Talk:Seventh generation of video game consoles/Archive 4

message: The PS3 is the only one that has 1080p HD capabilities. The Xbox 360 can upscale to 1080p but it is not TRUE HD. I think that should be mentioned on the table.--66.176.92.191 (talk) 05:14, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Resolution?

message: On 13 September, 2007 I placed factual evidence once more in to the console sales table please may no one edit these figures unless they may provide factual and real evidence thank you. Animal91X 16:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No you didn't, you basically rely on the fact that everyone is too lazy to look up your sources and read them to see the numbers you put up are completely unsourced made up BS, or taken from crap sites like VGChartz. Then you have the gall to call people who replace your unsourced crap with sourced facts fanboys. And you edit articles with ban threats even though you have no authority to ban anyone. Tehw1k1 21:06, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Seventh Gen. Sales

message: Those numbers are false! They are heavily disputed and gamespot is not a valid source. How can we believe those numbers when NPD doesn't back them based on sales from the same site? NPD has the 360 at 6.3 million flat in the USA and Media crate has the 360 at 400k plus in Japan...That is SOLD not shipped, so are we to believe that the 360 has only sold 2.2 million in every other nation in the world? Sorry if I think something doesn't add up here. Pardon me if something just doesn't seem right, at best the numbers should be left N/A until more reliable numbers are given. To further back this that study didn't include all nations as countries like Canada and Australia are not included.
(Death is a right 10:02, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Those numbers are false! They are heavily disputed and gamespot is not a valid source." - They are not heavily disputed, as far as I can tell. Give me a valid source that disputes that claim. GameSpot is considered a valid source, having been cited many times. "How can we believe those numbers when NPD doesn't back them based on sales from the same site? NPD has the 360 at 6.3 million flat in the USA and Media crate has the 360 at 400k plus in Japan...That is SOLD not shipped, so are we to believe that the 360 has only sold 2.2 million in every other nation in the world?" - If you had read the article, you would find that the data is for July 31, 2007. You are comparing the numbers in the article to data given at the end of August 2007. "Sorry if I think something doesn't add up here. Pardon me if something just doesn't seem right, at best the numbers should be left N/A until more reliable numbers are given." - Seems reliable enough to me. "To further back this that study didn't include all nations as countries like Canada and Australia are not included." - Prove that they are not, please. 71.17.35.93 02:02, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  remove the sales numbers 

message: It is 40 KB long. Laptopdude 01:31, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archive? 

message: Also if it hasn't been changed, the 360's price was dropped to 349. Check all stores.
Are you talking about Elite or Premium?--Kondrayus 21:24, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  wrong price 

message: http://www.gamespot.com/news/6179772.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=newstop&tag=newstop;title;2
That article says the 360 has a 11.6 million installed base, but they posted another article saying it was 8.9....Which is it gamespot, get your story straight!
(Death is a right 01:33, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Different sources, shipped vs. sold.... Tehw1k1 20:41, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gamespot Should NOT be used 

message: "However, Microsoft hopes to surge sales with the release of upcoming exclusives such as BioShock in August"
BioShock has been released for the PC and is due for Xbox 360 release some time later. GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT. Check the link. BioShock Overmage 14:07, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess in terms of consoles it is an exclusive, in that it's only available for Xbox. But that's confusing nonetheless. Charles 18:26, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  BioShock is NOT an exclusive! 

message: reggie fils-aime has stated at a nintendo press conference that the wii is not a next gen console. it is therefore a 6th gen console. and should be moved to that article  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Infernoply (talk • contribs) 13:31, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone always tries to do this.  I'd just like to say that there is no more "next gen".  The so-called "next gen" is now the current gen.  Next gen will be the PS4, Xbox 720, and, uh, Super Wii or something.  Anyway, the Wii belongs in the 7th generation because it is the successor to the GameCube, regardless it not being 20 times more powerful or any other factor.  Because it is not a remake, a slimmed-down version, or anything else, it is a completely different architecture and therefore not a GameCube, making it the successor to the GameCube. Horsepower, and Nintendo's claim to not be competing against the PS3 and Xbox 360, do not deny that fact.  It's after the 6th generation, so it's the 7th generation.  Useight 14:56, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

text: I believe Reggie was actually saying the Wii is a current-gen console, instead of a next-gen one (providing this is the conference-thing or whatever I'm thinking about). You'll need to provide some form of proof of this statement, though. Haipa Doragon (talk) 19:23, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Why does someone always have to start something huge over something as little as this? The Wii is a next gen console. If it were a sixth gen console it would have been released along-side the gamecube. But was it? No. Therefore the Wii is a seventh gen console.--Kondrayus (talk) 14:47, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: the wii is not a next gen console

