bundled with a game. To have two games and a console with the Wii, you'd only have to pay $300. That means you'd have even more money to buy games with than you would if you got a 360 Premium.

Why, then, does the Wii have a lower attach rate then the 360? Why, then, does the Wii have fewer top 20 selling games than the 360? Because Wii owners buy less games than 360 owners. It's the simple, obvious solution.

The bundle naturally helps, but it's just dancing around the main reason, if you ask me.

It could also simply be first-year blues. At least 2/3 of all 360 owners have had between six months to a year longer to buy games than all Wii owners. The Wii has the same attach rate now (even excluding WiiPlay and WiiSports) that the 360 did at this time last year, or perhaps slightly lower.

Okay, I wasn't sure if Halo 3 came with the Halo edition. Thanks for the correction.

As for the bundled games, I'm not saying that peopel buy additional games to those that are included. Rather, I'm saying that MS counts those bundled games as being sold. So if they sell 1.3 million consoles in Dec., and assuming about 30% of them have the bundled games (I think it would be higher), that would mean an extra 780k combined sales for both games. That helps to keep the attach rate up.

The install base continues to grow in NA. I didn't say it didn't. However, the rate that it's growing at for the first half of the year was very slow as evidence by how very few consoles were moved from a month to month basis (according to NPD). During that time, it's obvious the install base isn't going to stop buying games. That keeps the attach rate high.

Last part, pretty irrelevant to how MS keeps its attach rate up. It's true they make money and third parties are making money, but I didn't argue against those points.

Zhengi

If that was true both Marvel UA and Forza 2 would be on the list of top 10 selling games in December.

[QUOTE="Zhengi"]

Okay, I wasn't sure if Halo 3 came with the Halo edition. Thanks for the correction.

As for the bundled games, I'm not saying that peopel buy additional games to those that are included. Rather, I'm saying that MS counts those bundled games as being sold. So if they sell 1.3 million consoles in Dec., and assuming about 30% of them have the bundled games (I think it would be higher), that would mean an extra 780k combined sales for both games. That helps to keep the attach rate up.

The install base continues to grow in NA. I didn't say it didn't. However, the rate that it's growing at for the first half of the year was very slow as evidence by how very few consoles were moved from a month to month basis (according to NPD). During that time, it's obvious the install base isn't going to stop buying games. That keeps the attach rate high.

Last part, pretty irrelevant to how MS keeps its attach rate up. It's true they make money and third parties are making money, but I didn't argue against those points.

wmc540

If that was true both Marvel UA and Forza 2 would be on the list of top 10 selling games in December.

That's cause NPD doesn't track bundled games. Furthermore, NPD doens't track attach ratio either. Those are numbers that MS computes and releases.

[QUOTE="sonicmj1"]

Now you're just guessing.

Take the Wii, for example. It retails for $100 less than the Premium 360, and it comes bundled with a game. To have two games and a console with the Wii, you'd only have to pay $300. That means you'd have even more money to buy games with than you would if you got a 360 Premium.

Why, then, does the Wii have a lower attach rate then the 360? Why, then, does the Wii have fewer top 20 selling games than the 360? Because Wii owners buy less games than 360 owners. It's the simple, obvious solution.

The bundle naturally helps, but it's just dancing around the main reason, if you ask me.

mjarantilla

It could also simply be first-year blues. At least 2/3 of all 360 owners have had between six months to a year longer to buy games than all Wii owners. The Wii has the same attach rate now (even excluding WiiPlay and WiiSports) that the 360 did at this time last year, or perhaps slightly lower.

That probably is a greater boost than the bundling, I'd think, and would certainly account, by itself, for the fact that the 360 is ahead of the PS3 and Wii when it comes to attach rate. The NPD software sales numbers suggest that 360 owners do buy more games, though. I'm pretty sure that 7.0 is an awfully good attach rate.

Is that true about current Wii attach rates vs. year-old 360 attach rates? I'd be interested to see the numbers.

