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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Why don't Sony and Microsoft update their top selling games every financial period?

sales2099 said:
Cerebralbore101 said:

It's easy to pump up monthly active player numbers when a game is free or tied to a subscription service. Just look at Poke'mon Go, with its 1 billion downloads. Now, does that suddenly mean that Poke'mon Go is the best Poke'mon game? Hell no! In fact, Poke'mon Go is a barebones shell of the original games. You'd have a hard time finding anybody listing Poke'mon Go as their favorite Poke'mon game.

Also, keep in mind that how long people play a game is in no way tied to its greatness. A game can sell 10+ million copies and be just a 10 hour single player game. Using monthly active player lists you'd think a game like that isn't very good. On the flipside a game that is manipulative, grindy, and addictive can have a massive playerbase despite being an awful game. All fun games are addictive, but not all addictive games are fun.

What MS really needs to do is man up, release actual sales numbers, and then project how many sales were lost to Gamepass. That would be more honest than what they are doing now. I get it. Gamepass costs them sales. But we are all smart people here. We can all see that if a game sold 7 million copies, lifetime, while launching day 1 on Gamepass, then that is a really damned good sales figure.

On topic, companies releasing numbers for their games isn’t required on a quarterly statement. It’s better off being told to us via tweets. It’s for gamers who are invested, not for investors.

Like the fiscal quarter that covered August MS said that 1st party was driving a lot of engagement and revenue. That’s covering the 4 games Tell Me Why, Flight Sim, Wasteland 3, and Battletoads. That’s all we really need to know. The stats that Flight Sim sold over 1 million on Steam and played by total 2 million players is a nice bonus. 

But regardless it’s no longer a good metric to list sold when you pushing GP. Seems your criteria is solely meant for PS fans to dissect and use as ammo against Xbox fans online. To MS, they don’t care about “losing sales to Game Pass” they care that you play their games as much as possible. The revenue comes in other ways rather then just upfront like you are used to. 

Saying it's driving "A lot of engagement and revenue" isn't a clear objective picture. A lot is a subjective term. We need it put in terms that are objective. Instead of saying we drove "a lot" of engagement and revenue, they should say something like "we made $4,000,000 in profit from Xbox this quarter". But I don't think they want to say that, because they are making less money than Sony/Nintendo is. They don't want that information to be readily available so they hide it as best they can behind marketing.

Well, I own a PC, a Switch, and about 14 other game consoles. It's not that I want ammo to use against MS in Sony's favor. It's simply that I want MS to be held to the same standard that game sales have been held to for the past 30 years. I really don't think Gamepass is profitable in the long run. They need to inject Microtransactions into their games to make up the difference. The problem is that the way Microtransactions are currently priced, they make up for far more than they cost to maintain. They also make games less fun in the long run. A game designed to be played forever, addicting, but not fun, isn't nearly as good as a game designed to be fun and played for a limited time. I think MS is going the way of Ubisoft, and EA. Their games are asking for more and more of your money, while also asking for more of your time via artificial game lengtheners.



Around the Network
sales2099 said:
Cerebralbore101 said:

It's easy to pump up monthly active player numbers when a game is free or tied to a subscription service. Just look at Poke'mon Go, with its 1 billion downloads. Now, does that suddenly mean that Poke'mon Go is the best Poke'mon game? Hell no! In fact, Poke'mon Go is a barebones shell of the original games. You'd have a hard time finding anybody listing Poke'mon Go as their favorite Poke'mon game.

Also, keep in mind that how long people play a game is in no way tied to its greatness. A game can sell 10+ million copies and be just a 10 hour single player game. Using monthly active player lists you'd think a game like that isn't very good. On the flipside a game that is manipulative, grindy, and addictive can have a massive playerbase despite being an awful game. All fun games are addictive, but not all addictive games are fun.

What MS really needs to do is man up, release actual sales numbers, and then project how many sales were lost to Gamepass. That would be more honest than what they are doing now. I get it. Gamepass costs them sales. But we are all smart people here. We can all see that if a game sold 7 million copies, lifetime, while launching day 1 on Gamepass, then that is a really damned good sales figure.

