Topic: Microsoft's Xbox Kinect - Nov 4th 2010

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

[Chozo Ghost]

Had Yokoi stopped development when it was clear the higher ups at Nintendo wanted him too, he'd be one of the top people at the company right now.

That's of course assuming he didn't die in that tragic auto accident. Damn shame for such a great mind to die so soon. The virtual boy was his only blunder, but Nintendo apparently couldn't forgive him for that, even though everything else he did was Gold.

[TJ Spyke]

That's standard in Japanese business. Whenever someone screws up majorly (lik he did with the Virtual Boy), they are put in the proverbial doghouse for awhile. He left Nintendo before they could forgive him though.

Luigi Dude, Choze is right. Yokoi himself decided to use only red rather than full color because it was just too expensive.

Chozo, how was the HD DVD add-on a bad idea? Microsoft wanted to support HD DVD, but they had already launched their system. So they released an ultra cheap add-on that could play the discs. I heard that the HD DVD add-on actually sold pretty wll.

[Adrock]

The HD-DVD add-on failed miserably. And it was a terrible idea. I'm curious what you consider ultra-cheap because to me, $200 for an add-on is total bull sh*t.

It's not like Microsoft didn't know about HD-DVD before launching 360. They could have done more to support the format, but they didn't.

[Chozo Ghost]

If the 360 had INTEGRATED HD-DVD support then it is possible that format might have won the format war. The PS3 being a Blu-ray device had a significant role in that format's success.

[TJ Spyke]

The HD DVD add-on did not fail miserably, you might want to do at least SOME research before spouting off false claims. First, the add-on had sold 150K units in the US after 2 months (which was more than Toshiba branded HD DVD players had sold in 6 months) at the $200 price point. The add-on sold over 316K units in the US by the time it ended (which is pretty good considering the relative failure of HD DVD). How was it a terrible idea? It gave people a cheap way to watch HD DVD movies (since HD DVD players were much more expensive). It was a good idea, and you can't claim it was a bad idea just because HD DVD failed.

Microsoft didn't want to delay the Xbox 360 just to add in HD DVD support (the first HD DVD player came out 5 months after the Xbox 360 launch). Microsoft, it obviously seems, was more concerned about hurting Sony than supporting one format. There were credible reports though that Microsoft was preparing to announce a Xbox 360 with the HD DVD player built-in at GDC 2008, but Toshiba announced it was ceasing supporting of the format 2 months earlier at CES.

As for calling it cheap, that is my bad. I forgot that it launched at $200. It was not ultra-cheap, but it was still much cheaper than regular HD DVD players (like how the PlayStation 3 was the cheapest Blu-ray Disc player for a long time).

[Adrock]

The add-on didn't help the format from ultimately dying. You talk about research, I can search google too but shuffle numbers all you want, it failed. 316,000 units is a terrible number considering the total amount of 360 consoles sold at the time were in the millions (roughly 10 million in the US by February 2008 according to vgcharts). And you're comparing the add-on's sales to Toshiba's own HD-DVD players. That's like comparing a failing grade of 27 to a failing grade of 13. One is better than the other, but ultimately both are sub-70 failing grades.

And it was a terrible idea because Microsoft ultimately lost money which I suppose to them is a drop in the water. And again, the term "cheap" is relative. A consumer would have had to spend $500-$600 for a 360 + HD-DVD drive. I suppose it's a deal compared to a dedicated player, but still not really cheap.

[TJ Spyke]

No, it didn't stop HD DVD from failing. It may have actually helped keep it around longer. Considering the price and the relatively low Xbox 360 userbase at the time, it's sales weren't that bad. Had it started at something like $100, it probably would have don even better. However, this was all dependent on HD DVD ding better too.

I back up my statement with facts. Where is your proof Microsoft lost money with it? Even using just US sales, Microsoft made $30 million in the first 2 months alone (after that it's difficult to measure because you can't tell how many were sold in between specific price cuts). Besides, something can be a good idea and still lose money.

Also, below 70 is not failing. Most schools use either 60 or 65 as the cutoff point for passing.

[BlackNMild2k1]

I don't think MS intent was ever to fully support HDDVD and they only made the attachment to lessen the value of buying a PS3 as a Blu-ray player during a format war that could sink the PS3. If MS could help HD-DVD live long enough, then Blu-ray woulds suffer, which means PS3 would suffer and ultimately Sony would suffer. If MS had backed HD-DVD 100% with the Xbox 360 and HD-DVD had failed, then the XBox360 could sink right along with it.

