Borkachev on 27 January 2008
And that it took two years for the 360 to become profitable to Sony's one. So who made the smarter decision there? (Again, I hate when people say the 360 is doing better then the PS3, ITS BEEN OUT TWICE AS LONG GET THAT THROUGH YOUR HEAD, YEAR FOR YEAR THE PS3 IS DOING BETTER THAN THE 360)
Comparing two consoles on equal footing by aligning their launches gives some useful information, definitely. In the real world, however, there's a much more important perspective: what the actual install numbers are. Whether or not the 360 "cheated" its way to 7 million units ahead by launching a year earlier, the fact remains that it's 7 million units ahead, and that's what matters. It's what matters to publishers, who tend to make games for the leading system, and therefore it's what matters to gamers, who tend to buy those games.
As for who broke even when, there's no credible source that says Sony has done anything of the kind. There's a theory from one outside analyst who thinks they might be breaking even on some models in some regions, but nothing concrete. If they are breaking even, I'm not sure why Kaz was so hesitant to predict the PS3 would reach profitability this year. Wouldn't they nearly be there already?
And as I understand it, as of this month the 360 has actually turned a net profit for Microsoft. At the moment it looks unlikely that Sony is ever going to do that with the PS3, unless it's through BluRay sales.
