By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Azzanation said:
DonFerrari said:

PS4 sold 80M and have 35M of PSN+, much much much more PSN accounts or subs if you want to call.

The number of Subs and MAU MS reports include Silver accounts, Switch Minecraft, PC Silver and Gold, etc... so hardly a point for you to try and drive.

When I see almost half of PS4 userbase pay for the subs only to play multiplayer I'm very sad. In case you don't know PS3 had less than 10% (I believe even less than 3%) of it's userbase under PSN+ for the "free games" and discounts. Just putting MP under the paywall made it cross 50%. Also in case you don't know this have been a very stable metric, from 10M PS4 sold up to 80M the PSN+ have been 50% attach ratio, so the HW have drove the subs.

The point you are missing is consoles dont just automatically win you subs. They help but they dont just generate the numbers, majority wont just Sub just because. Xbox could sell 100m consoles and still only have a third of there customers subscibe. 35m are paid PSN users in an environment of over 80m consoles sold. Theres almost 2 thirds of PS customers not paying for PS+.

My point is HW helps but even if Xbox went on to sell 50m consoles, it seems MS care about the real profits and thats the Subs. 50+ million Xboxes sold with a high attachment to paid members is better than a ton of consoles sold (little profit) and small amount of subscibers. All console HW numbers do is help measure whos dick is bigger, its been like that ever since the beginning of sales charts. 

Heck look at it like this, PS3 and 360 sold similar amount of HW numbers in there lifetime, yet PS3 lost more money than any other console in the industry because HW isnt where the profits are. Wii's were cheap to produce,  360s had Paid subscibers and PS3 only had HW and SW.. it was not enough to turn Sony's fortunes around that gen. They lost billions. That is just a simple example of HW numbers not meaning everything. Yes it helps but its not everything.

https://www.gamespot.com/forums/system-wars-314159282/sony-lost-5-billion-on-ps3-losing-more-money-than--29131319/

Its time we start moving forward and look at the numbers that really matter rather than live in the past thinking HW numbers mean everything. 

You really are king of exaggeration.

2/3 is 66% while 45/80 (and those aren't the exact numbers) is 56% so it's closer to 1/2 than 2/3 but let's use something more exaggerated. Nothing really grants anything. But if you have a strong correlation between HW sold and PSN+ (besides the PSN) that have shown for 4 years that there is almost 50% attach ratio (this has been almost constant) then yes selling more HW granted more subs.

Sure majority won't sub just cause. I even provided you that it took Sony putting MP behind paywall (very bad move for customers, but was wonderful for their revenue) to increase from less than 5% attach ratio to almost 50%.

MS doesn't disclose the paid XBL numbers and also doesn't disclose the P&L of Xbox, so you are saying they care more about it but doesn't show the results, so what would we discuss in this subject?

You do know that from what can be gathered on the internet Xbox never profited since the first release right? And that we can't infer the numbers because the department always had other stuff put together that would distort the numbers. But sure most would know PS3 was a major money loss for Sony. But since you were so kind to provide Sony loses on PS3, please provide MS profit on Xbox alone for any of the 3 gens.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."