The Cartographer
Member
Not even with the 360 E/S?
How is that even possible?
How is that even possible?
You forget the RRoD?Not even with the 360 E/S?
How is that even possible?
It’s not all free money. The services are still expensive to run. There’s profit there but royalty revenue traditionally covers hardware R&D and not making a substantially profit on hardware but with online services (and the expectation that companies continue to deliver updates via the internet), if people aren’t paying for it, it’s another thing to offset from their royalty revenue. The royalty cut is also only about 12% for retail which was where most game were sold In the past. That’s why I think when things go fully digital they have less of an excuse of charging for online because many of the services then become an inherent part of the business and their monetization greatly changed for their benefit (I.e 30% instead of 12%).I imagine they both make a killing for paid online too.
It's been known forever they've started with significant losses.I always assumed this. I thought it was known forever
What’s bad? If no profit, what was their loss?O
Ok. I stand corrected. It's not as bad as I thought, just bad. Still no profit.
I don't necessarily disagree with you here. The Zenimax purchase is a big deal. What's important here is how Sony responds. In order to fight back against that, do they start having first-party studios create Bethesda like games (but better)? This could work out in the end for Sony if some of their first-party studios start going toe-to-toe with them.
They don't report profits, that can only mean one thing in the business world. No profits worth reporting/losses.What’s bad? If no profit, what was their loss?
They report profits as a whole. And they certainly had net profits.They don't report profits, that can only mean one thing in the business world. No profits worth reporting/losses.
That's unrelated to what I'm asking.You forget the RRoD?
they should start taking a 30% cut in every transaction made in windows
look at apple. they don't develop games. they don't develop consoles. and they are beating microsoft in game revenue
and google is next with android
Top Public Video Game Companies | By Revenue | Newzoo
Newzoo's Top Video Game Companies ranking is updated every quarter. Features the top public video game companies by revenues.newzoo.com
the cost of online services is shouldered mostly by the devs and publishers themselves, most games are P2P and I doubt Microsoft pays for servers in third party games. The most expensive part of Microsoft and Sonys online service is their store, which should obviously be free to access. XBL gold and PS + is almost pure profit.It’s not all free money. The services are still expensive to run. There’s profit there but royalty revenue traditionally covers hardware R&D and not making a substantially profit on hardware but with online services (and the expectation that companies continue to deliver updates via the internet), if people aren’t paying for it, it’s another thing to offset from their royalty revenue. The royalty cut is also only about 12% for retail which was where most game were sold In the past. That’s why I think when things go fully digital they have less of an excuse of charging for online because many of the services then become an inherent part of the business and their monetization greatly changed for their benefit (I.e 30% instead of 12%).
They were already so far in a hole, that was my point.That's unrelated to what I'm asking.
The E and S models were introduced in 2010 and 2013 respectively and I just can't understand how is it possible to sell five plus year old console units at a loss.
Profit as a whole of what? Xbox? No. They haven't reported any profits for Xbox.They report profits as a whole. And they certainly had net profits.
Apple sells a device whose primary means of secondary profit is selling games.. that is used extensively for playing games.. Apple has a game subscription service on this device.
For all intents and purposes; the iPhone is a game console.
It is super interesting how it was never the intention though lol
by that same logic Windows is a gaming OS, this line of reasoning leads to a bunch of pointless conclusions.Apple sells a device whose primary means of secondary profit is selling games.. that is used extensively for playing games.. Apple has a game subscription service on this device.
For all intents and purposes; the iPhone is a game console.
It is super interesting how it was never the intention though lol
They lost THAT much money repairing red rings? That's hard to believe...They were already so far in a hole, that was my point.
Why does it matter?by that same logic Windows is a gaming OS, this line of reasoning leads to a bunch of pointless conclusions.
So? Pretty sure Sony doesn't earn money from pure hardware sales either.
They also have a music subscription service, a dedicated episodic and movie subscription service and a dedicated Music and Video store.Apple sells a device whose primary means of secondary profit is selling games.. that is used extensively for playing games.. Apple has a game subscription service on this device.
For all intents and purposes; the iPhone is a game console.
It is super interesting how it was never the intention though lol
What is your point?They also have a music subscription service, a dedicated episodic and movie subscription service and a dedicated Music and Video store.
For all intents and purposes the iPhone is a music and video playback device along with a phone
They also have a Fitness subscription service.
For all intents and purposes the iPhone is a device to assist with staying fit along with a phone.
They also have a news subscription service.
For all intents and purposes the iPhone is a news reading device along with being a phone.
