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

Forums - Sony - PS4 will make $1.2bn each year from PS Plus, analyst estimates

joeorc on 15 August 2013
pokoko said:
sales2099 said:
pokoko said:

No, that math doesn't work when you consider that PS+ doubled subscribers after E3.  Actually, even beyond that, PS+ membership likely spiked again at the end of the year.  Because of that, even though membership more than doubled, it's mostly going to be back heavy, with the average contribution from most members being way under the yearly amount.  Your figure will only give us the least members possible and is probaby way off the actual number.

Also, a LOT of people got a free month or more during the holiday season when they bought a PS3 or Vita.  That's what I did.  So, even though I became a member in 2012, I didn't pay until 2013.

Considering we had no numbers of it "doubling" after E3......that only means the numbers were that much lower.

You can't dismiss math. Im sorry it doesn't work like that. Divide 2012 revenue of $140 million and you have 2.8 million suscribers in December 2012. This isn't a exact figure but a estimate based on whatever information we have been given. Im sorry but you shouldn't be defending this because you don't agree with the answer.

You say whatever hypotheticals you want, I just did some simple math. Less then 3 million subs on a optional service that is only 2 years old isn't bad per-se, it just means it has a long way to go to pull Live Gold numbers.

Dismiss math?  Defending what?  I'm not dismissing math or defending anything, I'm just saying that your math won't give us a good estimate, it only gives us the lowest number possible, as it assumes every member paid $50.  You know that's a false assumption.

How about we go the other route and assume every single member paid the minimum of $18.  That's math, too, isn't it?  Would you have a problem with that?  Do you understand what I'm saying now?

Also is this taking into account how much money Sony is taking in from Playstation Home?

Even if your just counting only PS+ SUB'S s, Sony also has an income stream from playstation Home, which for the fact is quite profit generating from the exec's from Sony stated it is. 

So i doubt we have as concrete number's or even really close number's at all right now.



I AM BOLO

100% lover "nothing else matter's" after that...

ps:

Proud psOne/2/3/p owner.  I survived Aplcalyps3 and all I got was this lousy Signature.

Around the Network
bigd615 on 15 August 2013
aurelounet said:

 used the 2.5 millions subscribers stated earlier by someone.

X being the number of users on 01/01/2012 and (1+144%) X the number of user on 01/01/2013.

While you tried to find an average number of PS+ accounts for the year by dividing the 140,000,000 by 50$ and 18$.

Our avarage for the year beind different, we found some different results (not to different).

Actually, I am having some trouble understanding your equation, what is your X ??

My "x" is the number of subscribers at the beginning of the year. I assumed they each paid $50 for the whole year. And I assumed that the rest paid $18 for one subscription. They made up 144% of the initial subscribers....

Oops I made a mistake. 

It should have been $140,000,000 = $50 * x + $18 * 144 % * x

$140M total rev

$50 per subscription for those who bought at the beginning.

$18 per subscription for those who bought at the end.

You said there was an increase of 144% so I assumed they bought the $18 hence 144% * x

i solved for x: 1.84 million those bought at the beginning. 

$90M revenue

I solve for x * 144 %: 2.65 million.

$47.7M revenue

i add them together to find the total subscriptions at the end of the year: those who bought at the beginning + those who bought at the end.

4.49 million total or 1.84 million * 244% 



pokoko on 15 August 2013
bigd615 said:
pokoko said:

Hold on a second.  He started the insults and you're telling me I shouldn't get mad?  Uh, yeah.

I KNOW it won't be 7.77M, just as it won't be 2.8M, either.  That was my ENTIRE POINT.  I don't get what you're saying.  I shouldn't point something like that out?  It was wrong of me to attempt to clarify?

Clarifying is fine. Calling someone "BLOODY STUPID" "obtuse" and cursing at them is pushing the limit imo. While you are definitely correct in the fact that it is more than 2.8M it could've been done more tactfully. But his method of estimating the numbers, while low, is as sound of a concrete number as you can get without more numbers or speculating.

But as far as him throwing out insults, I've always been the type to mostly ignore them on the Internet when directed at me so maybe I'm not the best judge on that, but throwing out more isn't going to calm the situation and will look poorly on yourself.

That you have a problem only with what I said tells me everything I need to know about you and, quite honestly, interjecting yourself on one side while ignoring the other looks poorly on you.  Don't lecture me without taking a look at yourself.  If you're not going to be fair then I really don't care about your opinion.  I was tactful in my first several posts, which you seemed to ignore.



joeorc on 15 August 2013
Zappykins said:
So it this a greedy corporations, smart business decision or something else.

It will be interesting as this may help Microsoft's business. Especially how a few were so outspoken that Sony would NEVER charge for multi player.

why is it that some  are still trying to imply there is no free online gaming for the PS4 when you bring up this very issue , when there is infact still free online gaming for the PS4!

that is the truth.

 

Say you have two friends each one buy's a PS4 one decides i have PS+ but the other does not decide to get it because they are more of a single player game player. even though they both have accounts that are not the same. that still does not mean the OTHER NON ps+ member cannot play online multiplayer games with the PS+ member. 

Example: 

You still can play "online" Multi-player gaming on the PS4 without the need for playstation+. Now you are restricted to those online Multi-player games that are free to play, that still does allow you some online Multi-player gameing for free without PS+ being required, so in effect, this allow's those with non PS+ and those with PS+ to still play online together with out the need of both having to have PS+. 

