Demand as in who wants one.  The desire is active and present and relief is sought.  Otherwise, there is no demand.  Europe had a few extra months to save up money for this launch and we all knew the price of it since May '06.  "I'll get one later when the price drops" or "I'll get one, but there are no good games for it" are not statements made under actual demand.  Sony shipped a million to Europe, and only sold 600,000; and people have put them on eBay or might return them?  With 400,000 still in stores?  That doesn't sound as if it would boost confidence on the surface.  That is why I'm curious about future European numbers---launch numbers are usually skewed by weird anomalies, such as dud systems, free tvs, and resellers.  Not to mention the delay offers news from the US and Japan about what the future holds software-wise (in this case, it's not pretty) AND how Sony seems to really shaft Europe, such as the delay and removing the full backwards compatibility, with the exception of 125 from Britain who got those tvs.  Plus, DMC4 and Assassin's Creed are also going to 360; is MGS4 and FFXIII (the only current 3rd party exclusives), both coming out who knows when, enough to build much demand for the system now?  To be honest, I was expecting Ace Combat 6 for the PS3.  I'm shocked that it is now coming for the 360, apparently exclusively, with online 16 player action.  That really hurt my demand for the system and I actually own one.

Well I have my doubts about the actual figures but, if they are true, disputing demand because they didn't sell out strikes me as utterly ridiculous.

They sell more than almost every other console launch in history and still have some in shops if I decide to go in and buy one today and that's a negative? By that logic, anything sitting on a store shelf can be considered a failure. We should all be walking around empty shops.

So if a console sells much less but sells out because they only made, say, 4 - that's a good thing? That the manufactured 'demand' by undersupplying can be seen as a good thing is a complete farce. If that's the case, the Phantom must surely be the greatest console ever made (or not).

Again:  "Demand as in who wants one.  The desire is active and present and relief is sought.  Otherwise, there is no demand."  That doesn't mean that individuals who do not want one now does not ever want one; demand is not a now-or-never situation.  The Phantom has no supply, so its demand cannot be substantially recognized by how much of the supply is exhausted at release.  Sell-through numbers remain important, which is why it would be nice to get ongoing EU numbers---that is why, even though I got Datschge's point, I said launch numbers can be misleading.

As for selling 4 being a success, no.  Wouldn't, for instance, Sony want 20 million PS3 owners to match the 20 million PS2 owners?  Even if half of this examples current PS2 owners wanted a PS3, that's 10 million people wanting one, fully aware it will be released and for how much---all one million, which is just 1/20th of Sony's current (PS2) owners, should've been sold with 9 million more going, "WTF?  Where's mine?"

Of course they would. That's supposed to happen in the first weekend of release? Datschge was being very simplistic when he said "A sell out should happen as long as there's a high enough demand" while implying a negative in the European PS3 launch. If there is any truth in the numbers, the European launch was a resounding success.

No, the 20 million isn't to happen in the first weekend; there weren't 20 million available.  There were 1 million... demand should equal that supply, but it didn't.  I think that as a launch it did better than previous launches because it had way more systems than demand; the problem for Sony is why there wasn't a sell-out.  I guess those extra four months didn't build up the type of anticipation I would assume Sony expected.  I also am less concerned with the launch itself as I am about the long-run.  Still, one thing can be said in the PS3's defense---it has sold in one weekend in all of Europe what it took 3 months to do in Japan.

btw, do you doubt the numbers---for better or worse?

I guess Datschge could step forward and explain his own post.

I doubt the real figures are that high. Now I have no firm basis for that except anecdotal evidence. I was in two game shops on the friday it launched (looking for Theme Park DS), there was no buzz about it and the guys in one shop actually said it was performing badly for a launch day. Now two shops is hardly an accurate sample base but I've heard similar stories in other areas in the UK and Ireland.

Now while chart figures are obviously likely to beat my anecdotes and two-shop sample base in terms of accuracy, they are extrapolated from a small sample base and could well be out quite considerably.

Or they might be accurate. I don't really know. If they are accurate, well, they surprise me. I would have guessed a far poorer performance.

Hmmm, well let me ask this -did the original Playstation do well on its launch? I'm guessing it didn't sell-out, at least I don't remember a big brouhaha at the time. After the release of innovative and ground-breaking games, the system really picked up steam and became dominant. What hooked me was Symphony of the Night (still one of my all-time favorites Anyway, I think Sony expected their system to be an "instant hit", but the price is just too high. In fact, I think most of us saw that coming, and I find it ridiculous that there are people in Sony who get paid $$$$$ for making such stupid decisions and clearly they have no clue how to market anything (I think the same could be said for Sega by the way)! Seriously, most anyone of us could have said "Um, $600 is too much. Make the blu-ray optional and at $400 it will be a success."

cheers,

-avatar!