Perfect. <32038:
![]()
By 2040, just Xbox Ones outnumber humans (PS4s take until 2045 to reach this landmark). By 2050 there are over ten consoles for each human (and 80% of them are Xbox Ones).
Where do I apply to write about common sense for money?
This assumes his errors are due to mere incompetence.![]()
Can we have a basic maths requirement for game journalists? Like 5th grade level?
don't read too much into it.
Holy shit, those graphs, those projections based on keeping percentage increases fixed! Creating pointless counterfactuals doesn't help the analysis, Ars, it only confuses it. They even recognize it's ridiculous, but there it is.
This is a goldmine of hilarity, I need to look at it more closely.
Awful graphs. Even the ones based in reality I don't really see what their comparing.
This guy. Is this for real?
What in the actual fuck is this article?
Like, wow.
Putting analysis in the title of this thread is an insult to that word.
2038:
![]()
By 2040, just Xbox Ones outnumber humans (PS4s take until 2045 to reach this landmark). By 2050 there are over ten consoles for each human (and 80% of them are Xbox Ones).
Read the last line of his. It's essentially a plaintive cry to Microsoft for help as even with his fabulist skills he can't even make Xbox one catch up unless 2024.So they made this stupid graph then pointed out later that it is stupid and console sales don't work this way. What's the point of this article again?
*Shines Detective-GAF beacon*Hahaha! Same writer too.
How do these articles get by the editor?
edit: Kyle Orland is the senior gaming editor. Well then.
Well, assuming a normal distribution, for every good analysis, there should be a bad one.
What?
Lol, okay.
The argument is supposed to be that even if you implausibly believe that the Xbox will continue its current sales increases, it would still take way longer than the lifetime of the product for it to outsell PS4.
That's a perfectly coherent point even if you're incapable of understanding it.
I think some of you saw a graph where Xbox outsold PS4 and your brains switched off with rage.
So they made this stupid graph then pointed out later that it is stupid and console sales don't work this way. What's the point of this article again?
It is the year 2024. Every man, woman and child in America owns an average of 3 Xbox consoles, but many individuals have far more.
Personally I've stacked up five to use as a nightstand.
I think everyone understood the premise - they are just criticizing the point of the article.
That being - why would anyone go into an analysis of made up numbers projected in unrealistic conditions over a longer period of life than the product being analyzed?
It ... there is no sense to it at all.
The point of the article looks to be saying it would take the XB1 maintaining current YOY sales till 2024 to top PS4 - but who gives a shit? How is this relevant? Even if it was relevant, the methodology used doesn't hold water at all.
2038:
![]()
By 2040, just Xbox Ones outnumber humans (PS4s take until 2045 to reach this landmark). By 2050 there are over ten consoles for each human (and 80% of them are Xbox Ones).
It says Mr. Orland is a comp-sci major too.
I was EECS, but I remember taking A WHOLE LOT of math classes. What the heck happened?
Bingo bongo.
Comp -sci major at which university though?
I think everyone understood the premise - they are just criticizing the point of the article.
That being - why would anyone go into an analysis of made up numbers projected in unrealistic conditions over a longer period of life than the product being analyzed?
It ... there is no sense to it at all.
![]()
If these trends continue... ayyyyyyyyyyy
Geez some guys here are dumb.
The whole point of the article is that even assuming absolute best case scenario for Xbox, it isn't gonna catch up. Which is, outside some major black swan, a fair assessment. The graphs are meant to show how even under extreme circumstances the gap won't be closed.
Anyone who reads this as "by 2024 XBO will be on top" has severe reading comprehension issues and should feel bad.
Geez some guys here are dumb.
The whole point of the article is that even assuming absolute best case scenario for Xbox, it isn't gonna catch up. Which is, outside some major black swan, a fair assessment. The graphs are meant to show how even under extreme circumstances the gap won't be closed.
Anyone who reads this as "by 2024 XBO will be on top" has severe reading comprehension issues and should feel bad.
Geez some guys here are dumb.
The whole point of the article is that even assuming absolute best case scenario for Xbox, it isn't gonna catch up. Which is, outside some major black swan, a fair assessment. The graphs are meant to show how even under extreme circumstances the gap won't be closed.
Anyone who reads this as "by 2024 XBO will be on top" has severe reading comprehension issues and should feel bad.
So they made this stupid graph then pointed out later that it is stupid and console sales don't work this way. What's the point of this article again?
Geez some guys here are dumb.
The whole point of the article is that even assuming absolute best case scenario for Xbox, it isn't gonna catch up. Which is, outside some major black swan, a fair assessment. The graphs are meant to show how even under extreme circumstances the gap won't be closed.
Anyone who reads this as "by 2024 XBO will be on top" has severe reading comprehension issues and should feel bad.
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2015/...-widen-its-console-sales-lead-over-microsoft/
There are some interesting graphs from Ars, like always:
![]()
![]()
![]()
Lock it up if old.
I hope I'm reading this wrong, but is this trying to say that PS4 + Xbone sales will sell 65 million and 70 million respectively in 2024?
I hope I'm reading this wrong, but is this trying to say that PS4 and Xbone sales will be 65 million and 70 million respectively in 2024? And the LTD will be 350+ Million and 300 million respectively?
You're supposed to laugh, in a sense. It's showing the impossibility of the Xbone overtaking the PS4.