sales2099 said:
bigd615 said:
| sales2099 said:
Considering we had no numbers of it "doubling" after E3......that only means the numbers were that much lower.
You can't dismiss math. Im sorry it doesn't work like that. Divide 2012 revenue of $140 million and you have 2.8 million suscribers in December 2012. This isn't a exact figure but a estimate based on whatever information we have been given. Im sorry but you shouldn't be defending this because you don't agree with the answer.
You say whatever hypotheticals you want, I just did some simple math. Less then 3 million subs on a optional service that is only 2 years old isn't bad per-se, it just means it has a long way to go to pull Live Gold numbers.
|
Is there any reason why it needed to reach the same numbers as Live? I mean if you asked me which would have more subscribers: something that was mandatory to play games online or something that was optional and just gave benefits, I would say that the mandatory one would have more subscribers every single time (on a comparable user base).
|
Because Live Gold is the bar set for console paywalls for online MP?
I understand where your coming from, but a general consencus here was the internet foums would have you believe the number was far higher then 3 million approx. But im sure it will go way higher when PS4 is introduced.
|
Of course it's the bar set for paywalls on online MP. Nobody else has done it. That's what I'm saying. PS+ for PS3 wasn't close to being the same thing as Live so the number of subscribers can't really be compared as they are completely different products.
Consensus on Internet forums? A few hundred or thousand people out of a possible few hundred million. That's a horrible sample size especially when I believe over 75% of the people on the forums have Xbox live or ps+ (Guessed number so don't ask for a source). When in reality far fewer than half the people who own a console have either one.