message: PS3 Article itself says: "Units sold 4.28 million (as of June 30, 2007)" And we have the same number here but for as of September 20, 2007!!! so it has not sold any 10K units for 2 months and 20 days?!?! [36] reference is a "file not found" link. and [37] is an article written on "Posted Sep 13, 2007 1:42 am GMT"!! So it'd be intresting to know where this 20 September date has come from?! Also, the only thing about PS3 sales written in [37] is: "According to the FT, approximately 9 million Wiis were purchased across the globe as of July 31, just barely overtaking the 360's sales of 8.9 million units during the same period. Both platforms were far ahead of the PlayStation 3, which sold only around an estimated 3.7 million units internationally." !!! So there's no new info. Anyway, I remember Sony announced in TGS 2007 that they have sold between 5-6 million PS3. We can't use it as it's not fixed, but atleast change back the date to 30 June.
Nintendo’s Wii takes console lead
Found the original article by Financial Times. Quote: "According to sales data from each console’s launch through to the end of July (or the end of August in Japan), consumers have bought 9m Wiis, 8.9m Xbox units and 3.7m PS3s." So should I assume it's saying PS3 has sold 3.7m as of end of August? Pretty much outdated! GLdK 06:41, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You've been Animal91X'ed! Enjoy your stay. IMO, we should all agree on ONE or TWO sources at the most for worldwide sales, and just stick with those. Too bad there's too many fantards out there. Tehw1k1 20:46, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  PS3 sales number are very wrong! 

message: Most of the Milestone Titles look like a joke and just a milestone title according to the person's POV.
Brain Age and Big Brain academy can't be said to bring the "non-game" trend if there aren't many games like that. You can't claim this in the beginning of a gen, only towards the end.
GeOW being the showcase of UE3, might as well put any game as the showcase of a new engine? UE3 was anticipated I guess, but so have many other engines. If anything, UE3 is getting nothing but bad press lately.
"Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Games marks the first time these two former rival mascots will officially appear in the same game." - Pure POV. I don't see this as Milestone, especially as it's not a trend yet. IF you want to put it, it should be towards the end of the Gen after this proved to be the beginning of a multiple-game trend.
Pokemon Battle Revolution and WiFi... So what? We already knew the Wii can pull it off, is it a milestone title only because it's the first to do it? Can't we say the same thing about R:FoM and whatever 360 game first pulled online off? Or milestone titles for the Wii itself now count as milestone titles for every console?
Halo 3, I guess I can agree with.
"Potter and the Deathly Hallows. This may help Microsoft make its first profitable quarter since the release of the Xbox in 2001" - Is this a joke?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.139.124.63 (talk) 00:35, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, this section is too opinion-based. I'm for deleting it, more than anything, but it's best to see what others say first. Haipa Doragon (talk) 18:39, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Games that aren't "games" popping up is not something new of this generation. Being trendier now doesn't warrant an appearance in milestone titles. GeoW was the first game with the unreal engine, and it does have to do with quality if it gets its own spot in milestone titles (unlike hundreds of other engines, yeah?). But nevermind, it appears to have been deleted. Mario and Sonic would count as a big thing only if they made a trend out of it. No one would care in 20 years if the first Mario & Sonic game was this game if... It's the only one that ever came out. That's why saying it was the "first" or saying anything about it right now isn't important enough. I'd say delete the whole section or just put the Halo one up for now. Xolver 10:48, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Also, to add some more, it appears Sonic is now on SSBB.Xolver 09:28, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Milestone Titles a joke 

message: Someone changed the Xbox 360 Elite Price. I'll change it back.--Kondrayus 22:32, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Elite Price

message: If you go to the "playstation 3" article in wikipedia, it says the Ps3 has 5 million+ sales, and it cites a source that is not vgchartz.com or nextgenwars.com or a source that did not get its info from either of these sites. Perhaps i should change the number of them sold to 5 million here as well? What do you guys think? change it back if you don't agree, ok?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crymetyme1000 (talk • contribs) 16:43, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sales numbers 

message: this is the site i got my info from, so i am changing the total sales numbers ok?
http://n4g.com/News-75304.aspx  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.65.48.142 (talk) 20:39, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that the general consensus is that figures from VG Chartz are not reliable enough for use in Wikipedia articles. Dancter 20:49, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  overall console sales numbers 

