It does, and the confusion is entirely intentional.
In the end EA and Microsoft have different goals.
MS knows that they can't really grow their console customer base much this late in the generation, so their focus was to show how efficient they were in keeping their current customers happy and spending. Microsoft showed that their customers are spending more money on average per head than an equivalent PS4 customer. An optimist would say this is good, because that means they are keeping their hard core fanbase in anticipation of the next generation.
EA, however, focus on the consumer base. They sell games, and they want to know how many people would actually be in a position to buy an EA game without needing to buy a new console first. The 103m number is basically their sales ceiling, the maximum number of copies an EA game can sell if everyone who CAN buy one, buys one.
The closest thing to that magical 103M is GTA 5, which sold 90m copies. (Ask
ZhugeEX, he reported it like many other news outlets.)
Obviously there would be double-dipping happening, but the point is that EA was interested in how many MORE people they can sell their games to. That they haven't reached saturation yet is a positive, if you think about the level of growth that is possible.
And that's where I am making my point. That If you want to view MS's "high engagement" as a sign of them halting the bleeding until they could make a comeback with XboxTwo, or alternatively the reality that they are not really growing their consumer base because the high levels of engagement can be interpreted to be a lack of new customers and thus, no growth.