NJ5 said: Auron said: Main point of the OP "I'm a narrow minded wii fanboy and this is why i think 360 and PS3 are bad, pay attention to me." No facts, figures sources, a steaming pile of assumptions with little or no actual basis good job, you could have at least added some sources to at least make some sort of decent attempt. What do you want sources for? The $50 million spent/loaned on DLC? I believe you (as most) have seen that already. That Sony's still losing money on hardware? It's already a few posts above yours. What else do you want sources for? Maybe it would be better if you contributed with something relevant to this thread, but as I've seen your posting habits I'm not counting on it.

 Keep writing quality posts like the one above where all you do is show your Wii fanboyism by trying to make a veiled attempt to post something of substances.  The HD consoles are doing fine.  Competition is good, perhaps you would prefer communist USSR?? 

Wow for stating something that obviously is pretty much correct, that Sony and Microsoft are battling each other for the same marketshare shooting each other in the foot, the Sony fanboys are flocking. This forum is starting to get Sonyfied again. And thats the worst kind of -fied.

libellule said: NJ5, YEAH YEAH, I know it but it doesn't count the total PS sales, does it ? whatever, let's say they made 3 billions (at very best) on the PS/PS2, so it is obvious they have lost everything.

True I was just comparing with PS2, not PS1.

They haven't lost everything, it's just kind of amazing that not even a PS2-like success would be enough to recover their losses with the PS3. Those losses are just unbelievable (almost as unbelievable as MS's losses with the original Xbox).

I'm going to bed pretty soon as I have to work tomorrow, so see you.

@Auron: Sorry but I'm not here to feed trolls anymore, I'd rather reply to well made posts like most of the other ones in the thread.

 

NJ5,

(for tomorrow maybe)

They have lost everything but they didn't made so much money compared to the little Ninty.
PS2 = 120M unit = +2 billions only ... quite poor compared to the sales of the console.

CaptainPrefrences said: if those two die w'll be stuck with mario and nintendo consoles LOL. if that ever happns, ill be begging for sega to comeback

 Mario and Ninty consoles is Utopia!!! very few Sega games released nowadays of very good (in ratings)

NJ5 said: libellule said: NJ5, YEAH YEAH, I know it but it doesn't count the total PS sales, does it ? whatever, let's say they made 3 billions (at very best) on the PS/PS2, so it is obvious they have lost everything. True I was just comparing with PS2, not PS1. They haven't lost everything, it's just kind of amazing that not even a PS2-like success would be enough to recover their losses with the PS3. Those losses are just unbelievable (almost as unbelievable as MS's losses with the original Xbox). I'm going to bed pretty soon as I have to work tomorrow, so see you. @Auron: Sorry but I'm not here to feed trolls anymore, I'd rather reply to well made posts like most of the other ones in the thread.

 Yea it's much easier to pay attention to the posts praising how smart you are then to those which disagree with you.  Alright i won't post anymore in this thread either.  I await your next thread of  bias.

NJ5 said: I know that this is pretty obvious for some of you, but I think it deserves to be discussed in its own thread: In some ways, 2008 is proving to be a big year for the HD consoles... Third parties are giving them a lot of support, launching big games which are expected to be the climax of those consoles' success. The biggest such games for 2008 are obviously GTA4 and MGS4. Given this, what do Sony and Microsoft do regarding those games? - Microsoft does huge price cuts in Europe before GTA4 launches, positioning their console near Wii's price, which is obviously a much cheaper console to manufacture (thanks for that BTW, it enabled me to get their console for GTA4 and a few other interesting games). It's still unclear whether they'll do the same thing for USA, but it wouldn't surprise me if they did. - Microsoft spends $50 million on downloadable content for GTA4, much of which they'll probably never gain back. - Sony bundles MGS4 and GTA4 with zero added cost for the consumer vs the console's price. This negates any gain from royalties on those two games. They'll be losing money in two ways when someone buys one of those bundles: Manufacturing cost vs retail price. They have gone on the record saying that they are still losing money on hardware, and that they only expect to start breaking even towards the end of the fiscal year. The games themselves which they have to buy from Konami/Take 2, instead of taking royalties as it would be expected. When I put that together with the losses that they have sustained before this point (especially Sony in terms of the current-gen), I get this picture: This is a like battle between irate giants, who keep pounding each other (and themselves) to the ground at every step, even when they're getting near the climax of their product's life. They're not just competing, they're competing so fiercely that the only winners in the business seem to be the consumers and a few lucky third parties.

