Why do people pay for Xbox Live?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
wow this thread is still going on??
So non Xbox owners are still concerned of how Lems spend money.. while Lems still wont admit they pay ONLY cause otherwise they couldnt enjoy online gaming..Â
One side bashes, while the other side tries to justify the extra cost :) Â
Personally I got a 360 and while I'm not happy to pay extra for gaming online (cause its free on other systems) I have to.. I know there was this cost when i got the 360 console.. its not like MS tricked me, it was my decision to get a 360 knowing i had to pay for XBLG....
Malta_1980
I really don't see why anything needs to be said on this matter.
I like xbox live gold a lot. I can easily see how some people are upset at having to pay for it, but it definitely has it's advantages. I don't mind paying $50 or less a year, because it's worth it to me.
And if people don't think Sony will have a subscription based system very similar to xbl gold, they are in denial.
Cannot wait to be here when Sony annpunces the pricing structure for the PS4's online. The damage control will have a new standard.
Live fees are one of the reasons I'm defecting from MS to Sony next gen, if Sony put basic services behind a paywall I'll go PC only next gen.Cannot wait to be here when Sony annpunces the pricing structure for the PS4's online. The damage control will have a new standard.
timbers_WSU
[QUOTE="def_mode"]If everything was free. They would be losing money. Games for Windows Live is like 1/1000th the size of Xbox Live. Does that really have to be said? You proved my point. The $50 (or $40 or $35) annual subscription fee was not because of the services the Gold offers but it was a business move.Games for Windows Live is the PC version of XBL Gold. Game for Windows Live has:
- Achievements earned during gameplay.
- Gamerscores amounting the total of a user's achievement points.
- Rep voted by other users preferring or avoiding the user. Rep defaults to five stars over time after the user has been preferred by at least one other user.
- Friends list displaying the user's chosen friends of up to 100.
- Recent players list displaying the last 50 players the user has met.
- Complaint system allowing users to file reports of other users that have broken Live Terms of Use.
- Games for Windows Marketplace offering Games on Demand, downloadable content, music and movies.
- Private chat via Voice and text.
- Multiplayer gameplay via Games for Windows Live.
- Matchmaking depending on the user's cumulative gamerscore, rep, location, language and gamer zone.
- Family settings controlling younger users' exposure to other users.
- Game Room virtual arcade space offering a library of classic retro games.
- Cross-platform gameplay with Xbox 360
As you can see, it has all (most, if not all) the features that XBL Gold has on XBOX360 but it is free. So this proves and shows that MS can offer the service for free but they wont because they know that people pays for gold subscription and that they are a business company and wants all the money they can get.
So please hardcore fanboys, dont give me that "oh XBL Gold has cross game chat, marketplace, server maintenance, netflix and facebook app" BS. MS offers the same exact service on PC for FREE!!!
Â
Source: http://www.xbox.com/en-CA/Live/PC
From their actual website.
jimmypsn
Why do people pay for Xbox Live? Because they don't have any games to pay for!
I don't pay for Live anymore. but it is a more stable online with many more people talking during matches. DL's are much faster, but altogether, I don't see the value.
[QUOTE="NathanDrakeSwag"]
[QUOTE="mems_1224"]So PSN as a service does nothing better than XBL? Glad you agree. mems_1224
Free PSN does everything gold does except party chat. PS+ shits on XBL.
Glad you agree that they aren't equal. Also, how are voice messages on PSN? Or HBO Go? wait how the hell does this analogy make sense? Take price out of the question and tell me what PSN does better than XBL? It's a dumb question because the fact that XBL isn't free contradicts the answer you're hoping for to begin with, so this is a like dumb paradox, except actually not a paradox cause it makes no sense. Seriously? Again, it's okay you're a microsoft fan
[QUOTE="jimmypsn"][QUOTE="def_mode"]If everything was free. They would be losing money. Games for Windows Live is like 1/1000th the size of Xbox Live. Does that really have to be said? You proved my point. The $50 (or $40 or $35) annual subscription fee was not because of the services the Gold offers but it was a business move. Do you know anything? Every subscription fee in the world that has ever existed is a business move. What are you complaining about now? The service COST MONEY to maintain and operate. But they are indeed making a profit as well. MS isn't a charity. It's a business. And some of that profit is used to subsidize the cost of Games for Windows Live.Games for Windows Live is the PC version of XBL Gold. Game for Windows Live has:
- Achievements earned during gameplay.