Then how are you so sure that they include Marvel UA and Forza 2?wmc540

Just call it a guess. You can either accept it or throw it out since I have no proof. However, it'd definitely be in their interest to include the numbers cause it does make for a more impressive attach rate.

[QUOTE="wmc540"]Then how are you so sure that they include Marvel UA and Forza 2?Zhengi

Just call it a guess. You can either accept it or throw it out since I have no proof. However, it'd definitely be in their interest to include the numbers cause it does make for a more impressive attach rate.

Wouldn't Wii Sports have "sold" about the same amount as Marvel UA and Forza 2 in the bundles??

Sony succeeded in getting the PS3 to drive Blu-Ray as a format, but they forgot about the games. Heavenly Sword, Ratchet and Clank, Uncharted... these games don't stuck!!! Stop waiting and play some games already! If any of these titles were on the 360 you'd see them on the Top 10 for the year. Ratchet and Clank would probably be top 5.

PS3 owners keep talking about all the games coming out in 2008. The next time you see a list tell that guy to shut up. There are only 2 games coming out in 2008: MGS4 and GT5. Everything else will sit on store shelves to rot. PS3 owners are "just waiting" for those two titles. They haven't purchased any games prior to them and its doubtful they'll purchase any games after those two.

[QUOTE="mjarantilla"][QUOTE="sonicmj1"]

Now you're just guessing.

Take the Wii, for example. It retails for $100 less than the Premium 360, and it comes bundled with a game. To have two games and a console with the Wii, you'd only have to pay $300. That means you'd have even more money to buy games with than you would if you got a 360 Premium.

Why, then, does the Wii have a lower attach rate then the 360? Why, then, does the Wii have fewer top 20 selling games than the 360? Because Wii owners buy less games than 360 owners. It's the simple, obvious solution.

The bundle naturally helps, but it's just dancing around the main reason, if you ask me.

sonicmj1

It could also simply be first-year blues. At least 2/3 of all 360 owners have had between six months to a year longer to buy games than all Wii owners. The Wii has the same attach rate now (even excluding WiiPlay and WiiSports) that the 360 did at this time last year, or perhaps slightly lower.

That probably is a greater boost than the bundling, I'd think, and would certainly account, by itself, for the fact that the 360 is ahead of the PS3 and Wii when it comes to attach rate. The NPD software sales numbers suggest that 360 owners do buy more games, though. I'm pretty sure that 7.0 is an awfully good attach rate.

Is that true about current Wii attach rates vs. year-old 360 attach rates? I'd be interested to see the numbers.

It's not bad. The Xbox and GameCube both had attach rates of 9, and the PS2 had an attach rate of 10-12 or some ridiculous number.

The bundling has had almost no effect whatsoever. Unless a bundle is mandatory, like in Nintendo's case, it won't make much of a difference. Microsoft's simply done a bang-up job promoting their games and hitting their target audience. Oblivion, Gears of War, Mass Effect, Halo, etc., were all games which received major Microsoft backing (even though Oblivion is now technically multiplat, it was a major fixture of MS's E3 2005 conference).

I would not be surprised if the 360 had a huge disparity of game ownership, with the top 20-30% of 360 gamers owning several dozen games, while the remainder only owned maybe three or four really big games. Likewise, I would not be surprised if the Wii had a much more even distribution of game sales among its gamers.

[QUOTE="Zhengi"]

[QUOTE="wmc540"]Then how are you so sure that they include Marvel UA and Forza 2?wmc540

Just call it a guess. You can either accept it or throw it out since I have no proof. However, it'd definitely be in their interest to include the numbers cause it does make for a more impressive attach rate.

Wouldn't Wii Sports have "sold" about the same amount as Marvel UA and Forza 2 in the bundles??

It probably sold more. With Wii Sports, though, since every Wii console has the game, the install base = the number of games bundled. The same can't be said about Forza 2 and Marvel UA since they were sold separately and not all 360s sold are bundled with the games.

[QUOTE="sonicmj1"][QUOTE="mjarantilla"][QUOTE="sonicmj1"]

Now you're just guessing.

