Unknown?
Member
Not at the discounts they've had to do.And they make it back on GP subscriptions.
Not at the discounts they've had to do.And they make it back on GP subscriptions.
*excluding cost of FP development
Phil has already stated it eats into retail sales significantly from the court documents
GP is profitable though.
Even if Sony is unwilling to go completely free, what's stopping them from offering new games at a discount to subscribers?
Yahoo is sourcing PlayStationlifestyle
It doesn't really anymore. Its now a tarted up Bing search website where MS tried to get what remained of Yahoos search engine marketshare in a deal. Getting boomers to use Bing without knowing it.Today I learned Yahoo still exist.
It being profitable is a response to the claim that it's being held afloat by Office, etc.Even making $1 over operating costs is "profitable". Until MS gives up the actual numbers for revenue and profit, considering the service has stagnated in growth for a long time, best to assume "profitability" is just a term with little to prove it's substantial when MS brings it up in relation to Game Pass.
do you believe Phill Spencer's words?It being profitable is a response to the claim that it's being held afloat by Office, etc.
It doesn't really anymore. Its now a tarted up Bing search website where MS tried to get what remained of Yahoos search engine marketshare in a deal. Getting boomers to use Bing without knowing it.
*excluding cost of FP development
Phil has already stated it eats into retail sales significantly from the court documents
I think it's still Verizon, It was never owned by MS. It had a 10yr deal (MS seems to love those) to use Bing for its search engine but keep its own ad network. Then 10 years later lost those to Bing too.it was owned by Verizon, then ATT, and now I have no clue, I guess Discovery.
The same with AOL, Verizon and ATT both owned the two other (not Gmail) biggest Email providers and didn't know what to do with them for money. Crazy.
It being profitable is a response to the claim that it's being held afloat by Office, etc.
Not really.This whole thing has become humorous. Both sides are screaming how much they suck and how much better the other one is.
What do you mean? Xbox has been throwing out charts showing how PlayStation sales dwarf Xbox. And PlayStation is saying that they are already unable to compete with Xbox.Not really.
And they make it back on GP subscriptions.
I'm not sure why FP development is a factor here. FP development has little to nothing to do with game pass's revenue, those FP games are sold on multiple storefronts at retail as well.
Tbf we don't know how profitable it is, so "marginally" may or may not be accurate.Both statements can simultaneously be true. It definitely can be in parts supported/have costs offset by revenue from the main pillars of the company, and also be marginally profitable as a service. The two aren't mutually exclusive.
Playstation sales do dwarf Xbox.What do you mean? Xbox has been throwing out charts showing how PlayStation sales dwarf Xbox. And PlayStation is saying that they are already unable to compete with Xbox.
The less Sony are the focal point for the gaming industry the better IMO.
Why would Sony even care about COD for PS+. They never even do first party games at launch on sub plans on their system, never mind big third party games. So for them it makes zero difference.
Just because MS does it doesn't mean Sony has to. Sony hasnt copied MS doing first party games on their sub plans. Not even for their own MLB baseball game. So it's a bogus and moot point Sony stating they'd have to increase sub plan costs. Even right now, hardly any COD games are even on any sub plans for PS or Xbox anyway at whatever the current cost is.
Sony has big PS+ overall numbers, but lousy PS Extra/Premium numbers. You can tell since they never dissect it. And the last time they did when PS Now was around, they only had I think 3.2M users in 7 years. They stopped publicly telling a year before it transitioned to the 3 tier system. So it probably maxed out at 3.5M tops. 4M would be a stretch. And that was across 110-120M PS4 users.
MS has been putting first party games on GP for ages at dirt cheap $1 promo deals and it's not like it's moved the needle one bit for them.
I doubt COD would either. It'd swing the needle so small it'd barely do anything.
FP is a factor because their games cost money to make. If GP eats into their retail revenue significantly to the point where it's insignificant - which HAS occurred with titles like Halo Infinite and Horizon selling significantly less at retail than predecessors - then the major revenue driver MUST be GamePass and Dev cost should, at some proportion, be considered a cost when analyzing profitability.
We simply don't have the receipts on any of this, but rest assured if GamePass was such a slam dunk business model Sony would be chomping at the bit to put ALL their retail games Day 1 on PS Plus Sub services. They don't. Why? Because their entire company depends on Playstation revenue and they are not willing to subsidize it through a Sub model. This should be blatantly obvious that Retail profit/revenue collectively >>>>>>> Sub Profit/Revenue
FP is a factor because their games cost money to make. If GP eats into their retail revenue significantly to the point where it's insignificant - which HAS occurred with titles like Halo Infinite and Horizon selling significantly less at retail than predecessors - then the major revenue driver MUST be GamePass and Dev cost should, at some proportion, be considered a cost when analyzing profitability.
We simply don't have the receipts on any of this, but rest assured if GamePass was such a slam dunk business model Sony would be chomping at the bit to put ALL their retail games Day 1 on PS Plus Sub services. They don't. Why? Because their entire company depends on Playstation revenue and they are not willing to subsidize it through a Sub model. This should be blatantly obvious that Retail profit/revenue collectively >>>>>>> Sub Profit/Revenue
Sony are certainly getting close to it, they've just out out a marquee game, Horizon FW, on the service even though it is in the retail channels right now as well.
Sony are certainly getting close to it, they've just out out a marquee game, Horizon FW, on the service even though it is in the retail channels right now as well.
365 day difference.I wouldn't say that's "close". The game released a year ago, and it's only one of their first party titles. They likely added it in order to capture more sales of the DLC coming out soon
Big difference IMHO between Day 1 and a Year plus.
365 day difference.
You've previously written essays in response to me to try and convince me you were "unbiased". I actually prefer this.
