DarkNight_DS said:
You still make no sense. You don't understand how economics work. Your costs incured are for all your games currently being printed and currently in development as well as all your other overhead. PS3 made no money. They would have been praising the PS3 for bringing in money and finger pointing at the 360 if it lost money. |
Do you have any data pointing towards a substantially higher development cost for the PS3 version of a multiplat game? Considering the source make no mention of this, don't assume, especially when you're criticising others for also assuming.
Development for a PS360 is often linked, the cost of development for 1 might be higher than the other but never to such a substantial degree that can offeset a 10%+ revenue intact when talking about hundreds of millions of dollars; the engine are the same and much of the coding is also the same, its impossible to praise one of them for bringing in the money and the other for losing it when development cost is not seperated and when the 360 still generated more revenue than the PS3 for the financial year. The lost most likely comes from cost in developing future project such as LA Noire etc.
Also The revenue here merely shows a pattern of consumer purchase for PS3 and 360, especially in europe, where games don't tend to frontload as much as the US.