If you would so kindly post the XBOX division profits here, you'll have my thanks.They report profits as a whole. And they certainly had net profits.
I’m talking about Microsoft as a whole.If you would so kindly post the XBOX division profits here, you'll have my thanks.
And I was always talking about Xbox.I’m talking about Microsoft as a whole.
So Xbox is losing money?And I was always talking about Xbox.
Why do you care?Ok. I stand corrected. It's not as bad as I thought, just bad. Still no profit.
Fascinating - and surprising - stuff. I’d love to know how Sony and Nintendo equate with this. I’d be amazed if either of them had never made any money selling consoles.
Definitely.So Xbox is losing money?
They were already in the hole at selling the console at a loss, then this,They lost THAT much money repairing red rings? That's hard to believe...
If you would so kindly post the XBOX division profits here, you'll have my thanks.Definitely.
Huh? They don't post profits that means losses, my friend. Read between the lines.If you would so kindly post the XBOX division profits here, you'll have my thanks.
Because you generalize all sales from the App store for iPhone as just games. I am sure that gaming makes up a large part of the App Store's contents and profits but to consider iOS devices as the secondary function as a phone / texting device is just wrong and doesn't seem to have any facts to back it up.What is your point?
Microsoft and Sony both have video stores on their "game console"..
MS dabbled in having a music service too... .and.. a fitness one.. and... TV specific functionalities..
They've both had web browsers in the past.
But again, why should this matter?
I suppose that's worst case scenario. As long as PlayStations continue selling like crazy for the reasons they do, it would be foolish to abandon what drives so many people to the platform. If that day were to ever arrive, than I would be done with gaming. Well, not entirely true, I'd stick to the old stuff I guess.possibly. But I am more concerned about the game pass model marginalizing the elite tier of software development that Sony currently enjoys
im not suggesting that will realistically happen, but it will be a sad day when we don’t have ambitious, highly expensive, narrative driven games simply because it’s not financially feasible in a monthly subscription model
They don't post profits for any division, just the company as a whole.Huh? They don't post profits that means losses, my friend. Read between the lines.
Your second point is actually why Epic has a chance in this lawsuit. Microsoft had actually been investigated for antitrust violations in 1992 and 1994, and in 1994 Microsoft agreed that they would not use their dominant position in the OS field to push their own non-OS software over competitors. Of course that is not what happened, Microsoft used it's dominant position to stifle competitors in browsers on the Windows platform and basically bankrupted the competition.You seem to be confusing a few things here.
First, Apple doesn't have a monopoly in mobile whilst Microsoft in the 1990s did have a monopoly in personal computing software.
Second, Microsoft used said dominant position to basically run Netscape out of business (which it did) by pre-installing IE. This is why they got sued by antitrust bodies around the world. This is abuse of monopoly power.
Third, Apple's iOS is closed source because that's how Apple does things and sees a lot more benefits (both for the benefit of Apple's bottom line AND user experience) from a closed source structure (i.e., security, quality control, performance, monetisation).
the economy itself, a gigantic local software industry that effects almost every single other industry and normal participation in modern society relies on general computing devices like smart phones and computers, game consoles are a luxury that retains influence in only one sector of the economy and grants access to a completely unnecessary part of modern life.Why does it matter?
Explain why "it's a general computing device" should effect anything having to do with this case.
I'm not the one leading to any conclusion.. other than, this is a pointless distinction.
Are you seriously asking where does MS profit for the whole company comes from? Do you know what Microsoft is? They can have several big divisions in the red for years and that's barely a mosquito sting to them.They don't post profits for any division, just the company as a whole.
Does that mean every division is loosing money then? But where does the (substantial) overall profit come from?
Because you generalize all sales from the App store for iPhone as just games. I am sure that gaming makes up a large part of the App Store's contents and profits but to consider iOS devices as the secondary function as a phone / texting device is just wrong and doesn't seem to have any facts to back it up.
There are numerous services that Apple offers that all contribute to one bottom line. If you are going to say that Games are the main earner for Apple, show some numbers that back this up instead of speaking on opinion.
App Store earns $72.3 billion in 2020 said:Games were the biggest sellers, netting Apple $47.6 billion across the year.
Apple is taking this approach because just like consoles iPhones and iPads are a marriage of hardware and software developed, sold, and maintained by the same company.the economy itself, a gigantic local software industry that effects almost every single other industry and normal participation in modern society relies on general computing devices like smart phones and computers, game consoles are a luxury that retains influence in only one sector of the economy and grants access to a completely unnecessary part of modern life.