On topic, companies releasing numbers for their games isn’t required on a quarterly statement. It’s better off being told to us via tweets. It’s for gamers who are invested, not for investors.

Like the fiscal quarter that covered August MS said that 1st party was driving a lot of engagement and revenue. That’s covering the 4 games Tell Me Why, Flight Sim, Wasteland 3, and Battletoads. That’s all we really need to know. The stats that Flight Sim sold over 1 million on Steam and played by total 2 million players is a nice bonus. 

But regardless it’s no longer a good metric to list sold when you pushing GP. Seems your criteria is solely meant for PS fans to dissect and use as ammo against Xbox fans online. To MS, they don’t care about “losing sales to Game Pass” they care that you play their games as much as possible. The revenue comes in other ways rather then just upfront like you are used to. 

Yet they still don't report any profits or losses for their gaming division, there's a reason for that.



vonny said:
sales2099 said:

On topic, companies releasing numbers for their games isn’t required on a quarterly statement. It’s better off being told to us via tweets. It’s for gamers who are invested, not for investors.

Like the fiscal quarter that covered August MS said that 1st party was driving a lot of engagement and revenue. That’s covering the 4 games Tell Me Why, Flight Sim, Wasteland 3, and Battletoads. That’s all we really need to know. The stats that Flight Sim sold over 1 million on Steam and played by total 2 million players is a nice bonus. 

But regardless it’s no longer a good metric to list sold when you pushing GP. Seems your criteria is solely meant for PS fans to dissect and use as ammo against Xbox fans online. To MS, they don’t care about “losing sales to Game Pass” they care that you play their games as much as possible. The revenue comes in other ways rather then just upfront like you are used to. 

Yet they still don't report any profits or losses for their gaming division, there's a reason for that.

You beat me to it. Even before gamepass was a thing, they didn't report sales numbers for games or the XB1. They've never wanted people to know just how much they are losing by. Gamepass is just their conveinent excuse.



Because Sony and MS have multiple divisions. They are not just a gaming company. Why report something bad when you have numbers that is/looks better.



Pocky Lover Boy! 

Farsala said:

Individual SW sales of each game isn't that important to Sony's bottom line, so they feel that investors don't really need/care to know about it. Of course Sony will still do PR after a successful launch, touting numbers for a brief rally, but afterwards it isn't so important.

Especially when a game like GTA V makes Sony more money than almost all of their smaller games.

What smaller games? 



Pocky Lover Boy! 

Around the Network
Jranation said:
Farsala said:

Individual SW sales of each game isn't that important to Sony's bottom line, so they feel that investors don't really need/care to know about it. Of course Sony will still do PR after a successful launch, touting numbers for a brief rally, but afterwards it isn't so important.

Especially when a game like GTA V makes Sony more money than almost all of their smaller games.

What smaller games? 

Smaller selling games, stuff like Dreams, The Last Guardian, Sackboy, and VR games.



Cerebralbore101 said:
sales2099 said:

It’s simple logic that if you going to aggressively push a subscription service then using purchases suddenly makes no sense. Engagement and monthly active players is actually a much better way to gauge popularity.

The income is steady and monthly. And optional purchases like cosmetic mtx for say Sea of Thieves is where the long term money comes from when you maintain high engagement and monthly active users. 

It’s a culture shift from what you are used to. Try to understand it instead of being hostile towards it. 

It's easy to pump up monthly active player numbers when a game is free or tied to a subscription service. Just look at Poke'mon Go, with its 1 billion downloads. Now, does that suddenly mean that Poke'mon Go is the best Poke'mon game? Hell no! In fact, Poke'mon Go is a barebones shell of the original games. You'd have a hard time finding anybody listing Poke'mon Go as their favorite Poke'mon game.

