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

Do you need a source to prove 45/80 (which is the complement of 35/80)? 45/80 would be the number of people that doesn't have PSN+ (but guess what at least 80M PSN accounts exist, and Sony MAU is higher than MS). So it is like this 45/80 or 56% doesn't have PS+ which is closer to 50% (1/2) than to 66% (2/3) but you choose 2/3 for what reason?

But to help you out https://segmentnext.com/2018/05/22/sony-ir-psn-ps-plus/ so PS4 MAU is 80M or about the number of PS4 sold. Which is more than double the MAU of MS, also more than double subs of XBL. With PS+ (paid) about equal to total XBL (including silver).

Many perhaps would (many more would say the opposite). On HW and SW it was a success, in bringing money it was a failure, but at least kept Sony in the fight for PS4.

MS have never disclosed their profit for Xbox at all (but you are claiming it is making money, so you should provide source instead of asking). We have had during X360 disclosure of HW sold and also the number of gold members. Both stopped being shown this gen when they were to much behind so now they give total number of Live accounts (that  for some crazy reason you compare PSN+ to Total Live accounts instead of Gold).

So please give us the showing that Xbox by itself ever profited.

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-11-07-huge-xbox-losses-hidden-by-patent-royalties-says-analyst

https://www.destructoid.com/analyst-microsoft-losing-2-billion-on-xbox-annually-265273.phtml (so X360 gen took 7 years... that would make 14 Billion in loses, almost 3 times as much as the one reported for Sony)

From how you posted it, it sounded like you were saying there were 45m PS+ members. And you also forgot i said almost 2 thirds, i never said it was 2 thirds.

Having accounts is easy since every XB and PS4 require an account to use the system. Its all about turning those accounts into paid members. Well for MS anyway hence the heavy focus on there inline features and games.

PS3 was the worst profitable console in History not the 360. Do the maths, $60 x 20m Gold accounts x 7 years. Now there just low rough figures. The 360 at some point had over 40m Gold accounts. Now add those profits from Live into your Destructiod link which is just an assumption not actual fact and remember the 360 also sold more software than the PS3 aswell. Strange how hardware means everything to you yet the console that technically sold the least last gen actually sold more SW and made more money. Point proven.

Also you dont need them to disclose there making money on a department to actually think there not. MS never claimes how much money they make from there Subs. Sneaky little MS. Where does all that Sub money go? 

Isnt it funny that one of the greatest and wealthiest video game companies around in Blizzard also dont tell us how much they make from there subscriptions? They leave it all up to us to estimate. 

Last edited by Azzanation - on 24 July 2018