- Gamerscores amounting the total of a user's achievement points.
- Rep voted by other users preferring or avoiding the user. Rep defaults to five stars over time after the user has been preferred by at least one other user.
- Friends list displaying the user's chosen friends of up to 100.
- Recent players list displaying the last 50 players the user has met.
- Complaint system allowing users to file reports of other users that have broken Live Terms of Use.
- Games for Windows Marketplace offering Games on Demand, downloadable content, music and movies.
- Private chat via Voice and text.
- Multiplayer gameplay via Games for Windows Live.
- Matchmaking depending on the user's cumulative gamerscore, rep, location, language and gamer zone.
- Family settings controlling younger users' exposure to other users.
- Game Room virtual arcade space offering a library of classic retro games.
- Cross-platform gameplay with Xbox 360
As you can see, it has all (most, if not all) the features that XBL Gold has on XBOX360 but it is free. So this proves and shows that MS can offer the service for free but they wont because they know that people pays for gold subscription and that they are a business company and wants all the money they can get.
So please hardcore fanboys, dont give me that "oh XBL Gold has cross game chat, marketplace, server maintenance, netflix and facebook app" BS. MS offers the same exact service on PC for FREE!!!
Â
Source: http://www.xbox.com/en-CA/Live/PC
From their actual website.
def_mode
[QUOTE="mems_1224"]Glad you agree that they aren't equal. Also, how are voice messages on PSN? Or HBO Go? wait how the hell does this analogy make sense? Take price out of the question and tell me what PSN does better than XBL? It's a dumb question because the fact that XBL isn't free contradicts the answer you're hoping for to begin with, so this is a like dumb paradox, except actually not a paradox cause it makes no sense. Seriously? Again, it's okay you're a Nintendo fan You're gonna be a mad cow for a very very long time. Its great knowing you're gonna be mad at the way other people spend their money for the next 8 years.[QUOTE="NathanDrakeSwag"]
Free PSN does everything gold does except party chat. PS+ shits on XBL.
xxunnecessaryxs
Yep just how PS+ is going into paying for those who are using the PSN service. The difference is that PSN is still losing money. Sony has never made a profit.^So people paying for Live are subsidising a free service for PC gamers?Â
That's nice of them.
JamDev
[QUOTE="xxunnecessaryxs"][QUOTE="mems_1224"]Glad you agree that they aren't equal. Also, how are voice messages on PSN? Or HBO Go?jimmypsnwait how the hell does this analogy make sense? Take price out of the question and tell me what PSN does better than XBL? It's a dumb question because the fact that XBL isn't free contradicts the answer you're hoping for to begin with, so this is a like dumb paradox, except actually not a paradox cause it makes no sense. Seriously? Again, it's okay you're a Nintendo fan You're gonna be a mad cow for a very very long time. Its great knowing you're gonna be mad at the way other people spend their money for the next 8 years. really because it seems like Lemmings are the ones who are more concerned about SONY's finances than SONY themselves. When LIFE GIVES YOU NO GAMES, BECOME AN ACCOUNTANT AND OBSESS ABOUT THE COMPANY THAT'S LOSING MONEY JUST TO ENSURE THEIR GAMERS HAVE GAMES TO PLAY AND ENJOY. LOL
Better question is why are there 31 pages of Lemmings desperately trying to justify their stupid investments and failing miserably? Anyway, testing my new Sig..xxunnecessaryxspoor quality and has a watermark
[QUOTE="JamDev"]Yep just how PS+ is going into paying for those who are using the PSN service. The difference is that PSN is still losing money. Sony has never made a profit. You have a source that proves PSN is still losing money? Last time they revealed the PSN figures was in 2010, those figures showed a strong upward trend with revenue doubling YOY and the service was expected to become profitable in 2011. PS+ has taken off in a big way since then so to claim they are still losing money on it is pure speculation. Regardless, it's a very different situation than subsidising a service on a whole other platform, and hardly a good argument for Live subscribers getting value for money.^So people paying for Live are subsidising a free service for PC gamers?Â
That's nice of them.
