Qwark said:
Cerebralbore101 said:
Making 10% profit is considered golden in most businesses. Even if you factored in the negligible $10 that retailers kept and sales there's more than enough to have well over 70% profit. Exclusives like Spiderman 2 literally print money.ÂÂ
Concord was $800 million. Just two exclusives would cover the loss of Concord. And Sony's solution to that issue shouldn't be to go 3rd party. As it was pointed out previously in this thread Sony makes $800 per PS5 customer during a console life cycle. That number is profit and doesn't include the $550 for a PS5 sold. If you included pure revenue it would be much higher. Meanwhile your average 3rd party customer might buy 3 or 4 Sony titles that are taxed at 30% on Steam. A customer moving from PS5 to mainly being on PC costs Sony well over $600 per console cycle. You need five to six non-PS5 owning customers to replace a single PS5 owning customer.ÂÂ
But again, what happens when a PS5 costs $800 due to Trump tariffs? Well then, you can't sell consoles. And what happens if you decide to sell those $800 PS5s for $550 anyway? Well then, you incur a $350 loss per console, and that eats into your profits massively. Sony can't sustain selling consoles at that kind of a loss. They are afraid that one bump in the road will destroy their console business model so they are going 3rd party. |
In movies the general rule is you need to make at least 1.5 to two times the costs for it to be profitable. I do t see why that's different for games. So a game costing 200 million, better bring in at least 400 million of revenue. Playstation is now one of the biggest players in the business, however without PlayStation hardware, they are not much bigger than EA. Sony doesn't release and sell that many titles a year. |
Yeah production budgets usually don't include advertising costs, which for modern games/movies (at least the big ones) is often colossal in its own right.