It will catch up to them. Hardcore fans aren't served to buy for $70 and then pay to rent it. People will figure it out eventually.That's a pretty big difference, and it's only 1 game. For some, they may be willing to wait. For a lot of the hardcore fans? They won't.
Most sales of games occur within the first few months of release
But you don't usually hear Xbox going out of their way to tell people that.Playstation sales do dwarf Xbox.
Its obvious. They're not going to broadcast they're last place. They are trying to compete.But you don't usually hear Xbox going out of their way to tell people that.
It will catch up to them. Hardcore fans aren't served to buy for $70 and then pay to rent it. People will figure it out eventually.
We can also speculate that many Xbox owners wouldn't have bought a console if it weren't for GP and therefore no chance they'd buy the retail games.Not confirmed at all. But we can speculate that this is simply not the case given the disparity in revenue you'd receive from a typical GP sub vs. a full fledged retail title.
The way they are currently doing it gives them the best of both worlds without the well documented "buy to play" cannibalisation.
I wouldn't say that's "close". The game released a year ago, and it's only one of their first party titles. They likely added it in order to capture more sales of the DLC coming out soon
Big difference IMHO between Day 1 and a Year plus.
Try to figure out what I'm saying to cut down on these replies. Im saying they are rapidly moving closer to the MS position. Day 1 sub games.Figure what out exactly?
Them releasing games on premium subs isn't reliable at all. You cannot bank on EVERYTHING releasing only 365 days after initial release when we only have one example to go by, and it's very much aligned with the release of the DLC they want to push.
I don't try to convince anyone, make up your own mind. I enjoy PC, Nintendo, Retro and currently Xbox the most. I dislike Sony itself and have for a long ass time, they always push their walled gardens and have not changed with the times. I also have fuck all interest in GoW or Uncharted etc. I tried them on PC and turned them off rather quick. Boring but very pretty to look at. Similarly it's why I don't buy a Switch for myself when the Steamdeck is a better offering (when it gets to Australia). If you choose to call that bias, so be it. The ActiBliz and this thread content just continue to reinforce for this gamer why I don't like Sony, their respect is less each year for me.
I like some of what Sony does, love some of what Nintendo does. I play on Ninty, PC, mobile and Xbox. Not sure why people think I'm limited to Xbox. I've been gaming since monochromatic text-based games, Xbox wasn't even around, LOL.
FP is a factor because their games cost money to make. If GP eats into their retail revenue significantly to the point where it's insignificant - which HAS occurred with titles like Halo Infinite and Horizon selling significantly less at retail than predecessors - then the major revenue driver MUST be GamePass and Dev cost should, at some proportion, be considered a cost when analyzing profitability.
We simply don't have the receipts on any of this, but rest assured if GamePass was such a slam dunk business model Sony would be chomping at the bit to put ALL their retail games Day 1 on PS Plus Sub services. They don't. Why? Because their entire company depends on Playstation revenue and they are not willing to subsidize it through a Sub model. This should be blatantly obvious that Retail profit/revenue collectively >>>>>>> Sub Profit/Revenue
At least the mask is off now, appreciate it in contrast to whatever this was:
We can also speculate that many Xbox owners wouldn't have bought a console if it weren't for GP and therefore no chance they'd buy the retail games.
We do know they're making money from it though.
Try to figure out what I'm saying to cut down on these replies. Im saying they are rapidly moving closer to the MS position. Day 1 sub games.
Well yeah, it's not there yet, Sony are far more reliant on direct sales to 'exist' than MS is for Xbox, so the exact same model doesn't work for both right now, even though they have gone on record to say Game Pass is profitable.
Sony are inching more towards it with time, even the 365 day is something none of us would have seen coming not too long ago.
Spin it all you want mate, I don't enjoy labels or ban baiting, as you're going for. Go through my post history, I've been up front about not liking Sony or their games, with the exception of Spidey for the most part. It's not hidden, nor do I wear a mask. I'll kindly ask the character assassination to fuck off thanks.
They changed from "never" to 365 days virtually overnight. I'm not nostradaumus. But they're obviously, obviously chasing the MS strategy. Just admit it. They may win just copying what MS is doing. But they're copying.Yes they are making revenue (not necessarily robust profitability), and yes maybe that's the only way Xbox is able to compete as much as they are recently given their studio troubles. But what works for MS and their corporate mothership of cash resources does not necessarily work for Sony's business model that has to optimize for profits rather than sub growth.
"Rapidly moving closer" isn't really accurate in the sense that you are projecting that it will eventually converge to what MS is doing. They are trying differentiated higher tier sub models to create a balance of Sub vs Retail that works within their framework, and Horizon is perhaps a trial of that. It doesn't mean you're gonna be getting everything Day 1, let alone 1 year after retail.
They changed from "never" to 365 days virtually overnight. I'm not nostradaumus. But they're obviously, obviously chasing the MS strategy. Just admit it. They may win just copying what MS is doing. But they're copying.
Theyre cannibalizing that Tchaka Khan island game and the Mario Maker TPS thing. Im not trying to argue. Believe what you want.No they didn't. Because you're falsely claiming that 365 days is the new norm. No evidence to suggest that. HFW has DLC, they want to promote it.
They are obviously introducing new tiers to compete with GamePass, but their intent is NOT to go for the GamePass model. Jim Ryan has explicitly stated that, and it should be patently obvious why that's the case, because they do not want to cannibalize day 1 sales.
Theyre cannibalizing that Tchaka Khan island game and the Mario Maker TPS thing. Im not trying to argue. Believe what you want.
Theyre cannibalizing that Tchaka Khan island game and the Mario Maker TPS thing. Im not trying to argue. Believe what you want.