jimmypsn
[QUOTE="jimmypsn"][QUOTE="JamDev"]Yep just how PS+ is going into paying for those who are using the PSN service. The difference is that PSN is still losing money. Sony has never made a profit. You have a source that proves PSN is still losing money? Last time they revealed the PSN figures was in 2010, those figures showed a strong upward trend with revenue doubling YOY and the service was expected to become profitable in 2011. PS+ has taken off in a big way since then so to claim they are still losing money on it is pure speculation. Regardless, it's a very different situation than subsidising a service on a whole other platform, and hardly a good argument for Live subscribers getting value for money. It's crazy how some people pull things out of nowhere and claim it as facts.^So people paying for Live are subsidising a free service for PC gamers?Â
That's nice of them.
JamDev
[QUOTE="jimmypsn"][QUOTE="JamDev"]Yep just how PS+ is going into paying for those who are using the PSN service. The difference is that PSN is still losing money. Sony has never made a profit. You have a source that proves PSN is still losing money? Last time they revealed the PSN figures was in 2010, those figures showed a strong upward trend with revenue doubling YOY and the service was expected to become profitable in 2011. PS+ has taken off in a big way since then so to claim they are still losing money on it is pure speculation. Regardless, it's a very different situation than subsidising a service on a whole other platform, and hardly a good argument for Live subscribers getting value for money. Sony has never declared they have broken even or made a profit off PSN. Smart investors such as myself can only go by what a company states. All they have declared have been loses. Taking that into account. Playstation has been losing money. This is May 2012. http://www.computerandvideogames.com/347056/playstation-division-loses-pound18-billion-as-annual-ps3-sales-decline/ Put 2 and 2 together.^So people paying for Live are subsidising a free service for PC gamers?Â
That's nice of them.
JamDev
[QUOTE="jimmypsn"][QUOTE="xxunnecessaryxs"] really because it seems like Lemmings are the ones who are more concerned about SONY's finances than SONY themselves. When LIFE GIVES YOU NO GAMES, BECOME AN ACCOUNTANT AND OBSESS ABOUT THE COMPANY THAT'S LOSING MONEY JUST TO ENSURE THEIR GAMERS HAVE GAMES TO PLAY AND ENJOY. LOL def_modeGamespot cares about it too. http://www.gamespot.com/news/sony-expecting-64-billion-full-year-net-loss-6370956 LOL. What is the point of this? You know that Sony is not just a video game company or that PS is not their only product right? It is a total loss of everything in their business. You clearly show lack of knowledge about this argument. I am done /done Sony on the whole has lost billions upon billions the last 6 years. They've only declared a profit the last quarter mainly due to asset sales. They sold buildings for goodness sakes. Sony is continuing to look into more asset sales. They sold off their DeNA venture. Until Sony stop selling their assets. They are not really turning things around in the ways that people are expecting.
Cows seem to be the angriest at Sony losing money. This is partly their fault because they don't really buy or play games. There was a Nielson study that showed PS3 users mainly like to watch movies. Its pathetic. All talk and no action from their userbase.
Â
Even sony stated they should consider to cut down on the number of games they should make because they have been money losses for the company.
Okay so it proves my point that sony is shelling out money to make games despite taking losses then. What's your point? ANd how does this answer or defend MS charging for XBL???I found the sources for my last post. Here it is. Kinda sad to be honest. http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2012/02/10/sony-we-should-probably-develop-less-games/
jimmypsn
SONY: Okay, we're not going to take your money, but we're going to keep giving you games to play.
