psychicscubadiver said:
The PS4 also sold more hardware units this quarter so by your own logic shouldn't it have a higher software tie-in ratio than the Switch? |
PS4 sold 3.2M HW and 40.6M SW
Switch sold 1.9M HW (not sure) and 18M SW.
PS4 sold more than double SW than Switch without selling double HW.
The point the other guy made was PS4 have 80M sold and this quarter sold 40M SW, so "every user bought 0.5 games" while Switch have sold 20M and this quarter had 18M SW so almost 1 SW per HW. And that is where my point comes from. the 3.2M HW sold by PS4 is 8% increase on install base on the Q, while Switch 1.8M is 10% increase and having each of the 3.2M HW selling 4 SW amounts to 12.8M (leaving 28M to be bought by older owners) while 1.8M HW selling 4 SW amounts to 7.2M (leaving only 10M to be sold by older owners).
Switch being a younger platform will have a smaller total tie ratio, but shall as well have a higher growth on its tie ratio plus new SW sold per HW.
SpokenTruth said:
Completely agreed. There is zero reason or validation for any negative statements regarding the hardware or software sales of PS4 or Switch. Both are doing great. |
Yep. And the biggest criticism that could be 3rd party is improving continuously for Switch. It may hit critical mass that even new demanding games will be worth to be "redone" to have good performance on Switch and release faster.

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."