Also, keep in mind that how long people play a game is in no way tied to its greatness. A game can sell 10+ million copies and be just a 10 hour single player game. Using monthly active player lists you'd think a game like that isn't very good. On the flipside a game that is manipulative, grindy, and addictive can have a massive playerbase despite being an awful game. All fun games are addictive, but not all addictive games are fun.

What MS really needs to do is man up, release actual sales numbers, and then project how many sales were lost to Gamepass. That would be more honest than what they are doing now. I get it. Gamepass costs them sales. But we are all smart people here. We can all see that if a game sold 7 million copies, lifetime, while launching day 1 on Gamepass, then that is a really damned good sales figure.

I disagree with this. Most people are not smart, most are completely ignorant and that goes for shareholders. If MS announced their games sales were low and justified it with Gamepass subscription, I highly doubt there wouldn't be a legion of angry shareholders who couldn't be bothered to do their research on the matter. People are not smart at all by and large. If we were, our forefathers would have founded direct democracies everywhere instead of the representative governments we have all over the planet, relying on smarter officials to make decisions than the masses.

It is in MS's best interest to not reveal these sales figures and instead focus on subscriber updates regularly.



Why does it even matter that much to you OP, when we all know you're pro Ninty and well, not really interested in the other two and just want to see Nintendo dominate everything?.

I'd be curious, if it didn't have a hint of fanboyism attached to it.



Step right up come on in, feel the buzz in your veins, I'm like an chemical electrical right into your brain and I'm the one who killed the Radio, soon you'll all see

So pay up motherfuckers you belong to "V"

Because they don't need to. Simple as that. Sony do give some random updates for some milestones and MS doesn't say much on sales. But legally they don't need so that is why, they will brag whenever they do noteworthy though,



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

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

sales2099 said:
Cerebralbore101 said:

It's easy to pump up monthly active player numbers when a game is free or tied to a subscription service. Just look at Poke'mon Go, with its 1 billion downloads. Now, does that suddenly mean that Poke'mon Go is the best Poke'mon game? Hell no! In fact, Poke'mon Go is a barebones shell of the original games. You'd have a hard time finding anybody listing Poke'mon Go as their favorite Poke'mon game.

Also, keep in mind that how long people play a game is in no way tied to its greatness. A game can sell 10+ million copies and be just a 10 hour single player game. Using monthly active player lists you'd think a game like that isn't very good. On the flipside a game that is manipulative, grindy, and addictive can have a massive playerbase despite being an awful game. All fun games are addictive, but not all addictive games are fun.

What MS really needs to do is man up, release actual sales numbers, and then project how many sales were lost to Gamepass. That would be more honest than what they are doing now. I get it. Gamepass costs them sales. But we are all smart people here. We can all see that if a game sold 7 million copies, lifetime, while launching day 1 on Gamepass, then that is a really damned good sales figure.

On topic, companies releasing numbers for their games isn’t required on a quarterly statement. It’s better off being told to us via tweets. It’s for gamers who are invested, not for investors.

Like the fiscal quarter that covered August MS said that 1st party was driving a lot of engagement and revenue. That’s covering the 4 games Tell Me Why, Flight Sim, Wasteland 3, and Battletoads. That’s all we really need to know. The stats that Flight Sim sold over 1 million on Steam and played by total 2 million players is a nice bonus. 

But regardless it’s no longer a good metric to list sold when you pushing GP. Seems your criteria is solely meant for PS fans to dissect and use as ammo against Xbox fans online. To MS, they don’t care about “losing sales to Game Pass” they care that you play their games as much as possible. The revenue comes in other ways rather then just upfront like you are used to. 

Of course it is a good thing to list sales even if the game is on GP. Even more when we have people come to VGC to say GP actually increases sales of the SW instead of making it sell less.

Would have zero issue with they saying "We sold 3M of this game and had another 5M playing it on GP that right now have 10M subs". You just don't want MS posting low numbers, and MS have stopped giving sales numbers for HW and SW much earlier than GP ever being a thing so that excuse doesn't hold water.



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

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."