MS: We ARE going to take your money.
YOU: Buhh am I going to get games???
MS: HAHAHAHA DON'T BE SILLY.
Okay so it proves my point that sony is shelling out money to make games despite taking losses then. What's your point? ANd how does this answer or defend MS charging for XBL???[QUOTE="jimmypsn"]
I found the sources for my last post. Here it is. Kinda sad to be honest. http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2012/02/10/sony-we-should-probably-develop-less-games/
xxunnecessaryxs
SONY: Okay, we're not going to take your money, but we're going to keep giving you games to play.
MS: We ARE going to take your money.
YOU: Buhh am I going to get games???
MS: HAHAHAHA DON'T BE SILLY. Uhhh you think it okay to just throw away billions just to make your fans happy. What the.....Glad you don't run any businesses. On the other hand you probably couldn't do worse than Sony. Sony isn't even looking at the big picture. They are offering all these services, taking huge losses on PSN for free online. Lost money in the Epic PSN hack and had to spend nearly a quarter of a billion repairing it all for the sake of their fans who want free stuff. If Sony does want to charge, they are gonna come across their fans who are expecting free stuff. The fallout will be epic.
[QUOTE="xxunnecessaryxs"]Okay so it proves my point that sony is shelling out money to make games despite taking losses then. What's your point? ANd how does this answer or defend MS charging for XBL???[QUOTE="jimmypsn"]
I found the sources for my last post. Here it is. Kinda sad to be honest. http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2012/02/10/sony-we-should-probably-develop-less-games/
jimmypsn
SONY: Okay, we're not going to take your money, but we're going to keep giving you games to play.
MS: We ARE going to take your money.
YOU: Buhh am I going to get games???
MS: HAHAHAHA DON'T BE SILLY.
Â
Uhhh you think it okay to just throw away billions just to make your fans happy. What the.....Glad you don't run any businesses. On the other hand you probably couldn't do worse than Sony. Sony isn't even looking at the big picture. They are offering all these services, taking huge losses on PSN for free online. Lost money in the Epic PSN hack and had to spend nearly a quarter of a billion repairing it all for the sake of their fans who want free stuff. If Sony does want to charge, they are gonna come across their fans who are expecting free stuff. The fallout will be epic.Why do you say it as if PS3 is the only gaming platform that offers free online? PC offers it for free too. They have PS+ if you want subscription based but we are talking about the main thing here which is "online play" which in principle, should be free.
Do you really think that the current Xbox Gold subscribers will pay for Gold is online play was included in Silver? Ask yourself.
Uhhh you think it okay to just throw away billions just to make your fans happy. What the.....Glad you don't run any businesses. On the other hand you probably couldn't do worse than Sony. Sony isn't even looking at the big picture. They are offering all these services, taking huge losses on PSN for free online. Lost money in the Epic PSN hack and had to spend nearly a quarter of a billion repairing it all for the sake of their fans who want free stuff. If Sony does want to charge, they are gonna come across their fans who are expecting free stuff. The fallout will be epic.[QUOTE="jimmypsn"][QUOTE="xxunnecessaryxs"] Okay so it proves my point that sony is shelling out money to make games despite taking losses then. What's your point? ANd how does this answer or defend MS charging for XBL???
SONY: Okay, we're not going to take your money, but we're going to keep giving you games to play.
MS: We ARE going to take your money.
YOU: Buhh am I going to get games???
MS: HAHAHAHA DON'T BE SILLY.Â
def_mode
Why do you say it as if PS3 is the only gaming platform that offers free online? PC offers it for free too. They have PS+ if you want subscription based but we are talking about the main thing here which is "online play" which in principle, should be free.
Do you really think that the current Xbox Gold subscribers will pay for Gold is online play was included in Silver? Ask yourself.
most exclusives? :lol: sure, keep counting lol kinect games
and inferior multiplats that are better on pc, only proves that xbox is a poor man's pc.
