Forums - Sales Discussion - PSN still makes more money than the entirety of Nintendo Co., Ltd.

Azzanation said:
Lawlight said:

I don’t think the gaming division of MS was printing money.

Thats what MS want you to think.

Honestly Xbox Live has been going on for more than a decade. The amount of income Live would have created by itself is through the roof. Plus the software sold more on 360 and to add the 360 sold extremly well at its prime while PS3 only started to sell well when price drops started to happen. 360 was a huge success compared to the PS3. Doesn't matter who sold more in the end.

Sony would rather forget the PS3

MS would be placing the 360 on a pedestal.

MS wants you to think their gaming division was not printing money? 

As for comparing the 2 consoles success, while Sony would rather forget their first year, they pulled off one of the greatest turnarounds in video game history.  Launched a year later and ate hundres in losses per console and still caught up AND passed X360 and began making profits AND set them up for the PS4. As for pedestals, MS needs to put the X360 on one because the Xbox One certainly won't be.



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

Around the Network
SpokenTruth said:
Azzanation said:

Thats what MS want you to think.

Honestly Xbox Live has been going on for more than a decade. The amount of income Live would have created by itself is through the roof. Plus the software sold more on 360 and to add the 360 sold extremly well at its prime while PS3 only started to sell well when price drops started to happen. 360 was a huge success compared to the PS3. Doesn't matter who sold more in the end.

Sony would rather forget the PS3

MS would be placing the 360 on a pedestal.

MS wants you to think their gaming division was not printing money? 

As for comparing the 2 consoles success, while Sony would rather forget their first year, they pulled off one of the greatest turnarounds in video game history.  Launched a year later and ate hundres in losses per console and still caught up AND passed X360 and began making profits AND set them up for the PS4. As for pedestals, MS needs to put the X360 on one because the Xbox One certainly won't be.

Mate you sound a little defensive and a little uneducated in this.

Selling more does not make something more successful.

e.g. If MS decide to undercut the PS4 by $300 and in the long run over took and beat PS4 in sales. Does that make the X1 a more successful console? Haha if you think yes because (It sold more) than I’ll be a little worried.

You notice MS never include the income of Live subscribers in any of these reports? Interesting indeed. Maybe to avoid business tax in the division? Maybe so gamers won’t ask to lower their prices since they are racking in the profits. Shady but effective in business terms.

Sony's PS3 was a disaster at launch and cost the company billions. Sure Xbox had the Red Ring of Death which was paid off by Live Subs. PS3 had to get butchered to compete with the 360 similar to how the X1 had to be cut down to compete with the PS4 however not as extreme. PS3 also didn’t have Subs for PSN so their income only came from games which 360 sold more software than the PS3. If you think PS3 is a more successful console than the 360 than that would make me laugh on the inside.

You don’t win a war by selling more hardware, the real profits rely on Software sales and Subscribers. Hardware in many cases earn little gain and in some cases companies lose money on hardware sold.

Also note that the PS3 had a much higher R&D compared to the cheaper 360

https://www.geek.com/games/playstation-3-cost-sony-332-billion-it-may-not-recoup-576005/

PS3 from the get go cost Sony $3.3b in R&D compared to the rumoured $2.5b 360. Do the maths, PS3 sold slightly more hardware than the 360 in the end, however it cost almost a whopping $1b more than the 360 with less Software sales and no Subs over the course of the Generation.

360 killed it last gen for MS.



Azzanation said:
SpokenTruth said:

MS wants you to think their gaming division was not printing money? 

As for comparing the 2 consoles success, while Sony would rather forget their first year, they pulled off one of the greatest turnarounds in video game history.  Launched a year later and ate hundres in losses per console and still caught up AND passed X360 and began making profits AND set them up for the PS4. As for pedestals, MS needs to put the X360 on one because the Xbox One certainly won't be.

Mate you sound a little defensive and a little uneducated in this.

Selling more does not make something more successful.

e.g. If MS decide to undercut the PS4 by $300 and in the long run over took and beat PS4 in sales. Does that make the X1 a more successful console? Haha if you think yes because (It sold more) than I’ll be a little worried.

You notice MS never include the income of Live subscribers in any of these reports? Interesting indeed. Maybe to avoid business tax in the division? Maybe so gamers won’t ask to lower their prices since they are racking in the profits. Shady but effective in business terms.

Sony's PS3 was a disaster at launch and cost the company billions. Sure Xbox had the Red Ring of Death which was paid off by Live Subs. PS3 had to get butchered to compete with the 360 similar to how the X1 had to be cut down to compete with the PS4 however not as extreme. PS3 also didn’t have Subs for PSN so their income only came from games which 360 sold more software than the PS3. If you think PS3 is a more successful console than the 360 than that would make me laugh on the inside.

You don’t win a war by selling more hardware, the real profits rely on Software sales and Subscribers. Hardware in many cases earn little gain and in some cases companies lose money on hardware sold.