I'm not sure of this, but consoles always come bundled with a game, so how does changing the game cost anything? It's still a copy sold, I'd imagine including that game is considered when pricing the console.

If you can, please post these supposed "costs" of bundling a game, I'd think the developers wouldnt mind at all, considering its getting their game out there and known.

I also laugh at the last bolded part, so far MS has lost WAY more than Sony, especially since they are paying out of their asses for games ($50 million is no small price) not to mention all of their ad campaigns and what not.

I suggest in your next post you have more facts and less speculation.

 

libellule said: NJ5, (for tomorrow maybe) They have lost everything but they didn't made so much money compared to the little Ninty. PS2 = 120M unit = +2 billions only ... quite poor compared to the sales of the console.

 That's what Loss Leading does to you.

Loss Leading is really only useful when you want to expand your userbase.  Which is why it made sense on the PS1.  Loss Lead and then you've got an instant userbase and credibility for PS2 and PS3.

PS2's loss leading made no sense... as it was out second, behind the Dreamcast who's sales were slowing and suffering due to PS2 hype before it was even out.

PS3's loss leading I guess was just done so they could include the Cell and Blu-ray to intergrate their different divisions.  Either that or they were just tryng to drive Microsoft and Nintendo out of the videogame market.

Those are really the only two reasons to loss lead when you are the market leader... cause loss leading pretty much always costs you profits wise, even when you do generate a lot more sales.

Username2324 said: NJ5 said: I know that this is pretty obvious for some of you, but I think it deserves to be discussed in its own thread: In some ways, 2008 is proving to be a big year for the HD consoles... Third parties are giving them a lot of support, launching big games which are expected to be the climax of those consoles' success. The biggest such games for 2008 are obviously GTA4 and MGS4. Given this, what do Sony and Microsoft do regarding those games? - Microsoft does huge price cuts in Europe before GTA4 launches, positioning their console near Wii's price, which is obviously a much cheaper console to manufacture (thanks for that BTW, it enabled me to get their console for GTA4 and a few other interesting games). It's still unclear whether they'll do the same thing for USA, but it wouldn't surprise me if they did. - Microsoft spends $50 million on downloadable content for GTA4, much of which they'll probably never gain back. - Sony bundles MGS4 and GTA4 with zero added cost for the consumer vs the console's price. This negates any gain from royalties on those two games. They'll be losing money in two ways when someone buys one of those bundles: Manufacturing cost vs retail price. They have gone on the record saying that they are still losing money on hardware, and that they only expect to start breaking even towards the end of the fiscal year. The games themselves which they have to buy from Konami/Take 2, instead of taking royalties as it would be expected. When I put that together with the losses that they have sustained before this point (especially Sony in terms of the current-gen), I get this picture: This is a like battle between irate giants, who keep pounding each other (and themselves) to the ground at every step, even when they're getting near the climax of their product's life. They're not just competing, they're competing so fiercely that the only winners in the business seem to be the consumers and a few lucky third parties.   I'm not sure of this, but consoles always come bundled with a game, so how does changing the game cost anything? It's still a copy sold, I'd imagine including that game is considered when pricing the console. If you can, please post these supposed "costs" of bundling a game, I'd think the developers wouldnt mind at all, considering its getting their game out there and known. I also laugh at the last bolded part, so far MS has lost WAY more than Sony, especially since they are paying out of their asses for games ($50 million is no small price) not to mention all of their ad campaigns and what not. I suggest in your next post you have more facts and less speculation.

Bundling doesn't hurt the developer. Developers love it. Bundling hurts Sony. Or at least it does when they start bundling 3rd party games instead of first party games... because third party games are going to cost Sony more.

Or at least I think that's what NJ5 is trying to say.

Put it this way. Say sony gets... 10 dollars for every game sold or so. (They do have the highest liscensing cost of the big 3 to my knowedge.)

So they get 10 dollars for every copy of MGS3 sold.

Now say with the MGS3 bundle they are paying 30 dollars per copy of MGS3.

They make 40,000 bundled systems. MGS3 has to sell 120,000 copies just to break even on MGS software sales.

Now say Sony makes, 20 dollars on each first party game. It costs them about 5 dollars to make the game.  So they're losing 5 dollars per bundle on that game.

For each 1st party game they sell it covers 4 bundled copies as far as breaking even.