By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
RenCutypoison said:
pezus said:
RenCutypoison said:


New suscribers wouldn't take one year directly, right after buying a 400$ console + games.

Eh, why? I attended the launch here in my country and lots of people did just that. It's much cheaper than buying 90 days and then again and again and again


The difference is just 10$ per year. And it seems people prefer to pay small amounts regurlary than a big amount at once.

And PSplus still as a cost for Sony, discount plus big games (They probably have to pay publishers for big games in instant collection)

Sony pay something for all games for free on Plus... the amount (not disclosed on the interview I saw) is calculate on how much profit the owner lost (real sales that would be done on the period and besides got gave away) and how much he will make on sequels... So the bigger the tile and sooner the release more Sony will pay. So I would say that from that 50 you pay sony profit is something between 10-20.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."