Well PS3 games sell better than Xbox360 games in Europe and the Euro was strong during the year, which weakens their revenue from games sold in America. The Euro is down a bit now so that should have reversed by now.

Fact is we shouldn't look at revenue but profit. For instance Wii games generate less revenue because they are sold for 10 Euro less in Europe but they should make the same profit. DS games are 40 Euro, that's even less. There is your answer.

High PS3 revenue doesn't change the fact that Haze sales dissapointed and Prince of Persia had dissapointing sales as well (according to their financial report).

I'm sure Sony makes just as much revenue with the PS3 as Microsoft with the Xbox360 as the 80GB PS3 is 400 Euro in Europe and the 60GB Xbox360 is 230 Euro. Microsoft still made more profit with its console, though.

A strong year for the Euro won't convince Ubisoft to put more money into PS3 games.

Just to clarify: No developer will "abandon" the PS3, surely not the European ones! But the explanation seems wrong to me.

You will never know the profit from a video game. Never ever. So no we shouldn't be looking at profit, because well. We'd be looking at nothing.

Yeah sure... why using our head, right? I never said we should look at the profits from a single game but revenue is just silly to measure the success of a developer on a platform. Again, DS games are 40 Euro so they make 20 Euro less revenue from a DS game. Does that mean the games made them less money than the ones on the PS3?

And if the Wii accounts for 15% of the revenue, the games are cheaper at retail than PS3 / 360 games and the production costs are less, then it is valid to argue that they made just as much profit from the Wii.

Of course you have to look at profit and while you can't get exact figures there surely are some indicators if a developer made money on a platform or not.

Well, I'd guess Ubisoft are making money off of DS, PS3, 360, and Wii, but seeing as they don't disclose that data then it's pure speculation on my part. Whilst Ubisoft's DS and Wii games are cheaper to develop they cost a lot to market. It's not as simple as revenue - development costs = profit.

GTA & Bioshock both sold more on 360 = FACT.

ubisoft and EA both

I've never iven thought about that the ps3 would lack out of 3party titles

Just FYI: The article is wrong about Take2. The PS3 only was a bigger part of the sales for their Q4. Over the whole financial year 360 brought in more.

And what are those indicators that they made money? The only numbers they'll give you for a given platform is... *drum roll* REVENUE. Factoring in development costs for multiplatform games is pointless. Which platform "costs" the developer for when they were brainstorming for new games? Which platform "costs" the developer for when they are designing the characters? Does the lead platform incure all the costs? Which platform incures the cost of writing the script? Recording the music? Advertising for the game? Does one platform unfailry bare the burden of the development cost? Or is it split evenly? 

I just don't get it - how can the PS3 be a bigger source of income (= revenue, judging by those charts from Ubisoft that BKK posted) for Ubisoft and Take-Two if multiplatform games generally sell at least 30% more on the X360 (even Ubisoft and Take-Two published MP games sell a lot more on the X360 according to VGC numbers)?

I don't believe publishers get much more revenue from each copy sold in Europe compared to the US, because the reason why European games cost more is the sales tax (on average 20-25%) that's baked into the price - but the tax goes to the government, not to game publishers.

If anything, each PS3 game copy sold should generate less revenue to third party publishers because Sony is claimed to take a higher license fee ($10) than MS ($7.5) from each copy sold (I've never seen this being confirmed though, it might be a myth).