I take issue with equating iOS devices with consoles because apple is using slimy tactics to equate themselves to consoles and use them as a shield.
Dude, I'm using your own logic against you. You are claiming Xbox is not making a profit because Microsoft only shares revenue numbers for each division, be it Windows, Azure, or Xbox. Going by your claim that if a division does not have its profits disclosed it thus means the division is not making any profit. Hence no divisions are making a profit despite the fact that Microsoft reported a very healthy profit overall.Are you seriously asking where does MS profit for the whole company comes from? Do you know what Microsoft is? They can have several big divisions in the red for years and that's barely a mosquito sting to them.
And yet this entire case is about a gaming company wanting to sell games on that device.. are games not a luxury on the device?the economy itself, a gigantic local software industry that effects almost every single other industry and normal participation in modern society relies on general computing devices like smart phones and computers, game consoles are a luxury that retains influence in only one sector of the economy and grants access to a completely unnecessary part of modern life.
I take issue with equating iOS devices with consoles because apple is using slimy tactics to pursue that end in order to use them as a shield for their lazy profit scraping empire.
I sold my iPhone in February so maybe something big has changed since then, but you couldn't install stuff outside of the Apple store, meaning Apple has a complete monopoly on it. You also can't add a micro SD, so you have to buy more of apples magic memory that costs 2-3x the current market value.Man you still don't get it. You are simply wrong dude.
Yeah iOS started out "closed" but thats simply because of the nature of how tiny the market was. There are two key things here. There was no way to "close" Windows or Mac like iOS and Android on their inception. They wanted people working on software for their hardware and distributing them on discs, and in stores etc etc. It was only the advent of the internet that allowed Apple to do what it has obviously.
Apple makes a MASSIVE profit on each phone. The phone sustains itself, much like ... Windows licensing! And Mac computers!
The second aspect is "The windows world [has] lots of scenarios that people use these devices for."
Sorta like ... iOS and Android.
Again, this point is being made over and over. Too many businesses now depend on software distribution on mobile devices for their very survival. You are letting Apple and Google skim 30%(!) off the top for doing absolutely nothing other than providing a download link, and on top of that able to decide if those companies software has a right to even exist. Absurd!
That is the point. iOS has changed from a tiny player in a luxury market to a daily necessity (along with Android) that is literally crucial to the fabric of our global economy. And Apple should have control of ALL software that is allowed to exist? You're completely insane if you believe that. I don't get why you are so pro Apple on this one. The biggest corporation on the planet, with the ability to destroy thousands of businesses on a whim. That's your stance?
Edit: I can see you "laughed" at this Ethomaz, but I suggest you bring some actual substance to this instead of repeating the word "closed" over and over. That the very issue. Using the complaint as a defense is incredibly stupid. Apparently you think Apple should have total control over a giant portion of all consumer focused software and that Apple has a right to 30% of all businesses revenue. That's brilliant stuff guy.
This says ever though, so that would mean 360 as well right? if that's the case then surely the PS3 never made a profit for Sony as it was very expensive to make.On PS4 they didn't in first well 6 months... after that they have profit in each hardware unit sold.
MS suffered with no profit on Xbox One because it was a expensive machine that had to match PS4 price point... so it was fated to always be in the loss with the actual price going way lower PS4 price point.
not when their devices are arguably as important as public utilities and they have a 60% marketshare in the country in which this lawsuit is being held. The amount of power, the amount of drag apple is now applying to many countries software industries while providing little to no effort to support or sustain these industries justifies scrutiny. Developers fucking hate apple for a reason but they are forced to deal with them regardless.Apple is taking this approach because just like consoles iPhones and iPads are a marriage of hardware and software developed, sold, and maintained by the same company.
They all make the same widget from top to bottom and the guts that goes inside it. Because they are all self contained widgets that are NOT computers (except for the PS3 when it could run Linux for Import/Export Tax breaks), they should be allowed to dictate what is allowed into the machine.
I agree with this. They all make the rules for these non-computing devices. I am in favor of them being able to call the shots on their respective App Stores as long as it provides me with a safe and secure experience. I don't want 3rd party stores on any "sealed" device where I can't see what's going on first hand behind the scenes which I feel is a differentiating factor between Computers and mobile devices.They are all devices where the manufacturers make the rules of what can and can't sell. and how those things can or can't sell.... iOS is far less restrictive than Xbox or Playstation.. and? What does that have to do with whether they should or shouldn't be allowed to charge a 30% cut?