People always claim this but have never looked at NF's financials ever. Netflix has been profitable since the early 2000s when they were still doing DVD mailers. It's the past maybe 5 years where profits really ramped up.
People always claim this but have never looked at NF's financials ever. Netflix has been profitable since the early 2000s when they were still doing DVD mailers. It's the past maybe 5 years where profits really ramped up.
Even in the latest quarter when they said subs dropped 1 million users, they still made $1.4 billion profit.
Who knows. It'll be some amount of that $18 billion COGs. But in the latest fiscal year they made $5 billion profit as they earned about $30 billion revenue.
Does Sony/MS/Nintendo spent more or less money in content and do they have more or less profit as Netflix?.
Not sure. Maybe you can research the details.
The online pay wall cost $60 a year. Literally nobody paid $9.99 a month. And yes, there is a difference between $9.99 a month and $14.99 a month.
MS is putting itself into a precarious position where it needs Gamepass to be absolutely killer and rock solid. I don't care what any fanboy on this page says, they cannot and will not subsudize it forever. Either they will reach astronomical subscription numbers OR they will be forced to cut costs and then it will be filled with junk and cookie cutter quick development games.
I tried to Google it but rapidly became so murky and nonsensical.
Possibly.
This is why Game Pass itself feels like a Hail Mary. Especially when Xbox itself said in the Epic Vs Aple court that Xbox has never being profitable.
Yet they don't report about Xbox (division) profits. Why?.
Because they lump all their product lines into I think 5 pillars. And gaming goes into one of them that has Surface laptops and other electronics.
I tend to agree with this position. Microsoft has made USD$77b in investments to ensure Game Pass has the biggest and best games in the world. But, that just highlights that Microsoft - not just its Xbox division - is expecting sizeable returns. 25 million subscribers just isn't going to cut it. They'll take the loss for a while - they've previously said its "sustainable" - but, for how long?
And THEN Nintendo will be doomed.
For the same reason they don't report their cloud compute profits.
So you are saying it would be bad for the consumer if you could play first party games day one on psplus?
Absolute nonsense
Do you think the Xbox division themselves have taken the hit while Game Pass has been in the growth stage, or do you think MS did?
Do you think the Xbox division themselves were profitable enough to fund the Activision/Bethesda acquisitions, or did MS fund them?
MS is trying to drag Sony in to a fight they can’t win. Once Sony go all in on Plus what’s to stop MS from going and spending £100b on EA and Ubisoft and taking a loss on Game Pass for the next 20 years?
This mf said 90 monthly lmao
Because Sony spends crazy amounts on marketing and MS doesn't. Two different business models. With enough marketing you can even sell 10m Knack 3 or The Order 2.
Yeah. They added one first-party title per eternity, and then yanked it after 3 months. Looks like now first-party titles will be staying in service forever. Which is huge change.
Of course it exists. Both services are providing catalogue of games for fixed price per month. Fact that Sony is not willing to put first-party games there day-one and therefore their service is more shit is Sony's problem but it does not mean, that services can't be compared.
Are you seriously trying to suggest Sony spend more than MS on marketing? Have you seen the marketing budgets for the Halo series since Halo 5? Where were the 10M sales?
Because 343 spent years and years on it and the slipspace engine development which I'm sure they kind of regret now, plus its marketing budget was huge and a large part of the budget.
Nintendo Games are not 80€ on day one.
Much more on their big games. I've barely seen any Halo marketing compared to GOW/Spiderman/Horizon/TLOU/Uncharted and of course even with marketing you can't sell big numbers if your game is on a 1 Dollar subscription service or the main aspect of the game is free to play. This said SOD3 was a bad example.
Sony and MS would gladly charge you 70-80 Dollars for their 5 years old games. They simply can't. People don't buy their old shit, because they got more than enough 3rd party AAA alternatives. Sony or MS don't drop prices massively within months, because they are so consumer friendly.
Yeah and Microsoft have the money to just frivolously throw at failing projects that won't make it back, Sony have to be smarter.
Halo infinite isn't even a subscription service game at heart, it was primarily a f2p GaaS multiplayer game. With Halo Infinite they aimed to be the next fortnite and spent big. Unfortunately it didn't gain much traction. Now they are buying their 'Fortnite' like franchise in CoD/CoD Warzone.
I have a hard time believing that to be honest. They pretty much advertised everywhere and on everything where I am so it was near impossible to miss. This 2:30 minute TV spot aired during major matches like Chelsea vs Man U.