[QUOTE="xxunnecessaryxs"]Uhhh you think it okay to just throw away billions just to make your fans happy. What the.....Glad you don't run any businesses. On the other hand you probably couldn't do worse than Sony. Sony isn't even looking at the big picture. They are offering all these services, taking huge losses on PSN for free online. Lost money in the Epic PSN hack and had to spend nearly a quarter of a billion repairing it all for the sake of their fans who want free stuff. If Sony does want to charge, they are gonna come across their fans who are expecting free stuff. The fallout will be epic. If SONY does charge, and they have every reason to, they wouldn't rip people off like MS does. SONY is ALREADY CHARGING, IF YOU'RE TOO MUCH OF AN IDIOT TO REALIZE THIS. IT'S CALLED PS+ And it makes more sense to compare PS+ to XBL than to compare PSN to XBL because PSN smokes the living dog shit out of XBL for the simple fact that's it's free. Forget everything else at the end of the day it's going to back to the fact that it's free. And I do care that sony is taking losses and I'm sure SONY cares too, but SONY is loyal to fans and they rule by principle and not by condition. Oh and I decided to research the PS+ vs XBL gold for you. [QUOTE="KOTAKU"] You can pick your preference between PlayStation and Xbox. You can argue that Halo is better than KillZone or that Uncharted tops Gears of War. But it is becoming increasingly hard to argue that the Xbox 360's online subscription service is superior to the PlayStation 3's. This is what competition does, and, today, the long-running $60-a-year Xbox Live Gold just doesn't seem to offer as much value as the newer, upstart, the $50 PlayStation Plus. Let's break this down. Xbox Live Gold costs about $5 a month for individual plan. The paid plan gives Xbox 360 gamers an extra suite of features atop basic gamer-to-gamer text-messaging, cross-game-chat and access to an online marketplace, all of which are free as part of Xbox Live Silver . Gold members also get the following features: Xbox Live Gold Features Multiplayer Gaming Early Access to Some Demos Beta Access Game Discounts (40-50% off, often) Hulu Plus Netflix Amazon Instant Video Party Chat Video Kinect Zune Music Streaming Halo Waypoint Avatar Kinect Internet Explorer Cloud Storage Facebook Skype Twitter YouTube last.fm MLB.tv HBO Go ESPN Forthcoming: Free-to-Play Gaming Those are the major perks and features available in the U.S. There are several more entertainment services available in other regions. (Wikipedia has a good chart for this; Microsoft offers their own less-detailed chart.) Some of the services here, including HBO Go and Netflix require their own paid memberships with those services. And some, such as YouTube and Twitter, are free on just about any device other than an Xbox 360. Originally, Xbox Live Gold's main advertised feature was access to multiplayer gaming. With the launch of the PlayStation 3, Sony countered that by refusing to charge for online gaming. Sony's PlayStation Network was, initially, free to anyone who bought the console. There was no paid service, no PSN Gold. The PS3 couldn't do cross-game chat. That was the biggest knock. But it also didn't charge gamers. To this day, Xbox 360 owners pay for things on their console that PlayStation owners don't. Let's strike through all of the services on Gold that PlayStation 3 owners get at no extra charge from Sony. Xbox Live Gold minus Free PSN Features Multiplayer Gaming Early Access to Some Demos Beta Access Game Discounts (40-50% off, often) Hulu Plus Netflix Amazon Instant Video Party Chat Video Kinect Zune Music Store Access Halo Waypoint Avatar Kinect Internet Explorer Cloud Storage Facebook Skype Twitter YouTube last.fm MLB.tv HBO Go ESPN Forthcoming: Free-to-Play Gaming There's one cheat there. Sony owners don't actually get Internet Explorer, but they can browse the web for free. It also does offer free-to-play games in its free PlayStation Home avatar hangout/whatever-it-is as well as with games such as Free Realms and DC Universe Online. Several of Gold's features aren't available on PlayStation. There's no Halo Waypoint access, no ESPN, no HBO Go. But Netflix is there, Hulu Plus is there, still requiring outside subscriptions but no added payment to Sony. This is how it's been for a while, but, last year in 2010, Sony introduced PlayStation Plus and started giving its customers the chance to pay for more