message: can someone take a look at the prices for playstation 3?
I'm not sure, didn't exactly check websites, but the 20 Gb (same price as 60 and 80) is 100 dollars more than the 40 Gb. Are these correct? Maybe the 20 Gb comes with more accessories.
thanks
GoldenGoose100 01:57, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  prices for playstation 3 

message: I've been looking up information with regards to the two examples of games touted being originally exclusive to the PS3, namely Assassin's Creed and GTA IV. While I have found a citation specifically mentioning Assassin's Creed losing it's exclusive status, I've yet to actually find an article which specifically says GTA IV was ever an exclusive. Anyone can find any references to it? I'll remove the mention of GTA IV, but if a reference comes up don't hesistate to put it back if the need is there. Chan Yin Keen | Talk 06:48, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Playstation 3 - Loss of exclusives? 

message: The financial statements of Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo are the only truly reliable sources for hard sales numbers. After all these companies are bound by law not to give false statements on their sales numbers to their investors. As tempting as it may be to change them when some news source has updated numbers, they should remain unchanged until the companies issue their next statements, which will be in January 2008. Tehw1k1 04:48, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I completely agree that the numbers should only be updated when the companies release official statements, but we do not have to wait until january 2008. The fiscal year for 06-07 ended in september so all of the companies will be releasing statements sometime soon. The references I just updated with are official reports from sony and nintendo. I have been unable to find a microsoft one so far and it seemed wrong to just leave xbox numbers as they were so I looked for a new number as a temporary replacement while I look for an official statement. The source I used seems to check out so I think it is ok to leave it for now. I am actively searching for a microsoft statement to update the numbers with something official. (not today, but I searched for a while yesterday. I will continue to search later tonight and tomorrow)--Kyle(talk) 21:57, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree with this primarily because the definition of sales means shipped not SOLD. If we want to list it as number of units SHIPPED that's fine but sold implies that it's actually left distribution channels. MysteriousMystery 2:55, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Since when does sales mean shipped? Also, I am confused in general by your statement that sold implies that it's actually left distribution channels. From the way I read that, sold does not just imply that, that is basically the definition. Any chance you could clarify your entire statement because on a whole it is just not making sense too me? --Kyle(talk) 03:31, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In a company statement sold usually means to distributors or large retail chains, it does not indicate sell through to consumer. Due to things like price drops many times sold does not actually indicate that the manufacturer has even been paid for the product (this is why when a price drop occurs retailers don't generally lose the difference in price, they simply take the dropped price off of what they owe the manufacturer based on their remaining inventory). In the case of using financial statements, sold means shipped not sold to consumers. I'm going to edit my explanation a little further to clarify. Here is an example of when sales don't mean sales but shipped. In a company statement shortly after the launch of the Ngage Nokia announced that they had sold 400,000 units. Their definition of sold meant they were available to purchase in retail channels the actual number sold to consumers was shockingly low (under 20,000 worldwide at that point).  MysteriousMystery 3:40, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps the section needs clarification although when I looked at it before reading the financial reports, I understood it to mean sales to distributors and retailers, not to consumers. Just because I knew what it meant when I first read it doesn't mean others will, isn't it. Chan Yin Keen | Talk 03:51, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, it seems that Kyle for example didn't understand that it meant to retailers and distributors and not to consumers. I'd guess that most people don't understand that relative to a manufacturer sold means "produced and no longer in our physical possesion" not "Sold to consumers". This is where the confusion arises. MysteriousMystery 3:52, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the best way to deal with this is a note under units sold specifying that it means sold to distributors and retailers and not to consumers. I'd guess 90% of people will read sold and use that to believe that it means to consumers. MysteriousMystery 4:06, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree to adding the note. Chan Yin Keen | Talk 04:14, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Same--Kyle(talk) 04:17, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, although styling could've been better, or there is a proper system to adding notes that I am unaware of. Chan Yin Keen | Talk 04:33, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Well, I didn't entirely think that sold meant to customers, I was just confused by what you had said. Something about the way you worded the second sentence- I can't quite think of how to explain what my mind made of it. Also, somehow my mind does not connect the word shipped to money, sales=money but shipped=units made. I know this is wrong, but that is my initial thought when I see the words. --Kyle(talk) 04:11, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Worldwide sales standings should not be changed until January 2008

message: Attempting to resolve that statement regarding both of them being marketed to different audiences, but right now all I'm getting is like a general feeling that they are meant for different demographics rather than an official line stating "we are marketing this to kids/old people/core gamers etc". What I have found though, are two interviews (probably more as I dig around later), one with the Senior Marketing Manager for the PSP which states it "when we launched the PSP the key demographic for us was really north of 25 years old"  and another with Sony's Marketing Head which says the PSP is more for the "core gamer market". Thoughts on whether this clears up the demographic for the PSP? I'll be digging for articles about the Nintendo DS now. Chan Yin Keen | Talk 10:40, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Engadget interview with Reggie Fils-Aime All I could glean off this one was their insistence that they are here, "[with the DS and Revolution] ...bringing innovation to the marketplace that satisfies the hardest of the hardcore as well as brings new consumers into the marketplace". Reckon we can find better sources? I'll probably be filling that needed reference after this. Chan Yin Keen | Talk 12:15, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  PSP/NDS audience, demographics. 

