ckmlb said:
|
Although EA specifically blamed the PS3 for their poor profits, because they invested much more heavily in to the PS3, and Ubisoft's last quarterly report showed profits up 40 percent for the same time last year.
It depends on what barometer is used, frankly. Is EA selling better on the PS3? Yes, in terms of raw games sales. But they also have one more game out, and each of those games appears to have cost considerably more to make.
http://www.ps3blog.net/2007/07/26/ea-bet-on-the-wrong-horse-with-ps3-and-360/
http://blog.wired.com/games/2007/07/ea-we-backed-th.html
Relevant quotation: "[John Riccitello, EA CEO] admitted that EA was on the “wrong horse” by concentrating mainly on the PS3 and Xbox 360 while throwing less resources towards the Wii during the console transition."
http://kotaku.com/gaming/ea-boss-says/we-just-didnt-expect-the-wii-to-be-this-good-283018.php
http://kotaku.com/gaming/what-were-the-odds%3F/ea-blames-slow-growth-on-ps3-285058.php
Relevant quotation: " In other words, the cashed-up rich guy [EA] went to the races, bet the farm on the PS3, and some loose change on the Wii. And lost a lotta cash."
One can say that EA is performing better on the PS3 than on the Wii, and again, in terms of raw sales figures, that's true. In terms of both expectations and profit margins, that's quite false.
As a simple and extreme example to illustrate my point, what if EA took the time to develop a Halo 3 type game (in terms of development and research costs) and a Trauma Center style game for the Wii, and the Halo 3 style game only outsold the Trauma Center style by two hundred thousand copies? Obviously, that's either a triumph for Trauma Center, a failure for Halo 3, or both. Similarly, it's apparent that EA expected more from their PS3 titles than they have received, and their operating margins are at an all time low.
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a324/Arkives/Disccopy.jpg%5B/IMG%5D">
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a324/Arkives/Disccopy.jpg%5B/IMG%5D">