Take the Wii, for example. It retails for $100 less than the Premium 360, and it comes bundled with a game. To have two games and a console with the Wii, you'd only have to pay $300. That means you'd have even more money to buy games with than you would if you got a 360 Premium.

Why, then, does the Wii have a lower attach rate then the 360? Why, then, does the Wii have fewer top 20 selling games than the 360? Because Wii owners buy less games than 360 owners. It's the simple, obvious solution.

The bundle naturally helps, but it's just dancing around the main reason, if you ask me.

mjarantilla

It could also simply be first-year blues. At least 2/3 of all 360 owners have had between six months to a year longer to buy games than all Wii owners. The Wii has the same attach rate now (even excluding WiiPlay and WiiSports) that the 360 did at this time last year, or perhaps slightly lower.

That probably is a greater boost than the bundling, I'd think, and would certainly account, by itself, for the fact that the 360 is ahead of the PS3 and Wii when it comes to attach rate. The NPD software sales numbers suggest that 360 owners do buy more games, though. I'm pretty sure that 7.0 is an awfully good attach rate.

Is that true about current Wii attach rates vs. year-old 360 attach rates? I'd be interested to see the numbers.

It's not bad. The Xbox and GameCube both had attach rates of 9, and the PS2 had an attach rate of 10-12 or some ridiculous number.

The bundling has had almost no effect whatsoever. Unless a bundle is mandatory, like in Nintendo's case, it won't make much of a difference. Microsoft's simply done a bang-up job promoting their games and hitting their target audience. Oblivion, Gears of War, Mass Effect, Halo, etc., were all games which received major Microsoft backing (even though Oblivion is now technically multiplat, it was a major fixture of MS's E3 2005 conference).

I would not be surprised if the 360 had a huge disparity of game ownership, with the top 20-30% of 360 gamers owning several dozen games, while the remainder only owned maybe three or four really big games. Likewise, I would not be surprised if the Wii had a much more even distribution of game sales among its gamers.

I don't believe that is true because it seems like the 360 is made up of hardcore gamers. Sure there are going to be some people that only buy Gears and Halo, but there is no way you could back your statements even if it was flipped for PS3 or Wii.

[QUOTE="wmc540"][QUOTE="Zhengi"]

[QUOTE="wmc540"]Then how are you so sure that they include Marvel UA and Forza 2?Zhengi

Just call it a guess. You can either accept it or throw it out since I have no proof. However, it'd definitely be in their interest to include the numbers cause it does make for a more impressive attach rate.

Wouldn't Wii Sports have "sold" about the same amount as Marvel UA and Forza 2 in the bundles??

It probably sold more. With Wii Sports, though, since every Wii console has the game, the install base = the number of games bundled. The same can't be said about Forza 2 and Marvel UA since they were sold separately and not all 360s sold are bundled with the games.

Well then can't we agree that when comparing the Wii and the 360's attachment rates that the bundled games shouldn't even be part of the discussion?

[QUOTE="mjarantilla"][QUOTE="sonicmj1"][QUOTE="mjarantilla"][QUOTE="sonicmj1"]

Now you're just guessing.

Take the Wii, for example. It retails for $100 less than the Premium 360, and it comes bundled with a game. To have two games and a console with the Wii, you'd only have to pay $300. That means you'd have even more money to buy games with than you would if you got a 360 Premium.

Why, then, does the Wii have a lower attach rate then the 360? Why, then, does the Wii have fewer top 20 selling games than the 360? Because Wii owners buy less games than 360 owners. It's the simple, obvious solution.

The bundle naturally helps, but it's just dancing around the main reason, if you ask me.

wmc540

It could also simply be first-year blues. At least 2/3 of all 360 owners have had between six months to a year longer to buy games than all Wii owners. The Wii has the same attach rate now (even excluding WiiPlay and WiiSports) that the 360 did at this time last year, or perhaps slightly lower.