message: Does anyone else think the "Launch price" and "Included accessories and extras" sections are getting a bit too large? What are your thoughts on trimming them down? Which skus are the most relevant to this article, the most recently released ones, or the ones released at a console's launch? Tehw1k1 05:44, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ugh, you're so right. But the launch prices are modest-sized boxes in comparison to the mammoth Accessories section. I'm thinking we can cut down by taking out unnecessary details like the colour of the finish or chrome rimming or whatever. Perhaps some separately bulleted accessories can be combined into one line under one bullet. I'll give it a once over and please reverse what I've done if you think the details I took out are necessary. It's just that the way I figure it, this is a general comparison of consoles rather than a full listing of all things included in the package. If they wanted that, they can look up the console's wiki page or view product info when they go to buy it. (I see this page has been promoted to High Priority. When did that happen?)--clicketyclickyaketyyak 23:00, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I put in some hide tag code things to shrink the table. Is it good? Should there be more? clicketyclickyaketyyak 21:19, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice work. I think it does look better, though I'm not sure if it's due to the smaller text or edits. Can you detail your edits or link to a comparison? IMO there's no need for details on more than 3 SKUs (I realize its a completely arbitrary number, but 4 or more is overkill I think).  Tehw1k1 (talk) 08:52, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  comparison table bloat - too much information? 

message: The Xbox is being criticized for not having the disk capabilities that the PS3 has. GTA might have to come on multiple disk. I think that is worth mentioning--66.176.92.191 (talk) 00:28, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good, but not GTA speculation (unless in a quotation). I've certainly seen criticism of the 360's disk capacity before. I think one was in an interview with Hideo Kojima about MGS4, explaining why he won't bring it to the 360. Will google. clicketyclickyaketyyak 05:57, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Added a paragraph about it to the 360 section. Check it out and tell me what you think. For balance, I say a paragraph should be added to the PS3 section on the PS3's slower drive speed, resulting in longer load times. clicketyclickyaketyyak 09:36, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

text: ok, we've been through the load time thing before and it has been said elsewere (can't remember where, check the Blu-ray page maybe) that a 16x DVD is about the same speed as a 2x BD. I can tell you from personal experience that the 360's games load at about the speed as PS3 games. That being said, I don't thinks it's fair to put something supporting the PS3 and bashing the 360 (not literally, but you get the point) without doing the converse as well. Right off the top of my head, I can't think of anything that the 360 has on the PS3 other than game selection and price (not relevant from an encyclopediac viewpoint). The current section is very well written and I definately do not see POV in it. If you can't find anything other than load time (which I've already stated is not valid), it may not be a bad idea to omit the section because it could be taken as fanboyism, (I personally have nothing against either console, though I do think it was a bad move by Microsoft to not include a hard drive with all their consoles.) I guess you can make the call on whether to keep it or not. Thingg 00:25, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Xbox exclusive problems

message: I am not trying to express fanboyism with any of my edits. If you perceive any of them as fanboyism, please contact me and let me know of your changes. (Obviously, you don't have to do this, but it would be greatly appreciated.) I also wanted to say that although the PS3 section on Backwards Compatibility is much longer than the 360 or the Wii's, I feel this is necessary because of the many different PS3 versions and BC capabilities. 
===Questions===
Should the Xbox 360 Xbox Live Video Marketplace, Wii EverybodyVotes Channel, or Wii Sign Mii Out channel be counted as seperate services?
Does anyone know what wi-fi band (a, b, or g) that the DS uses?
Is it true that the PSP Slim is lighter than the DS Lite?
Thanks for the help. Thingg 03:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The PSPslim&lite is indeed lighter than the DSlite. The PSPS&L's product description lists it as 186 g. The DSL's product description lists it as 218 g clicketyclickyaketyyak 20:25, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes on my numerous edits

