Mazty said:
Go to amazon.com and you can see that MW2, 3 and BO are more expensive then Halo 3, ODST and Reach. Also, you have only shown gross profits, which are completely useless. We need to know net profit to assess the value of profits. The level of financial ignorance on this site is alarming. The fact you think gross profits prove I'm wrong shows you quoted a post you don't even understand. The only post that is of zero value is yours, unless you wanted to demonstrate how little you know of economics. I have been clear and concise every time I have made my points, with people thinking that half-baked and incorrect rebutals are of some value. I'm trolling in your eyes because I know the difference between gross and net profit? Keep at it bud. |
You keep going on about gross vs net and how COD is more profitable for Microsoft and 360 than Halo is. I understand that yes, Halo costs Microsoft money to make whereas COD does not, but you're not realizing that Halo nets more money for Microsoft than COD does, as it is their in-house property, and also important to consider is that because Halo is exclusive to 360 only, people must buy that console in order to play it, meaning more money for Microsoft from other purchased software, Xbox LIVE, peripherals, etc... not to mention what it does for brand recognition.
Which brings me to your argument about exclusives not being important or as profitable as 3rd party games are to a console. It's really a case by case situation depending on what console you're talking about, I suppose, but when saying this in the general sense I don't see how you expect people to take you seriously. Wii exclusives such as Wii Sports Resort, Mario Kart, WiiFit and NSMB have equaled or surpassed sales of any title, even on mulitple platforms. That's all profit for Nintendo and Nintendo alone because it's their exclusive property. And again, exclusives greatly help in moving systems and creating financial success.