That probably is a greater boost than the bundling, I'd think, and would certainly account, by itself, for the fact that the 360 is ahead of the PS3 and Wii when it comes to attach rate. The NPD software sales numbers suggest that 360 owners do buy more games, though. I'm pretty sure that 7.0 is an awfully good attach rate.

Is that true about current Wii attach rates vs. year-old 360 attach rates? I'd be interested to see the numbers.

It's not bad. The Xbox and GameCube both had attach rates of 9, and the PS2 had an attach rate of 10-12 or some ridiculous number.

The bundling has had almost no effect whatsoever. Unless a bundle is mandatory, like in Nintendo's case, it won't make much of a difference. Microsoft's simply done a bang-up job promoting their games and hitting their target audience. Oblivion, Gears of War, Mass Effect, Halo, etc., were all games which received major Microsoft backing (even though Oblivion is now technically multiplat, it was a major fixture of MS's E3 2005 conference).

I would not be surprised if the 360 had a huge disparity of game ownership, with the top 20-30% of 360 gamers owning several dozen games, while the remainder only owned maybe three or four really big games. Likewise, I would not be surprised if the Wii had a much more even distribution of game sales among its gamers.

I don't believe that is true because it seems like the 360 is made up of hardcore gamers. Sure there are going to be some people that only buy Gears and Halo, but there is no way you could back your statements even if it was flipped for PS3 or Wii.

Actually, you're just proving my point. Hardcore gamers tend to buy a LOT of games if they can. Definitely more than seven. I don't consider myself a hardcore gamer at all, and yet I have fifteen 360 games. If the 360's audience was made up primarily of hardcore gamers, then the attach rate should be through the bloody roof, like 12-15 or something, but it's not. Obviously, there must be a large segment of the 360's ownership who I would characterize as "niche" gamers who only buy a few games of a specific genre or something, like people who only buy sports games or racing games (one of my friends bought a 360 ONLY to play soccer and basketball games).

The Wii, on the other hand, probably has a much more even distribution simply because there isn't a hell of a lot to choose from. Even if hardcore Wii gamers DID want to buy more games, the Wii doesn't have the kind of game selection to accommodate them yet. So hardcore Wii gamers probably have only bought about 8-10 games, whereas hardcore 360 gamers might have bought as many as twenty games by now. And, of course, it could also be said that the Wii's audience is a lot more diverse, so there are fewer games that can attract a large percentage of the Wii's audience the way Halo can attract half of all 360 gamers.

So much arguing over the fact that both the 360 and Wii are top of their league in a certain category (software vs hardware). 360 has the software crown, and anyone denying that is just...well silly to be nice. Wii is a phenomenon for everyone hardware wise that won't stop for some time, and has some excellent games from Nintendo, but it still doesn't take the software crown from the 360.

Oh, and just so I don't leave it out, PS3 is one heck of a movie player!

[QUOTE="sonicmj1"]

That probably is a greater boost than the bundling, I'd think, and would certainly account, by itself, for the fact that the 360 is ahead of the PS3 and Wii when it comes to attach rate. The NPD software sales numbers suggest that 360 owners do buy more games, though. I'm pretty sure that 7.0 is an awfully good attach rate.

Is that true about current Wii attach rates vs. year-old 360 attach rates? I'd be interested to see the numbers.

mjarantilla

It's not bad. The Xbox and GameCube both had attach rates of 9, and the PS2 had an attach rate of 10-12 or some ridiculous number.

I'd be interested to see how those numbers played out over time. It'd give me a better sense of what these numbers mean now, two full years into the 360's life cycle.

I would not be surprised if the 360 had a huge disparity of game ownership, with the top 20-30% of 360 gamers owning several dozen games, while the remainder only owned maybe three or four really big games. Likewise, I would not be surprised if the Wii had a much more even distribution of game sales among its gamers.

mjarantilla

There's no real way of knowing that. You actually might be able to on the 360, by looking at played-games lists on people's XBL accounts, but you really can't track it on the Wii.

I know that there are plenty of people on these boards with tons of Wii games, while there are others who only own Wii Sports and Super Mario Galaxy. All we can really go on for distribution (why does that really matter, anyways?) is anecdotal stuff.

