Was Playstation Home Profitable?

[DaRev]

Jay520 said:

DaRev said:
1) Yes, Silly + Over ambitious = no profit for Sony with regards Home. I understand the thread.

2) Yes there are differences but there are also similarities, for example, you sell stuff on both and can watch movie trailers however you cannot do the running man or chase virtual girls around all day in Live. Ultimately, however, they both provide gamers with non-gaming experiences outside of standalone games on the respective consoles.

3) I never said that. Plus who says Sony was catering for just a minority? If they were, who is this minority? Is it people that like doing the virtual running man and chase virtual girls around all day, instead of playing actual videogames? Please explain who Home was expected to attract if in fact it wasn’t meant to attract mainstream gamers.

1.) It's only over ambitious if it cost too much to make a profit. But you still haven't demonstrated that it hasnt made a profit. So you can't keep saying its over ambitious.

2.) No, Home is an optional program on the PS3. It is not the dominant means to connect to the internet, like Xbox Live. Just because they offer non-gaming experience doesn't mean they're similar. Xbox Live is the means to do almost everything on Xbox Live. You NEED Xbox Live to play your games online. You do not need Home to play ps3 games online. If you don't have Xbox Live, you miss out on a large amount of perks of your 360. If you don't have Home, you don't miss out on the major perks of the system. You don't need Home to play your games online. You don't need Home to watch Netflix. You do not need Home to use a large number of the system's apps, unlike Live. In fact, Home is pretty much a robust App. It's not something you need to use the major components of the system.

3.) You just said " Ha ha, you telling me that Home was not meant for mainstream gamers? Well no wonder it didn't make any money. No wonder it is a failure and fit for a small minority that think it's better to do the virtual running man and watch Sony movie trailers all day than play actaul games." But now you're saying you don't agree that Home was for the mainstream, thus making your 3rd point entirely irrelevant. Which is it?

1) As soon as Sony lets you or me see its financial records, we will settle this definitively, but until then, I maintain Home is a failure and is not profitable.

2) I maintan both have similarities and both have dfferences. What are you disagreeing with? Or is it that you're saying Home and Live have nothing in common?

3) What? look, you're wasting my time. Please read my comments properly before you comment. I said, as always, Home is a failure, and thus, not profitable because it never appealed to the mainstream gamers, but appealed only to those that like doing virtual running man all day instead of playing standalone/acutal games. I never contradicted myself.