Now try this very same scenario with xboxlive "gold" and a xbox live "silver" Subscription can they play online Multi-player games together?

when people keep bringing there is no outcry " Especially how a few were so outspoken that Sony would NEVER charge for multi player."

and Has sony kept its promise? you cannot have it both ways, you cannot point out that its a negative , if Sony still offer's "free ONLINE Multi-player" for free all the while saying its all hypocrisy. WHEN INFACT Gamer's can still play online multi-player "online" for free still on the PS4, IT WOULD BE ONE THING IF "ALL MULTI-PLAYER " was in behind the paywall. But its not, that is just the blunt truth.

 



I AM BOLO

100% lover "nothing else matter's" after that...

ps:

Proud psOne/2/3/p owner.  I survived Aplcalyps3 and all I got was this lousy Signature.

bigd615 on 15 August 2013
pokoko said:

That you have a problem only with what I said tells me everything I need to know about you and, quite honestly, interjecting yourself on one side while ignoring the other looks poorly on you.  Don't lecture me without taking a look at yourself.  If you're not going to be fair then I really don't care about your opinion.  I was tactful in my first several posts, which you seemed to ignore.


I apologize if that's the way it came across. I do see times when he throws insults but given that I'm a Sony fan and he's a Microsoft fan and this is a pro-Sony discussion, if I try to correct him, then people may just call me a sony fanboy. I was just trying to get other Sony fans (if you are one, if not you seem pro-Sony in this discussion) to treat Microsoft fans with respect even if they don't do the same in return. That way they can't say that all Sony fans do is gang up and bash Microsoft fans.

And I did try to correct him on other points that I believed him to wrong on.

Again, I apologize if you feel like I'm ganging up on you and excusing other's behavior, that was not my intent. I just think it's best not to give someone the excuse to criticize your behavior whether you or they are in the wrong. But I'm not here to tell other people how to act. I might do it at times, but that's not always right. 



Around the Network
Zappykins on 15 August 2013

Joeorc, you seem kind of upset.

But to answer your question: "Now try this very same scenario with xbox live "gold" and a xbox live "silver" Subscription can they play online Multi-player games together?"

Sure, everyone on one Xbox One get's the equivalent of Xbox Gold if one person has that as their home system.  Then everyone else that uses that system has the equivalent of Xbox Gold.  Plus, when you travel, your Gold Comes with you when you visit friends.

Sort there are sort of two was Gold works:

1. For your Gamertag as you travel around.

2. For the Xbox One you designate as your home systems, and everyone that uses it there.

It's cool you can get some games outside of the paywall on the PS4, but I think most of things like COD, BF4, Bungie's new game, are probably going to be behind the paywall.

 



 

Really not sure I see any point of Consol over PC's since Kinect, Wii and other alternative ways to play have been abandoned. 

Top 50 'most fun' game list coming soon!

 

Tell me a funny joke!
Raven722 on 15 August 2013

I don't think Sony will have much of an issue getting people to pay. Sony is very good at marketing as we've seen over the years with the exception of the Vita and considering that the only real option for next-gen console gamers is to buy a Wii U if they don't want the online pay-wall I'm willing to bet that most of them will opt for it. For as much as everyone has tossed their two cents worth of complaints about online requirements we've already seen that it's where a majority of them go. Pay-wall or no pay-wall. They obviously won't get every PS4 owner online but I doubt it will be anything less than the percentage of Xbox 360 owners that went online. The incentives that they offer as well as games like Destiny and The Division should pretty much ensure that a majority of PS4 owners will want to pay for PS+. My sample size is obviously tiny, but all of my friends who are getting a PlayStation 4 have every intention of paying for the online service and most of them are the same guys who loved online play being free. Let's be honest, $50 for an entire year to play just about any and every game online is cheap. I spent almost $200 a year to play a single MMO.



think-man on 15 August 2013

Lots of my friends have ps3s and never go online even though its free so I can imagine they would never in a million years pay for online.

Me on the other hand I've been a Ps+ member for over a year now and once you have it there's no going back :) its the most ultimate service available to mankind.



 

How to Make friends In Dark Souls 3

Pemalite on 16 August 2013
think-man said:

Me on the other hand I've been a Ps+ member for over a year now and once you have it there's no going back :) its the most ultimate service available to mankind.


Nah. Steam is better than both consoles online services, it's also free. Completely utterly free and will always be free.

Zappykins said:

But to answer your question: "Now try this very same scenario with xbox live "gold" and a xbox live "silver" Subscription can they play online Multi-player games together?"

 


Actually you can play Multi-player with a silver account.

Minecraft for instance if you are a silver member, you can get a gold member to invite you into a game and play together. :)

Converesly games like Final Fantasy (Aka. MMO's) don't require a Gold Membership usually.




www.youtube.com/@Pemalite

bananaking21 on 16 August 2013
sales2099 said:
pokoko said:
NobleTeam360 said:
Huh I thought a lot of people had PS Plus. Those are some very low subscription numbers, I would've thought PS Plus had around 5-7 million subscribers at least.

What do you mean?  No subscription numbers were announced, were they? 

Basic math based on the approximate revenue generated gives us a rough estimate of 2.8 million suscribers.

Personally, that seems spot on when it's an optional feature, marketed to a userbase that prides itself on free multiplayer.

That and the service is only a couple years old.


i dont see any real numbers. these are estimates. or should we take the words of analysts as truth now?