MS was more confident in DD and streaming over any specific new disc based media format.

[Adrock]

Considering the price and the relatively low Xbox 360 userbase at the time, it's sales weren't that bad.

In the US, approximately 3% of the 360 user base had the add-on by the time it was discontinued. You're grasping at straws, dude.

I back up my statement with facts. Where is your proof Microsoft lost money with it?

Because it failed. All of that unsold stock, a clearance price of $50 when it was discontinued. $50 didn't recoup the cost of the components and manufacturing, and even if it did (which, let's be honest, it didn't), Microsoft shot themselves in the foot by keeping the price so high. You don't need to go to business school to figure this out.

Also, below 70 is not failing. Most schools use either 60 or 65 as the cutoff point for passing.

Lulz... talk about missing the point...

[TJ Spyke]

In the US, approximately 3% of the 360 user base had the add-on by the time it was discontinued. You're grasping at straws, dude.

It was more than 3%. Also, the fact that it was between $200 and $100 at the time and HD DVD was never a huge hit, that is still pretty good.

Because it failed. All of that unsold stock, a clearance price of $50 when it was discontinued. $50 didn't recoup the cost of the components and manufacturing, and even if it did (which, let's be honest, it didn't), Microsoft shot themselves in the foot by keeping the price so high. You don't need to go to business school to figure this out.

Um, so you don't have ANY evidence to back up your claim that Microsoft lost money on it? Let's be honest, it's likey they DID make money (unless you think the add-on cost them $100 million to make, which it almost certainly did not). They did not drop it to $50 until after Toshiba announced it was ending the HD DVD format, so Microsoft decided that dropping it to $50 would be the quickest way to clear out the remaining inventory. You keep acting like the HD DVD add-on was a failure just because HD DVD itself was. The add-on almost certainly made some profit for Microsoft, and Microsoft only discontinued it because it made no sense to keep manufacturing it after HD DVD ended.

[Adrock]

It was more than 3%.

You sure about that? Let's do some math. Roughly 316,000 HD-DVD drives sold by February 2008 divided by roughly 10 million Xbox 360 consoles sold by February 2008 (I got that number from vgcharts since you're such a damn stickler for research) is approximately 3% of the Xbox 360 user base with the HD-DVD add-on. My bad, it's 3.something %....

Um, so you don't have ANY evidence to back up your claim that Microsoft lost money on it?

And neither do you. See, Microsoft didn't make $30 million dollars in the first two months because you don't just multiply the number of units sold by it's price to get $30 million and call it a day. That's not pure profit because Microsoft didn't spend $0 on components and manufacturing (on top of research and development, marketing etc.). We don't even know if Microsoft broke even, sold at a loss, or made a small profit on each sale in those first 2 months. And even if they turned a profit, they still lost a hell of a lot more when they were cutting their losses selling the rest of their stock at $50. It's common sense not some fairy tale assumption where a company makes pure profit from a device they somehow spent absolutely nothing to make.

[BlackNMild2k1]

It was more than 3%.

You sure about that? Let's do some math. Roughly 316,000 HD-DVD drives sold by February 2008 divided by roughly 10 million Xbox 360 consoles sold by February 2008 (I got that number from vgcharts since you're such a damn stickler for research) is approximately 3% of the Xbox 360 user base with the HD-DVD add-on. My bad, it's 3.something %....

divided by roughly 10 million Xbox 360 consoles sold by February 2008 (I got that number from vgcharts since you're such a damn stickler for research)

(I got that number from vgcharts since you're such a damn stickler for research)

(number from vgcharts .... stickler for research)

(vgcharts .... research)

[Adrock]

Oh, please. This is a message board, not a graduate thesis. I'm only going to go so far to prove a point. Vgchartz provided approximate numbers for units sold by date and territory (Next Gen Wars only gives total lifetime sales). If you would like to find Xbox 360 sales in the US between launch and February 2008 that disproves the extremely low attach rate percentage of the HD-DVD add-on, be my guest.

Additionally, the 316,000 HD-DVD units sold came from wikipedia and that's perfectly acceptable?

[ThePerm]

Yokoi Succeeds...sort of



i bought my virtua boy at a flea market for $15. i don't know if works, but it is totally successful as a Nintendo artefact.

[BlackNMild2k1]

Oh, please. This is a message board, not a graduate thesis. I'm only going to go so far to prove a point. Vgchartz provided approximate numbers for units sold by date and territory (Next Gen Wars only gives total lifetime sales). If you would like to find Xbox 360 sales in the US between launch and February 2008 that disproves the extremely low attach rate percentage of the HD-DVD add-on, be my guest.

Additionally, the 316,000 HD-DVD units sold came from wikipedia and that's perfectly acceptable?

TBH, I don't really care about the argument/debate you 2 are having over HD-DVD and how much it sold, I was just laughing that you called him a stickler for research and then cited VGChartz as a source of said "research".

[Adrock]

And if you can provided better numbers, you can be a snob about it....

I don't really like using sales data for debates (I do recall saying something about shuffling numbers earlier), but if he's going to use wikipedia and call me out for lack of evidence, then vgchartz is fair game.

[vudu]

VGChartz is a perfectly credible source when looking up historical sales data.  They might be be that accurate in telling you what something's going to sell this month but you can generally believe their historical data.

[TJ Spyke]

Additionally, the 316,000 HD-DVD units sold came from wikipedia and that's perfectly acceptable?

Unlike VG Chartz, Wikipedia requires a reliable source for their info. For example, the 316,000 number comes from a NPD report on Gamasutra (http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=17006). I don't quote numbers unless a reliable source backs it up (so I never use VG Chartz). Please don't question me again. Whenever I use something from Wikipedia, I check to make sure it comes from a reliable source first.

Also, VG Chartz is not all that reliable for historical data either. Their problem is that they do fix the numbers that are publically known, but they still guess for the games they don't know (which is the vast majority. The US alone gets about 500 games a year, add in hundreds more that only come out in Japan or Europe). Basically any thing you see on VG Chartz should be taken with a grain of salt (meaning they are nice to look at, but you should not use them for real reports or when trying to prove a point on sales numbers).

[Adrock]

Yeah, yeah, yeah.... wikipedia requires nothing. However, if you insist, find better numbers and you can be a snob about it. If you want to call shenanigans on vgchartz's historical sales data, prove that it's wrong and that Microsoft fewer than 10 million consoles.

And I'm still curious how you think Microsoft made a $30 million profit.

[BlackNMild2k1]

we've proved many times that VGChartz data is not to be trusted. You can always search for it on this board, we've even had a thread comparing their data with actual released data and watching how it was changed after the fact on the VGC site.

You want to know what something might have sold, then VGCz is your place, but if you are trying to make a point on what something has sold, and debating a point based on solid actual numbers, then you only discredit yourself by citing anything from VGCz.

It's common knowledge for anyone that follows sales at all.
It goes all the way back to who the creator of the site is and how he would get called on all his BS "sources" and "numbers" all the time.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

I can be trusted.  I'll give you numbers.  My source is the Sales Thread.

[TJ Spyke]

Yeah, yeah, yeah.... wikipedia requires nothing. However, if you insist, find better numbers and you can be a snob about it. If you want to call shenanigans on vgchartz's historical sales data, prove that it's wrong and that Microsoft fewer than 10 million consoles.

And I'm still curious how you think Microsoft made a $30 million profit.

Again, i'm not pulling random numbers or using a site that makes up numbers. I am the one using RELIABLE info.

Also, I never said that made $30 million in profit. I said they made $30 million (referring to revenue), and I even said it was just in the US and just in the first 2 months. I will concede though that it was probably around $25 million or so though (it was based on the number of systems sold times the price of the system).

[Adrock]

Alright, then use your reliable info to prove it wrong. That's all.  Saying that number is wrong is completely different than proving that number is wrong with the correct one. I'll happily concede if you simply use your super sources to find different, supposedly more credible numbers that are no where near the number I pulled from vgchartz. You're the one making the claim so prove it. Point being, if you search your various sources and find out that Microsoft did actually end up selling approximately 10 million units in that time frame in the US then, ultimately, you accomplished nothing. This isn't really about vgchartz. All you've really done is shifted the focus away from the original claim that roughly 3% of Xbox 360 owners purchased the HD-DVD drive up until February 2008. I find this hilarious. In the end, even if you do pull a different number from your magic sources, I doubt it would be too far off from 10 million and therefore, won't change the fact that the HD-DVD drive reached a pathetically low percentage of the Xbox 360 install base at the time. It might not be 3% (it could be slightly more or less), but the adoption rate will still be really low.

I will concede though that it was probably around $25 million or so though (it was based on the number of systems sold times the price of the system).

See, that's not evidence then. You took 2 numbers and multiplied them, called it evidence then slammed me for lacking evidence.

[NWR_insanolord]

The 360 HDDVD drive add-on was unsuccessful, both commercially and in stopping the death of the format. The specifics are unimportant to this discussion.