services. Players got discounts in the PSN store, beta access, but nothing amazing. Then, this past June, Sony added one more key perk, the perk that makes a mockery out of Xbox Live Gold: free games. Here's what PlayStation 3 owners get for Plus: PlayStation Plus Features Instant Game Collection (Free Games) Game Discounts (40-50% off, often) Early Access to Some Demos Beta Access Cloud Storage Automatic Patching/Firmware-Updates 1-Hour Free Access to Full Games Note the length of that list. It's short. Microsoft's Gold list is longer. But Sony's has a bullet point that it's hard for Xbox Live to top, the Instant Game Collection. That's a bundle of games that a Plus subscriber can download and that remain accessible for as long as the subscriber's account lasts. In the few months the service has been live, Sony has removed some games from the offer and added new ones. The removed games are still available to legacy subscribers; they're just not available for free to new ones. For this to be a good deal, the games better be good, right? Here's what you'd have in your Instant Game Collection through early September, if you were a Plus subscriber since the free game offers started in June (games no longer offered to new subscribers have an asterisk): Free Games Available Through PlayStation Plus The Walking Dead Episodes 1 & 2 Bloodrayne Betrayal Outland Infamous 2 Little Big Planet 2 Ratchet & Clank All 4 One Space Marine Saints Row 2 Renegade Ops Pac-Man Championship Edition DX Choplifter Sideway Just Cause 2* Lara Croft & The Guardian of Light* Gotham City Impostors* Hard Corps Uprising* Zombie Apocalypse* Virtua Fighter 5: Final Showdown* (Borderlands will be added in September) Pretty good list, no? Well, some people don't like it: specifically, U.S. Plus subscribers have started complaining that Europe gets an even better batch, which includes Dead Space 2 and will soon include Red Dead Redemption . The grass is indeed always greener somewhere else. Xbox Live is much more widely-discussed than PlayStation Network. Microsoft has been noisier about their online service. They've been more aggressive, standardizing online console multiplayer gaming, striking first with Netflix streaming and just boasting more about their pay service. The company reports that it has 40 million Xbox Live subscribers, though it won't say how many are paying Gold members (one Microsoft estimate from two years ago put it at about half that count). Competition, however, causes the other party to do amazing things and that appears to be what's happening with PlayStation Plus, a service whichsurpriseSony doesn't share subscriber stats for either. It's a safe bet that Sony has fewer Plus people than Microsoft has Golds. It's also a safe bet that Sony reacts awfully well to competition, as they've been showing throughout the summer. It's Time for Xbox Live Gold to Be Free Our colleagues at Gizmodo recently argued that Xbox Live Gold should be free. (Microsoft might counter that their services cost money to maintain; we might counter that that's why they're running ads on Xbox Live.) Let's pile on a new argument: Gold should be as impressive as PlayStation Plus. For consumers, it sure looks like Sony is offering the better deal.[QUOTE="jimmypsn"] Okay so it proves my point that sony is shelling out money to make games despite taking losses then. What's your point? ANd how does this answer or defend MS charging for XBL???
jimmypsn
SONY: Okay, we're not going to take your money, but we're going to keep giving you games to play.
MS: We ARE going to take your money.
YOU: Buhh am I going to get games???
MS: HAHAHAHA DON'T BE SILLY.
Uhhh you think it okay to just throw away billions just to make your fans happy. What the.....Glad you don't run any businesses. On the other hand you probably couldn't do worse than Sony. Sony isn't even looking at the big picture. They are offering all these services, taking huge losses on PSN for free online. Lost money in the Epic PSN hack and had to spend nearly a quarter of a billion repairing it all for the sake of their fans who want free stuff. If Sony does want to charge, they are gonna come across their fans who are expecting free stuff. The fallout will be epic.[QUOTE="jimmypsn"][QUOTE="xxunnecessaryxs"] Okay so it proves my point that sony is shelling out money to make games despite taking losses then. What's your point? ANd how does this answer or defend MS charging for XBL???
