No!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It's made money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And people do use it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
No!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It's made money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And people do use it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There are lots of bored house wives on Home too. That can always be...interesting.
PSN ID: KingFate_
Kantor said: No!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It's made money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And people do use it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
I know you're joing around here but it just astounds me how many that people use the well it makes money so it must be good argument.
Would you call something like the Shrek games good? I guarantee you those are terrible games but they made assloads of money.
twesterm said:
I know you're joing around here but it just astounds me how many that people use the well it makes money so it must be good argument. Would you call something like the Shrek games good? I guarantee you those are terrible games but they made assloads of money. |
Good for Sony yes. Majority of customers HELL NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
twesterm said:
I know you're joing around here but it just astounds me how many that people use the well it makes money so it must be good argument. Would you call something like the Shrek games good? I guarantee you those are terrible games but they made assloads of money. |
It's a good idea. Nowhere in the OP does it mention Home being "good".
Home was an excellent idea, but it was very, very poorly executed. Ditto on what someone said about the PS3 not having a mic/keyboard in the box. If they had that, they would have tons more people on it. As it is, it's not easy to find any people to talk to. Or you sit and wait hours for people to type what they want to say with the on-screen keyboard.
<insert awesome signature here>
Kantor said:
It's a good idea. Nowhere in the OP does it mention Home being "good". |
I completely agree it was a good idea, it just always confuses me that people confuse good idea with good game (or application) because it makes money. Just because someone is free, makes money, or a "beta" does not make it good (for the consumer at least).
kowenicki said: who says it makes money?... can someone link me to the profit figures attributable to HOME? not turnover... profit. |
Not necessarily figures, but I don't care.
http://www.ps3center.net/news/2032/home-turning-a-profit-for-sony/
http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3176697
And according to Sony, they never made it for the money anyway.
Odd. Future. Wolf. Gang. Kill. Em. All. OFWGKTA Don't give a fuck!
Fuck Steve Harvey. FREE EARL!
Final Fantasy Versus XIII will be the GREATEST game EVER made!!!
I'd take a bullet for Square-Enix!
Sony does the microtransactions thing, but more and more people are coming onto Home all the time, especially with the ginnnormous Ps3growth lately--bigger audience means more people will be viewing the "ads" and so the company's sponsoring tem would pay more. Also, all the advertising done for games done on home is a "hidden" source of revenue that you cant directly tie to home when you look at the numbers.
That said, is it profitable? I'm sure that it is on a month to month kind of basis, but it will still take a couple of years for Sony to get their money back after the investments, programming, etc that is required for home, so i'm being realistic.