BasilZero said:
Kerotan said:
@cgi you know I don't make things personal around here!
Hey basil, so to get back to you I think console makers deserve 30% cuts because they have to provide you with the console you play on. Since Sony entered the market I think they only made an overall profit on their playstation venture last year. MS will probably be quite a few years yet if ever. Nintendo as we know are very profitable but the vast majority of that comes from their own games.
So imagine how fucked Sony and MS would be without the 30% cut. And that's only on digital sales. Retail copies they only got like 12% because they weren't the retailer.
If STEAM were selling everyone the pcs that were used I'd agree with them taking 30%. I'm actually shocked they got away with it for so long. But times are changing and I think this new wave of competition will force their hand sooner or later.
|
You do realize 30% is the standard for pretty much all companies right?
i think Sony, MS and Nintendo make more than enough from charging online so they should lower their 30%
Imagine how much more money devs and publishers can get to improve their games. Especially since the big three are giving away games through ps+, xbla, and nso.
|
Again the big 3 have the cost of producing the hardware which is risky and only get a small cut from retail sales which still makes up over half of AAA game sales.
These PC stores don't have the risk of hardware R&D so don't deserve 30% imo. To name just a few the ps3, Wii U and 360 were all hardware disasters and badly needed their software revenue to keep them viable.
