The difference I think is that the original MS report came before this Reuters report. Now I do not know when that original press release was prepared so I do not know if both figures are correct. All we do know is that a reputeable news agency has quoted Microsoft as saying 1.7 million presales in the US nothing more.
It's a pre-order number that differs from what Microsoft themselves have stated just before launch. 1.5 million pre-orders worldwide does not become 1.7 million in the US overnight.
Being a reporter at a major agency does not mean you're instantly more credible. They're not claiming to have first day sales numbers (though people here are quick to believe a random blog that does so), they're stating a stat we already know (pre-orders) but giving a different number. There's no reason to believe them.
The rest of it (on the need to reach casual gamers) is fine. I'm simply questioning the one sentence that makes no sense and contradicts the publisher. IF there were 1.7 million pre-orders in the US alone, Microsoft would have already issued a press release about it instead of stating the 1.5 million number.
@Laoldar, if it were a review of how Halo 3 plays, I would trust GameSpot more than Reuters. If it is regarding BUSINESS (such as MSFT's strategy or sales numbers), then I would far trust Reuters or Bloomberg over GameSpot. Interest in playing video games doesn't mean you get better statistics.
Large news outlets are not perfect. Nevermind that this reporter doesn't cite where they get this information from (afterall, they're claiming to have better info that Microsoft) but why would you believe a large outlet that reports gaming news as an after-thought?
And just to keep this in one comment, welshbloke, Yes, they quoite Microsoft...yet Microsoft themselves said a different number. What do you think is more likely...Microsoft giving out an updated number only to Reuters, or the Reuters reporter getting the number wrong? Newspapers run a daily corrections section for a reason.
@Laoldar, I would take the word of "a reporter for a non-gaming oriented news outlet" over that of any other gaming press if the non-gaming oriented news outlet is Reuters. Reuters hires professional journalists. Most gaming press are made up of part-time college kids and people who never even studied journalism. They just like gaming...the fact that they like gaming enough to write on a website doesn't mean they can get numbers any better than a professional journalist.
Well this is Reuters and one would hope they at least attempted to check the sources. They quote Microsoft as the source.
"Hyperbole" OK I will give you that one, although in the context of the article it is the biggest games title (Cough at launch) but hell yes a little elaboration for effect hopefully does nobody any real harm.
The Reuters article is different than the official statement from Microsoft (which had 1.5 million overall). I think it's more likely that a reporter got the number wrong rather than the publisher.
I think it's more likely that a reporter for a non-gaming oriented news outlet got the pre-order number wrong, rather than every other gaming press getting it wrong.
Nice hyperbole with "biggest games title ever". People forget that some titles have sold 20-40 million copies in the past.
Yes more Halo news. Then what did you expect this is the biggest games title ever. This article brings a couple of snippets together of which I had not seen before, namely that MS have said they took 1.7 million presales for the US (Previously it was announced as 1.5 and not clear about the US) additionally it quotes the Deutsche Bank as having checks that indicate a higher than expected sales and potential revenue 80% higher than expected for this fiscal year.
2
The difference I think is that the original MS report came before this Reuters report. Now I do not know when that original press release was prepared so I do not know if both figures are correct. All we do know is that a reputeable news agency has quoted Microsoft as saying 1.7 million presales in the US nothing more.