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

These are "net revenues"... I'd like to see more data on how they got these numbers...

But on net income:

 If one platform is the "lead development" platform, the cost to develop will be far greater. To "port it" to the second platform is a far less costly event. I don't know how EA accounts for the cost of development across multi-plat titles but that could be a big factor. Imagine development of a PS3/360 exclusive "big budget game" -- say some big shooter. Assume it cost $40 million to develop for both platforms and the PS3 was the lead platform. The development of the game includes creative work, development, management, and so on... Say $30-35 million of the total was consumed in making the "initial" version and then $5-10 porting it to the 360. Assuming they make no "adjustments" to the cost of development for each platform to spread the cost of development and the titles both sell 1 million copies, clearly the 360 version will be more profitable.

I suspect they do "allocate" costs, but to what degree is anyone's guess. I wouldn't read too much into these numbers without knowing the breakdown of costs.



I hate trolls.

Systems I currently own:  360, PS3, Wii, DS Lite (2)
Systems I've owned: PS2, PS1, Dreamcast, Saturn, 3DO, Genesis, Gamecube, N64, SNES, NES, GBA, GB, C64, Amiga, Atari 2600 and 5200, Sega Game Gear, Vectrex, Intellivision, Pong.  Yes, Pong.