Also note that the PS3 had a much higher R&D compared to the cheaper 360

https://www.geek.com/games/playstation-3-cost-sony-332-billion-it-may-not-recoup-576005/

PS3 from the get go cost Sony $3.3b in R&D compared to the rumoured $2.5b 360. Do the maths, PS3 sold slightly more hardware than the 360 in the end, however it cost almost a whopping $1b more than the 360 with less Software sales and no Subs over the course of the Generation.

360 killed it last gen for MS.

You realize that you just suggested MS committed SEC fraud for nearly a decade?

What about MS losing ~$2 billion per year on Xbox?
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-11-07-huge-xbox-losses-hidden-by-patent-royalties-says-analyst

 



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

SpokenTruth said:
Azzanation said:

Mate you sound a little defensive and a little uneducated in this.

Selling more does not make something more successful.

e.g. If MS decide to undercut the PS4 by $300 and in the long run over took and beat PS4 in sales. Does that make the X1 a more successful console? Haha if you think yes because (It sold more) than I’ll be a little worried.

You notice MS never include the income of Live subscribers in any of these reports? Interesting indeed. Maybe to avoid business tax in the division? Maybe so gamers won’t ask to lower their prices since they are racking in the profits. Shady but effective in business terms.

Sony's PS3 was a disaster at launch and cost the company billions. Sure Xbox had the Red Ring of Death which was paid off by Live Subs. PS3 had to get butchered to compete with the 360 similar to how the X1 had to be cut down to compete with the PS4 however not as extreme. PS3 also didn’t have Subs for PSN so their income only came from games which 360 sold more software than the PS3. If you think PS3 is a more successful console than the 360 than that would make me laugh on the inside.

You don’t win a war by selling more hardware, the real profits rely on Software sales and Subscribers. Hardware in many cases earn little gain and in some cases companies lose money on hardware sold.

Also note that the PS3 had a much higher R&D compared to the cheaper 360

https://www.geek.com/games/playstation-3-cost-sony-332-billion-it-may-not-recoup-576005/

PS3 from the get go cost Sony $3.3b in R&D compared to the rumoured $2.5b 360. Do the maths, PS3 sold slightly more hardware than the 360 in the end, however it cost almost a whopping $1b more than the 360 with less Software sales and no Subs over the course of the Generation.

360 killed it last gen for MS.

You realize that you just suggested MS committed SEC fraud for nearly a decade?

What about MS losing ~$2 billion per year on Xbox?
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-11-07-huge-xbox-losses-hidden-by-patent-royalties-says-analyst

 

I think Azzanation is also forgetting about the profit the PS3 brought to them by pushing Blu-ray as the dominant format over HD DVD.  Sony brings in royalties (I believe) for Blu-ray sales.



Not surprising since digital game sales on a home console with over 65 million users are going to be huge.



Around the Network
mizzou_guy said:
SpokenTruth said:

You realize that you just suggested MS committed SEC fraud for nearly a decade?

What about MS losing ~$2 billion per year on Xbox?
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-11-07-huge-xbox-losses-hidden-by-patent-royalties-says-analyst

 

I think Azzanation is also forgetting about the profit the PS3 brought to them by pushing Blu-ray as the dominant format over HD DVD.  Sony brings in royalties (I believe) for Blu-ray sales.

They indeed do, but it was Panasonic who made blu ray.

Sony is just one of the members of the blu ray association (Panasonic/Pioneer/Samsung/LG electronics etc) and their are another 40 + contributors who all get a slice of the pie. Only if Sony makes the blu ray discs you can talk about a cut of 0.25 dollar for each blu ray they receive but in general they should not get more than 0.08 Dollar in royalties for every blu ray disc sold. Or after 1 billion movies sold they get 80 million.   It is not very impressive if you know that they probably make more in a month for ps plus renewals/new subscriptions.  Sony apparently also not makes the blu ray discs in China for xbox but another company does in Mexico (considering the big market in USA it makes sense).






mizzou_guy said:
SpokenTruth said:

You realize that you just suggested MS committed SEC fraud for nearly a decade?

What about MS losing ~$2 billion per year on Xbox?
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-11-07-huge-xbox-losses-hidden-by-patent-royalties-says-analyst

 

I think Azzanation is also forgetting about the profit the PS3 brought to them by pushing Blu-ray as the dominant format over HD DVD.  Sony brings in royalties (I believe) for Blu-ray sales.

It didn't off-set the loses PS3 suffered because of it.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

maxleresistant said:
I'm still wondering if the switch really is increasing Nintendo's userbase and sales or is it just replacing the 3DS?

I recall seeing some "Nintendo Switch is my first Nintendo platform" threads not long ago.



KLAMarine said:
maxleresistant said:
I'm still wondering if the switch really is increasing Nintendo's userbase and sales or is it just replacing the 3DS?

I recall seeing some "Nintendo Switch is my first Nintendo platform" threads not long ago.

I know a friend never cared to buy the Nintendo consoles, and didn't bought the HH but was interested in Pokemon... Switch will make him buy both.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

DonFerrari said:
KLAMarine said:

I recall seeing some "Nintendo Switch is my first Nintendo platform" threads not long ago.

I know a friend never cared to buy the Nintendo consoles, and didn't bought the HH but was interested in Pokemon... Switch will make him buy both.

Noice.