message: Should the Xbox 360 Xbox Live Video Marketplace, Wii EverybodyVotes Channel, or Wii Sign Mii Out channel be counted as seperate services?
Does anyone know what wi-fi band (a, b, or g) that the DS uses?
Is it true that the PSP Slim is lighter than the DS Lite?
Thanks for the help. Thingg 03:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The PSPslim&lite is indeed lighter than the DSlite. The PSPS&L's product description lists it as 186 g. The DSL's product description lists it as 218 g clicketyclickyaketyyak 20:25, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Questions

message: I have never heard of the new PSP being reffered to as the "PSP Lite." I had removed that name from the table, and Silver Edge (who I assume, based on his numerous edits on this article, knows what he is talking about) put it back in. If anyone could explain this to me, I would appreciate it. If no one can find something referring to the new PSP as the "PSP Lite", I think we should remove that name from the article. Thingg (talk) 16:27, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The article for the new PSP is named PlayStation Portable Slim and Lite, and two sources cited in that article refer to it as the "PSP Slim & Lite",   one of those sources is a uk.playstation.com article. It seems PSP Slim & Lite is used only on the packaging in Europe, while "PSP" is used on the packaging for the new PSP in Japan and North America. See Talk:PlayStation Portable Slim and Lite#Name  and Talk:PlayStation Portable Slim and Lite#The Slim & Lite moniker is for U.K. & Europe only --Silver Edge (talk) 19:39, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry about that and thanks for the answer. Thingg (talk) 17:32, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  PSP Lite? 

message: Regarding the removal of the 'cached' part of urls (by Silver Edge), isn't it a good thing to use the Google Crawler that preserves websites in an archive in order to prevent Link rot? I'm just afraid that in five years when Nintendo releases its next console (or even before then), their Wii website will be taken down. Even while I was looking for things to replace the 'ref needed', I was finding references to an article on Bloomberg, but when I went there, it was gone. And I just had to replace a reference to an article about record-breaking Halo 3 because, as it said when I went to the link, "The page you are seeking has expired and is no longer available at MSNBC.com." Doesn't the caching prevent references from becoming dead links, or am I neglecting something in Wikipedia policy (sorry, I'm not very familiar with it yet)? 
(On that subject... Thingg, maybe you would like to replace the WP:GRIEF link on your userpage with this version, which is cached by Google, as the page has since been deleted and can no longer be read otherwise.) clicketyclickyaketyyak 19:57, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  cached pages 

message: The 360 SKUs (and PS3 SKUs?) are out of date on the comparison chart. The "core" SKU no longer exists and has been replaced with the "arcade" SKU, etc...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Longman391 (talk • contribs) 19:24, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They are not out of date. The new SKUs are mentioned along with the old ones because they existed, not because they are still being sold. Chan Yin Keen | Talk 04:21, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  360 SKUs out of date 

message: So I finally had enough of all the edits to release dates and prices and sales/shipped figures and requested semi-protection, if you're wondering why the page suddenly shows that it's semi-protected. You can, of course, request deprotection, but I hope you'll agree with me that it's much nicer to not have to check through a bunch of edits to find out what the actual figures were after multiple intervening edits have potentially changed the figures beyond recognition and removed the actual info. As long as VGChartz exists (and stores keep lowering the prices of consoles), I'm afraid that semi-protection seems the best solution... clicketyclickyaketyyak 23:25, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page semi-protected 

message: I recently found this on the internet saying the ps3 surrpassed 7million sales some time ago (november 9th)
http://www.digg.com/playstation/PS3_sales_pass_the_7_million_mark_faster_than_360
So I'm stillconfussed about how to work the website but hopefully this is the right place and some one can update these figures.
Thank Alan
:What was digged was vgchartz. Unfortunately, we're not using VG Chartz. If you look back on top of the discussion page, we don't consider VG Chartz as a valid source. So, all we wait for are sources like the quarterly reports from Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony to ascertain how many have left their hands. Chan Yin Keen | Talk 18:51, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  PS3 Sales way off  

message: On the comparison of Xbox 360s, Playstation 3's, and Wiis and how many of them have been sold or shipped to retailers, it says that the Xbox 360 has sold 17.7 million as of 8 JANUARY 2008.  Did someone come from the future to tell us that?  Also, we should get an update for the number shipped to retailers, because it looks wierd saying that there are 2.7 million less than the number sold.  Stevv (talk) 03:57, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Getting Reports from the Future? 

message: How can the worldwide sales figures for the Xbox 360 be lower than the US figures? pjh3000 (talk) 18:39, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Because those are the last available numbers. Notice how the Wii and the PS3 numbers of sales units are also defaced. -- ReyBrujo (talk) 23:31, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sales standings