I think a lot of consoles have big groups both of people who only have one or two games and people who have dozens of games. How many people buy PS2s for Madden or Guitar Hero? How many people have Wiis for Wii Sports? How many people have 360s to play Halo?

[QUOTE="mjarantilla"][QUOTE="sonicmj1"]

That probably is a greater boost than the bundling, I'd think, and would certainly account, by itself, for the fact that the 360 is ahead of the PS3 and Wii when it comes to attach rate. The NPD software sales numbers suggest that 360 owners do buy more games, though. I'm pretty sure that 7.0 is an awfully good attach rate.

Is that true about current Wii attach rates vs. year-old 360 attach rates? I'd be interested to see the numbers.

sonicmj1

It's not bad. The Xbox and GameCube both had attach rates of 9, and the PS2 had an attach rate of 10-12 or some ridiculous number.

I'd be interested to see how those numbers played out over time. It'd give me a better sense of what these numbers mean now, two full years into the 360's life cycle.

I would not be surprised if the 360 had a huge disparity of game ownership, with the top 20-30% of 360 gamers owning several dozen games, while the remainder only owned maybe three or four really big games. Likewise, I would not be surprised if the Wii had a much more even distribution of game sales among its gamers.

mjarantilla

There's no real way of knowing that. You actually might be able to on the 360, by looking at played-games lists on people's XBL accounts, but you really can't track it on the Wii.

I know that there are plenty of people on these boards with tons of Wii games, while there are others who only own Wii Sports and Super Mario Galaxy. All we can really go on for distribution (why does that really matter, anyways?) is anecdotal stuff.

I think a lot of consoles have big groups both of people who only have one or two games and people who have dozens of games. How many people buy PS2s for Madden or Guitar Hero? How many people have Wiis for Wii Sports? How many people have 360s to play Halo?

What I mean is that if you look at the distribution curve, the Wii will probably have a gentler curve, while the 360 will have a huge, almost exponential spike towards the "upper" end. The Wii will still have a similar sort of curve, but it wouldn't be as extreme as the 360's, and it would be a factor of both the availability of good games and the types of audiences the systems appeal to.

Another thing that's interesting about attach rates is that the PS3 currently has the lowest attach rate of all consoles (slightly less than the Wii), while the PSP has the lowest attach rate OVERALL. The PSP's attach rate is something dismal, like 2.5 or 2.8. The DS's is closer to four, while the Wii and PS3 both hover around 4 to 4.5 (excluding WiiSports and WiiPlay, but not excluding the PS3's bundled games like Motorstorm).

Another thing that's interesting about attach rates is that the PS3 currently has the lowest attach rate of all consoles (slightly less than the Wii), while the PSP has the lowest attach rate OVERALL. The PSP's attach rate is something dismal, like 2.5 or 2.8. The DS's is closer to four, while the Wii and PS3 both hover around 4 to 4.5 (excluding WiiSports and WiiPlay, but not excluding the PS3's bundled games like Motorstorm).

mjarantilla

I don't think that's too surprising.

The PSP and PS3 are both very much multimedia centers. The PSP is pretty competent as a movie and music player, even if you don't want to play games on it, and for a long time, the PS3 was the cheapest Blu-Ray player around. When that happens, you're gonna get people who get the console and don't have any games for it, or don't get many. That won't happen as much for the DS and Wii, whose only purpose is gameplaying.

I'm a Wii60 owner, and I can tell you that attach rate is about right

I have about 25 360 games, and 2 Wii games, I also have 2 Gamecube games, and 23 more regular xbox games that are BC

The quality of titles availible for the 360 is somewhat staggering, most games are pretty good, and because it was released earlier, there is a nice solid library of less expensive, yet still good, titles to choose from

The problem for the PS3 is simple, for every one sold to a gamer who loves sony's games, another is sold to someone who could give a crap about gaming, and is buying the cheapest blu-ray player

BTW, when is Microsoft releasing its blu-ray attachment? ;)