SONY: Okay, we're not going to take your money, but we're going to keep giving you games to play.
MS: We ARE going to take your money.
YOU: Buhh am I going to get games???
MS: HAHAHAHA DON'T BE SILLY.Â
def_mode
Why do you say it as if PS3 is the only gaming platform that offers free online? PC offers it for free too. They have PS+ if you want subscription based but we are talking about the main thing here which is "online play" which in principle, should be free.
Do you really think that the current Xbox Gold subscribers will pay for Gold is online play was included in Silver? Ask yourself.
PC doesn't really operate on a single centralized service to run online gaming. Its mainly done on a developer to developer basis. I'm happy to educate.Since you are talking about businesses or market strategies. I think we can all agree that subscribing for Gold is a business move or marketing strategy rather than claiming that you get more services that deserves the $50 subscription when the same company offers the same exact thing on PC for free.
Whichever way you look at it, it's a rip off.
[QUOTE="JamDev"][QUOTE="jimmypsn"] Yep just how PS+ is going into paying for those who are using the PSN service. The difference is that PSN is still losing money. Sony has never made a profit.jimmypsn
You have a source that proves PSN is still losing money? Last time they revealed the PSN figures was in 2010, those figures showed a strong upward trend with revenue doubling YOY and the service was expected to become profitable in 2011. PS+ has taken off in a big way since then so to claim they are still losing money on it is pure speculation. Regardless, it's a very different situation than subsidising a service on a whole other platform, and hardly a good argument for Live subscribers getting value for money.
Sony has never declared they have broken even or made a profit off PSN. Smart investors such as myself can only go by what a company states. All they have declared have been loses. Taking that into account. Playstation has been losing money. This is May 2012. http://www.computerandvideogames.com/347056/playstation-division-loses-pound18-billion-as-annual-ps3-sales-decline/ Put 2 and 2 together.
That article you posted is misleading. The division that lost money was Sony's Consumer Products and Services division - which houses its PlayStation, TV, video, digital imaging, PC and mobile businesses.Â
The gaming division itself has been profitable since 2011.
2011: $434m profit http://uk.gamespot.com/news/sony-posts-317-billion-loss-playstation-division-sees-434-million-profit-6315481
2012: $371m profit http://www.vgchartz.com/article/250414/sony-banking-on-games-division-to-help-return-the-company-to-profit/
2013: 1.7b Yen Proft http://www.vg247.com/2013/05/09/sony-fy13-ps3-sales-down-vita-flat-gaming-division-profit-down/
Â
But I'm sure you already knew that being a smart investor and all.
[QUOTE="def_mode"][QUOTE="jimmypsn"] Uhhh you think it okay to just throw away billions just to make your fans happy. What the.....Glad you don't run any businesses. On the other hand you probably couldn't do worse than Sony. Sony isn't even looking at the big picture. They are offering all these services, taking huge losses on PSN for free online. Lost money in the Epic PSN hack and had to spend nearly a quarter of a billion repairing it all for the sake of their fans who want free stuff. If Sony does want to charge, they are gonna come across their fans who are expecting free stuff. The fallout will be epic. jimmypsn
Why do you say it as if PS3 is the only gaming platform that offers free online? PC offers it for free too. They have PS+ if you want subscription based but we are talking about the main thing here which is "online play" which in principle, should be free.
Do you really think that the current Xbox Gold subscribers will pay for Gold is online play was included in Silver? Ask yourself.
PC doesn't really operate on a single centralized service to run online gaming. Its mainly done on a developer to developer basis. I'm happy to educate. Exactly! MS has no full control on PC unlike Xbox360. Players have no choice but to pay in order to play the "multiplayer" part of the game you already bought.Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment