Gaming and flying
CRank: 5Score: 720

The PS3 will remain in third place until late 2014

N4g has attracted gamers of all types and has become the preeminent home for gamers and fanboys of various allegiances.
One of the most pointless, albeit heavily debated, issues on the N4g comments section is the ongoing worldwide sales numbers of PS3 and Xbox360 hardware.

The thesis for this blog is not to instigate hateful retaliation or start a flame war.
Instead, this piece merely hopes to demonstrate, with official Sony and MS data that:

1. Subjective sales surveys such as VGchartz and 'active install base research' are flawed and meaningless
2. The PS3 has indeed outsold the 360 worldwide every year since its release in 2006 according to official data
3. The 360/ps3 gap is officially at 3.5 million
4. The PS3 will not catch the 360 until September 2014 according to official data.

Currently the PS3 is thought to be in third place, with the 360 holding a narrow lead over the ps3 in worldwide sales.
Despite launching a year later, PS3 fans maintain that the ps3 has outsold the 360 every year since launch and is rapidly closing the initial sales gap of almost 9 million consoles.

Curiously, repeated posts on N4g speculate that the ps3 may have even caught the 360 in worldwide sales, citing 'research' on active install bases that reports higher ps3 statistics.

However, in truth these reports are likely flawed in much the same way that VGchartz reports are flawed - both are based on limited samples and subjective inferences. As a consequence, these reports are, at best, merely rumours.
Unfortunately such subjective and meaningless rumours are oft favoured by fanboys, as they lend credence to their fanboy agenda.

Realistically, the only accurate guide to hardware sales come from the financial reports that both Microsoft and Sony make to their investors. In these reports, both companies are required by law to supply performance data to their investors.

Despite the fact that this information is readily available to the N4g community, it is rarely used or accessed.
Most likely, N4g users do not know where to look, or do not like the information as it does not fit their agenda.
In the interest of objectivity, I have provided the relevant links:

http://www.microsoft.com/in...
http://scei.co.jp/corporate...

What is particularly important to consider, is that the information in these links is required to be accurate by law.
Thus, we can be assured that this information represents the lawfully required best practice of quoting hardware sales. Indeed, it is infinitely preferable to any other 'research' or 'survey' that is mistakenly quoted by the community.

The only caveat to this official information is the 'lag' introduced by the retrospective nature of accounting in financial quarters. That is, as soon as the information is published it is effectively 'out-of-date' until the next financial report.
Nevertheless, it provides and effective measure that is second to none.

Using this official company data, we are readily able to see that the ps3 has marginally outsold the 360 worldwide since 2006.
Sorry, 360 fans, it is true.

The most recent official reports put the ps3 at 51.3 million sold, while the 360 is at 55.8 million sold.
As can be seen in the reports, in the 5 years that the ps3 has been available, it has closed the original gap of 9 million by only 5.5 million, to 3.5 million.
None too shabby!
PS3 fans are right to point this out - much to the chagrin of 360 fans that care about sales.

Astoundingly, however, this is where Ps3 fanboys get stuck.
They fail to consider the implication of the long term sales that have manifested to date.

On closer inspection, the average rate of growth is too low!
Over 5 years, the ps3 has gained 5.5 million in total sales on the 360, representing an average yearly gain of 1.1 million or less.
Using this long term sales rate, we can estimate at what date the PS3 will finally be even with the 360 in worldwide sales.

The official ps3/360 gap is 3.5 million today.
Thus, to close this gap, assuming the ps3 continues to outsell the 360 in the exact same way it has done for 5 years, will take until September 2014.

Proof:
Sept 2011 Gap = 3.5 million
Sept 2012 Gap = 2.4 million (This year ps3 outsells 360 by 1.1million)
Sept 2013 Gap = 1.3 million (Again, the ps3 outsells 360 by 1.1 million)
Sept 2014 Gap = 0.2 Million (Again, the ps3 outsells 360 by 1.1 million)

As can be seen, when we use the official data, and we make the assumption that the ps3 will continue to outsell the 360 at exactly the same rates as it has done for the last 5 years, we see the ps3 remain in third place until nearly 2015.

Of course, this news will likely anger or even infuriate ps3 fans on N4g.

Nevertheless, the numbers don't lie.
September 2014.
You heard it here first.

MaximusPrime5276d ago

Well thats your opinion that no one care about.

Hufandpuf5276d ago

How can you be mad at facts? I bet if the blog talked about 360 in last you'd be like "i agree". I personally don't think PS3 is in last but hey, the guy has some facts in his blog.

sdtarm5276d ago

why are you guys so defensive? he just said something that is true, this is an opinion which i doubt anyone care about since he said it himself this topic is pointless. and about the 'facts' i doubt he can predict the future, anything could happen, sony goes in bankrupt or M$ goes in bankrupt, we never know so where are you getting at?

death2smoochie5276d ago

How is this opinion when the man used actual data from Sony and Microsoft? Or does VGChartz and other forms of analysis that requires "guessing" now seem more accurate than actual financial data?
Only on N4G.COM folks...only on N4G.COM

MrBeatdown5275d ago

It's not opinion, but it's not fact either, as the author tries to imply by calling it "news". The numbers from Sony and Microsoft are fact. But using those numbers from the past five years doesn't make speculation about the next three years fact.

He's just finding the average rate at which the PS3 is catching up, then assuming that that rate will be constant for the next three years and is basically ignoring everything else. For example, why are we looking at data from 2007 to see how the PS3 will hold up to the 360 in 2012? Wouldn't it make more sense to give more weight to this past year as an indicator of how 2012 will play out?

Just finding an average based on previous years is no more accurate than the research or reports that he calls "meaningless rumors" which in reality, are likely far more in-depth in their analysis and use of data than the bit of basic math he used to come up with September 2014 as the date PS3 will pass 360.

Sheikh Yerbouti5275d ago (Edited 5275d ago )

Mark Twain said there are three types of lies:

Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics

While it is good to use public information, you have to be mindful of what type of data you are looking at. Not only is there a difference in fiscal years between the companies. There is a difference in what those numbers actually mean, intrinsically different due to how the companies operate. Does it represent systems sold to store or consumers? Are the numbers offset for returns and refurbs?

PP's methodology is right, but he is assuming that the rate the gap closes at 1.1 consoles. Pretty straightforward forecasting, but Sony has something for the first time this generation - a price advantage.

If left unanswered, I think the gap will officially close mid-year 2013 if not before. Not too far off from PP's prediction, but then it is not too far off from now. Generation ends in parity and fanboys will argue in perpetuity on who actually won.

Anon19745276d ago (Edited 5276d ago )

Couple of things wrong with this article. The first, and most glaring.

"...'active install base research' are flawed and meaningless"

Nothing could be further from the truth. Developers and retailers alike pay a helluva lot of money to find out how many consoles are out in the wild. They'd be stupid not to. To dismiss these important figures is incredible naive. VGChartz, I 100% agree. There's nothing remotely useful on that site in my opinion. Research into active installed units provided by well respected and established marketing firms are extremely important figures to those in the business.

As a game developer myself, I strongly rely on install base figures when looking at what platforms to expend my company's resources on. Sales are meaningless if those units aren't in use. And this is just one of the figures I look at when making a decision on what platforms to release on. The sales figures from each company don't even factor into my decision. Install base and sales results from similar products are much more important than overall sales. For example, the Wii sold like gangbusters, but based on active units and software sell rates for my type of games, I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole.

It's funny to me that the author has taken the time to write this article, but hasn't even attempted to look into the research conducted by the marketing agencies into the install base, choosing instead to merely dismiss the data out of hand. That's sloppy at best, at worst it's dishonest. How can you completely dismiss something without even looking into it?

"The PS3 will not catch the 360 until September 2014 according to official data."

That's just ridiculous. The official data predicts no such thing. If you looked at trend lines from 2009, the PS3 looked set to overcome the 360's total sales by the next year. That obviously didn't happen. If you looked at sales up to 2007, the figure would have looked different again.

Sales are dynamic and multiple external factors can have a huge impact, like Kinect's surge, the recession, Blu-Ray's adoption, price cut reactions, etc..etc. To make such a prediction based off historical sales data is meaningless.

"the numbers don't lie."

No, they don't. However, when you make broad and overly simplified assumptions based off these numbers while displaying a reluctance to even research other data sources while outright ignoring the dynamic nature of the data and glossing over external market factors - it certainly draws into question the basis of what is ultimately your "best guess" on the issue.

KING_KAI5276d ago Show
Bathyj5276d ago

Disappointed?

They've sold over 10M a year every year.

How much MORE do you think they expected to sell?

xX-StolenSoul-Xx5276d ago

Why would I be angry about this?

PoweredParaglider5276d ago

I apologise.
I should have said "ps3 fanboys"

"Ps3 fans" tend to be very rational.
I am a ps3 fan myself... and PC fan ... and 360 fan.

WildArmed5254d ago

We no need fans in winter!

Only in summer.

/random comment

iamnsuperman5276d ago

There is one factor not explored here and that is the price cut. For the latest figures it is not enough time for the impact to be measured. I agree with the figures presented but you may want to humour these (especially this) factor.

PoweredParaglider5276d ago (Edited 5276d ago )

Well, that is not entirely true - I did factor in price cuts.

The average sales of the last five years that I linked to already include previous sales cuts and sku reshuffles. Thus, the previous ps3 pricecuts are embodied in the numbers that we have access to.

What you are suggesting is that this pricecut will radically increase the rate of ps3 outselling 360 over and above the longterm average that already includes the historical effect of prior ps3 price cuts. I don't understand how that would manifest.

Sure, the ps3 might have a spike in sales for the near future from the recent pricecut, but this will be no different to spikes it had from price cuts in the 5 years before.

Thus, the 5 year average is a good indication of what we can expect, on balance, when both MS and Sony have adjusted their pricing strategies.

After all, don't forget that MS will likely also respond with their own pricecut if the ps3 gains too much momentum - thereby reverting the sales race to the long term average.

Sheikh Yerbouti5275d ago (Edited 5275d ago )

Difference between past price cuts and this one.

PS3 has the advantage, with the cheapest of the full-featured models. Even the 4GB 360 is at a disadvantage with the PS3 at this price.

Right now the experiencing what will be measured as a bump in sales overs MS. The longer it is unanswered, the more your model is thrown off in favor of Sony.

Still even if MS answers, analysts and their forecasting models are looking at next year for the two to reach parity.

Kee5276d ago (Edited 5276d ago )

I don't care because I already have one. I don't need the PS3 to sell more to justify my purchase of it. I already have done that by playing hours upon hours of games on it.

Edit: @iamnsuperman I couldn't have put it better myself.

iamnsuperman5276d ago

And sadly this is the problem with this generation. I am not sure why people defend their purchase. Nor do I understand why people care how many X consoles are sold. They are all in a position that have a large amount of consoles sold which means they will not drop out of console making any time soon. If these people are going to fight over something (never mind how ridiculous it may be to defend your purchase) it should games. Games mean a lot to games. Sales mean a lot to the manufacturers. The problem is no matter how unrelated and stupid the "victory" is, it is still a victory to these people.

Lets just play are games and respect each consoles merit.

Zir05276d ago

Thats only if MS doesn't cut price. But this pretty much confirms the 360 will beat the PS3 this gen.

PS3 fanboys needs to just get over that fact and enjoy the games they have to play.

Motorola5276d ago

Beats in sales yes, but not in games in my opinion.

Show all comments (36)
110°

Sony Shuts Down Video-Game Studio Bluepoint

Sony Group Corp. is shutting down Bluepoint Games, the PlayStation subsidiary responsible for developing remakes of video games such as Demon’s Souls.

Roughly 70 employees will lose their jobs amid the studio closure, a PlayStation spokesperson said, writing in a statement that the decision was made “following a recent business review.” Bluepoint will officially shutter next month.

Read Full Story >>
bloomberg.com
Neonridr1h ago

Well this sucks. Were they working on anything lately?

BlackCountryBob1h ago

They’d been working on a God of War GaaS game that got shut down I think. Had been hoping they would be taking the lead on the remake of the original trilogy as their next project instead.

Neonridr49m ago

damn, loved their work on the Uncharted series remasters. That would have been great as I missed the earlier GoW entries.

-Foxtrot1h ago

Go f*** yourself Sony

Your stupid management are the ones who made them waste years on a God of War live service title only to cancel it.

This is insane, they’ve really screwed up here, what the actual f*** man.

KiRBY300024m ago

Sony has been sabotaging themselves for the whole generation. their focus on live service has been an absolute disaster for everyone involved, the gamers, the studios, the investors. where are the solo games? what did Bluepoint do to deserve this? they done a brilliant job remastering and remaking games for sony and this is how sony treat them? after years wasted for a crap GOW live service nobody wanted.

man, fuck sony. they're so dumb it's incredible.

isarai_lee21m ago

I hate Jim so damn much for his GAAS push, this is absolute bullsh*t!

Cacabunga15m ago

I think we can sadly say that we are witnessing the PlayStation fortress collapse before our eyes..

Johnh522350m ago

This really sucks they couldve did Socom remaster or live service instead of milking gow to get shut down this sucks a good studio.

Show all comments (15)
20°

Canada’s Top Selling Video Games of 2025

See which games topped Canada’s 2025 sales charts, how Canadian-made series shaped the list, and which older hits refused to drop out.

Read Full Story >>
4scarrsgaming.com
60°

Sony Won’t Raise PS5 Price Despite Rising RAM Costs, Software and Services to Cover the Gap

Sony won’t raise PS5 price despite rising RAM costs, aiming to offset higher memory expenses through software and service sales growth.

isarai_lee1d 1h ago

Hope that doesn't mean a blanket GAAS push like Jim did, a few studios is fine but not all. But i mean consoles historically are mostly sold at a loss with game/merch meant to recoup lifetime costs, so not unfamiliar ground.

z2g1h ago

it means your games and subscriptions are going to get more expensive.

isarai_lee18m ago

Likely, but not inherently.

Goodguy0120h ago

Makes me thank the heavens I bought my current ram, ps5, and steam deck before this price increases nonsense lol.

z2g1h ago(Edited 1h ago)

but you're still going to incur the cost of the ram price increases bc the games you buy going forward are going to be more expensive to pay for the ram increase

z2g1h ago

so the console won't get more expensive... the games will. I'd almost rather it be the other way around considering the games and services cost increase would end up costing cumulatively more than just paying a bit more for a console. but I guess thats why they most likely made that decision.

Dandizzle58m ago

It means when you buy digital goods from Sony its helping others not have to shell out big $$$$ for a ps5. No one wants consoles to become unaffordable.