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

Forums - Sales Discussion - UBISOFT and EA both earned more money on PS3 than X360

Garcian Smith on 27 October 2008

As others have already pointed out: Revenue != profit.



"'Casual games' are something the 'Game Industry' invented to explain away the Wii success instead of actually listening or looking at what Nintendo did. There is no 'casual strategy' from Nintendo. 'Accessible strategy', yes, but ‘casual gamers’ is just the 'Game Industry''s polite way of saying what they feel: 'retarded gamers'."

 -Sean Malstrom

 

 

Around the Network
dbot on 27 October 2008

You can add Namco Bandi and Konami to your list as well. Namco Bandi sold 57% more software on the PS3 than they sold on the 360. Konami reported the PS3 accounted for 57% of it's sales last quarter whereas the 360 only accounted for 2.6%.

Link - > http://gamer.blorge.com/2008/10/26/analysis-ps3-selling-more-games-than-xbox-360-with-smaller-install-base/

You can get to the financials from this link.



Thanks for the input, Jeff.

 

 

DrStephenTColbert on 27 October 2008
superbeast1370 said:
Europe FTW!

That's one heckuva sig superbeast!

 



darthdevidem01 on 27 October 2008

Like it or not Playstations Back!



All hail the KING, Andrespetmonkey

Loud_Hot_White_Box on 27 October 2008
Garcian Smith said:
As others have already pointed out: Revenue != profit.

 

The revenue statistics still irk people plenty well enough. I'm liking that.

Plus, you conflate revenue for 3rd parties with profit for Sony.  Put another way, you strangely feel a need to bring up profit (apparently for Sony, right?) when the thread is about 3rd party revenue.



Around the Network
Grahamhsu on 27 October 2008
dbot said:
You can add Namco Bandi and Konami to your list as well. Namco Bandi sold 57% more software on the PS3 than they sold on the 360. Konami reported the PS3 accounted for 57% of it's sales last quarter whereas the 360 only accounted for 2.6%.

Link - > http://gamer.blorge.com/2008/10/26/analysis-ps3-selling-more-games-than-xbox-360-with-smaller-install-base/

You can get to the financials from this link.

Konami is expected MGS4....I can't believe 360 actually managed to sell 2.6% of Konami sales in Bomberman Zero!

 




-=Dew the disco dancing fo da Unco Graham=-

dbot on 27 October 2008
Grahamhsu said:
dbot said:
You can add Namco Bandi and Konami to your list as well. Namco Bandi sold 57% more software on the PS3 than they sold on the 360. Konami reported the PS3 accounted for 57% of it's sales last quarter whereas the 360 only accounted for 2.6%.

Link - > http://gamer.blorge.com/2008/10/26/analysis-ps3-selling-more-games-than-xbox-360-with-smaller-install-base/

You can get to the financials from this link.

Konami is expected MGS4....I can't believe 360 actually managed to sell 2.6% of Konami sales in Bomberman Zero!

 

Yeah, I guess that puts Konami's new policy of being strictly multi-platform into perspective. 

 



Thanks for the input, Jeff.

 

 

Garcian Smith on 27 October 2008
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:
Garcian Smith said:
As others have already pointed out: Revenue != profit.

 

The revenue statistics still irk people plenty well enough. I'm liking that.

Plus, you conflate revenue for 3rd parties with profit for Sony. Put another way, you strangely feel a need to bring up profit (apparently for Sony, right?) when the thread is about 3rd party revenue.

 

I feel the need to bring it up because revenue is meaningless in the grand scheme of things, so the people going "zomg PS3 domination!!" are flat-out wrong.



"'Casual games' are something the 'Game Industry' invented to explain away the Wii success instead of actually listening or looking at what Nintendo did. There is no 'casual strategy' from Nintendo. 'Accessible strategy', yes, but ‘casual gamers’ is just the 'Game Industry''s polite way of saying what they feel: 'retarded gamers'."

 -Sean Malstrom

 

 

FishyJoe on 27 October 2008
Loud_Hot_White_Box said:
Garcian Smith said:
As others have already pointed out: Revenue != profit.

 

The revenue statistics still irk people plenty well enough. I'm liking that.

Plus, you conflate revenue for 3rd parties with profit for Sony.  Put another way, you strangely feel a need to bring up profit (apparently for Sony, right?) when the thread is about 3rd party revenue.

 

Success is determined by profits not revenue. If we judged success by revenue, GM would be a thriving company.



Lafiel on 27 October 2008

@ Garcian Smith and FishyJoe )

as a non-stockholder I prefer high revenues with small (but positive) profits, because that means many people have work and the money doesn't just run into the arms of already rich stockholders, who get even richer


and BTW in my humble opinion a company is "successful" if it manages to employ as many people as possible with their revenue (and ofcourse still are profitable)