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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - XBO catching up quickly to PS4 in worldwide sales - EA CFO

DonFerrari said:

so the whole possibility runs only of you thinking perhaps sony was looking at it because it makes sense to you even with no base in know facts?

ps4 reveal they said drm was the publisher choice on how they wanted to do, e3 they were clear, there was no need for day one  patch to correct any drm.

Pretty much.  The profits Gamestop makes on games resales is ridiculous, if I were Sony, I'd want to stick it to them also.  But, not if it means translating those costs to the consumer.  So, I personally think that until they can figure out a way to take a big bite out of that without hurting the consumer, most companies won't do anything.

Doesn't matter what the Ps4 reveal said, you're simply going by public statements and have no real clue about what actually went on behind closed doors.  You're as much in the know, as I am.



Around the Network
bowserthedog said:
DonFerrari said:
bowserthedog said:

Canada.

Owwww so we are cherry picking.

let's complain about X1 release price in UK that was close to U$700,00 what a evil company right? Picking one country price to say what you said is quite the reach.

Wouldn't really call it cherry picking.  It's just where I live. I'm not always familiar with american pricing. My point is that it should be for consumers to decide on value. I don't believe Sony was giving the real reason why they rejected the proposal from EA. They didn't want to have to compete with EA for subscription based services on their own console and in this case Microsoft is coming off as being more open and more third party friendly.


consumer may decide not buying ps4 or its games. and sony probably weren't allowed to disclose real reason as they probably signed nda covering alot of aspects and can publically discuss them. ms have even more subs so they would risk losing even more subs (sony didn't had even 4M against ms 40M+ subs at the time) so this don't make much sense.



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."

mornelithe said:
DonFerrari said:

so the whole possibility runs only of you thinking perhaps sony was looking at it because it makes sense to you even with no base in know facts?

ps4 reveal they said drm was the publisher choice on how they wanted to do, e3 they were clear, there was no need for day one  patch to correct any drm.

Pretty much.  The profits Gamestop makes on games resales is ridiculous, if I were Sony, I'd want to stick it to them also.  But, not if it means translating those costs to the consumer.  So, I personally think that until they can figure out a way to take a big bite out of that without hurting the consumer, most companies won't do anything.

Doesn't matter what the Ps4 reveal said, you're simply going by public statements and have no real clue about what actually went on behind closed doors.  You're as much in the know, as I am.

I don't rule out the possility of sony looking at the subject just wanted to confirm that there is no basis besides it make sense trying to profit on second hand (ps pass was a not overly customer burden but they discontinued it) giving discount on digital is quite enough on the no second hand drm subject.



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."

DonFerrari said:

I don't rule out the possility of sony looking at the subject just wanted to confirm that there is no basis besides it make sense trying to profit on second hand (ps pass was a not overly customer burden but they discontinued it) giving discount on digital is quite enough on the no second hand drm subject.

The pass itself wasn't overly a burden, but the pass itself coupled with Gamestop's ridiculous markups is pure insanity from a consumer perspective.   Which is basically where the translating costs to consumers thing comes into play.



mornelithe said:
DonFerrari said:

I don't rule out the possility of sony looking at the subject just wanted to confirm that there is no basis besides it make sense trying to profit on second hand (ps pass was a not overly customer burden but they discontinued it) giving discount on digital is quite enough on the no second hand drm subject.

The pass itself wasn't overly a burden, but the pass itself coupled with Gamestop's ridiculous markups is pure insanity from a consumer perspective.   Which is basically where the translating costs to consumers thing comes into play.


yep that was a problem. but consumer have the more troublesome option of trading game directly instead of being screwed by gamestop paying low on used and selling it with a premium... but we have to consider they take all the risk so they deserve more profits on the operation.

Microsoft wanted 0 risk and full profit that was abusive.



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."

Around the Network
DonFerrari said:
bowserthedog said:
DonFerrari said:
bowserthedog said:

Canada.

Owwww so we are cherry picking.

let's complain about X1 release price in UK that was close to U$700,00 what a evil company right? Picking one country price to say what you said is quite the reach.

Wouldn't really call it cherry picking.  It's just where I live. I'm not always familiar with american pricing. My point is that it should be for consumers to decide on value. I don't believe Sony was giving the real reason why they rejected the proposal from EA. They didn't want to have to compete with EA for subscription based services on their own console and in this case Microsoft is coming off as being more open and more third party friendly.


consumer may decide not buying ps4 or its games. and sony probably weren't allowed to disclose real reason as they probably signed nda covering alot of aspects and can publically discuss them. ms have even more subs so they would risk losing even more subs (sony didn't had even 4M against ms 40M+ subs at the time) so this don't make much sense.


I'm just grumpy i didn't get to play Dragon Age 5 days early!



DerNebel said:
I really don't think he meant that in the way that the X1 is outselling the PS4 and thus catching up to it in total sales (quite simply because that isn't true), but more in the way that the X1s current sales are picking up and "catching up to the PS4s".

This.  Microsoft's $50 price cut and bundled games are a devastating hit to Sony's marketshare.  Sony not doing the same is just stupid.  Instead of dropping the price, they could atleast bundle more games.  Bundling a game they lose the possible sale of that game and maybe $1 for the amount to manufacture the game, so have four games bundled with the PS4, all first party exclusives, and Sony really loses nothing on the sale of the console and aren't forced to drop price but it still looks like a great deal.

I love the Playstation, but it's Sony being Sony.  It's been decades and they still haven't realized how bad their complacency hurts them in the long run.



bowserthedog said:
DonFerrari said:
bowserthedog said:

Wouldn't really call it cherry picking.  It's just where I live. I'm not always familiar with american pricing. My point is that it should be for consumers to decide on value. I don't believe Sony was giving the real reason why they rejected the proposal from EA. They didn't want to have to compete with EA for subscription based services on their own console and in this case Microsoft is coming off as being more open and more third party friendly.


consumer may decide not buying ps4 or its games. and sony probably weren't allowed to disclose real reason as they probably signed nda covering alot of aspects and can publically discuss them. ms have even more subs so they would risk losing even more subs (sony didn't had even 4M against ms 40M+ subs at the time) so this don't make much sense.


I'm just grumpy i didn't get to play Dragon Age 5 days early!


Feel sorry for you... is digital a possibility to you?



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."

kupomogli said:
DerNebel said:
I really don't think he meant that in the way that the X1 is outselling the PS4 and thus catching up to it in total sales (quite simply because that isn't true), but more in the way that the X1s current sales are picking up and "catching up to the PS4s".

This.  Microsoft's $50 price cut and bundled games are a devastating hit to Sony's marketshare.  Sony not doing the same is just stupid.  Instead of dropping the price, they could atleast bundle more games.  Bundling a game they lose the possible sale of that game and maybe $1 for the amount to manufacture the game, so have four games bundled with the PS4, all first party exclusives, and Sony really loses nothing on the sale of the console and aren't forced to drop price but it still looks like a great deal.

I love the Playstation, but it's Sony being Sony.  It's been decades and they still haven't realized how bad their complacency hurts them in the long run.


If we go by their shipments figures, projected sales and everything else they will probably sell almost 100% of their inventory for the period and the cost to produce more + cost to cut prices (make bundles) would shrink their profit instead of risen... so maybe they decided they didn't need to attack when MS did it... Just waited and kept their plan for BF bundles.



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."

Why did the OP never update the title of this thread ...