All purpose Sales and Sales Rumours and Anecdotes [2023 Edition]

Status
Not open for further replies.

EDIT:
Capture_decran_2023-02-14_a_10.20.13.png
 
Last edited:

They admit the truth.
And this will very soon happen to Sony too. Well IMO we can already see it in their own results, but most people are putting their head in the sand blinded by the "services, not content, is the future" mantra. They tried to follow MS strategy when we already knew MS strategy aim was not to increase profit, only subscribers (which worked until a point). But we can actually see Sony already failed to do the latter as the release of those new services actually lowered their subscribers (which is shocking IMO and should have made news around the world).

This is why their offer for next month is incredibly good (with Horizon FW) as they (the accountants in charge) really need a win. But this will only delay the inevitable failure of the strategy.
 
And this will very soon happen to Sony too. Well IMO we can already see it in their own results, but most people are putting their head in the sand blinded by the "services, not content, is the future" mantra. They tried to follow MS strategy when we already knew MS strategy aim was not to increase profit, only subscribers (which worked until a point). But we can actually see Sony already failed to do the latter as the release of those new services actually lowered their subscribers (which is shocking IMO and should have made news around the world).

This is why their offer for next month is incredibly good (with Horizon FW) as they (the accountants in charge) really need a win. But this will only delay the inevitable failure of the strategy.

The new PS plus did not lower the number of subscriber. They explain to the investor and shareholder, the problem was the PS5 shortage. Engagement of PS4 player is falling hard and they let the subscription lapse until they find a PS5. I am sure subscriber will grow again to the level they were before which is the ceiling for subscription services(only 2 millions subscriber is enough). HFW is inside the services because of the future release of Burning shores content.

And Hogwarts Legacy is the proof cross gen games is not needed anymore. For the moment the release of current gen version is enough for the title to have better launch sales than Elden Ring, Pokemon game or a Fallout game in Europe. This is massive.


EDIT: Another problem for Burning shores, single player game DLC content sales aren't very good. Maybe HFW PS plus version will help the DLC sales.
 
And this will very soon happen to Sony too. Well IMO we can already see it in their own results, but most people are putting their head in the sand blinded by the "services, not content, is the future" mantra. They tried to follow MS strategy when we already knew MS strategy aim was not to increase profit, only subscribers (which worked until a point). But we can actually see Sony already failed to do the latter as the release of those new services actually lowered their subscribers (which is shocking IMO and should have made news around the world).
I did LoL at this. The world is occupied with costs of living crisis, war in Europe, balloons and other UFOs being shot down left, right and centre, earthquakes, and whatever is going on with all the hazardous spills in the US. Perhaps some perspective about what is important to people?

But on the reduction of subscribers, this is the risk with changing things. I bet there were people who have forgotten they even subscribed to PS+ but being reminded about it, resulted in a subscription cancellation. In general any change may result in people questioning the value of a service. I would comment that what Sony did with PS+ is a long way from trying to upturn the economic model that Microsoft pursued with GamePass. Sony were a lot more cautious in terms of numbers of games, what content goes into which (if any) tier, and when.

This is why their offer for next month is incredibly good (with Horizon FW) as they (the accountants in charge) really need a win. But this will only delay the inevitable failure of the strategy.

I have never been convinced of the economics of a game subscription service, and at every step questioned how Microsoft intended to make it all work. When the subscriber base was smaller and GamePass was not impacting sales, Microsoft commented "Gamepass was not a big profit play" but now the subscriber base is larger it is impacting sales so what does that do to the numbers I wonder. The lack of any visibility of viable economic model continues to make be doubt this as being a viable business over the long term. People keep saying Netflix, yet most TV shows are produced in under a year and the potential audience is massive compared to videogames. It's not the same at all.
 
I did LoL at this. The world is occupied with costs of living crisis, war in Europe, balloons and other UFOs being shot down left, right and centre, earthquakes, and whatever is going on with all the hazardous spills in the US. Perhaps some perspective about what is important to people?

But on the reduction of subscribers, this is the risk with changing things. I bet there were people who have forgotten they even subscribed to PS+ but being reminded about it, resulted in a subscription cancellation. In general any change may result in people questioning the value of a service. I would comment that what Sony did with PS+ is a long way from trying to upturn the economic model that Microsoft pursued with GamePass. Sony were a lot more cautious in terms of numbers of games, what content goes into which (if any) tier, and when.



I have never been convinced of the economics of a game subscription service, and at every step questioned how Microsoft intended to make it all work. When the subscriber base was smaller and GamePass was not impacting sales, Microsoft commented "Gamepass was not a big profit play" but now the subscriber base is larger it is impacting sales so what does that do to the numbers I wonder. The lack of any visibility of viable economic model continues to make be doubt this as being a viable business over the long term. People keep saying Netflix, yet most TV shows are produced in under a year and the potential audience is massive compared to videogames. It's not the same at all.
I obviously meant news around the world in gaming news forums (we are in such a news thread after all). Costs of living, earthquakes and war casualities in all concerned countries (but not balloons shenanigans that is just theatre) are obviously much more important that all this.
 
But the CMA says that Nintendo is in their own market. How can the CMA then say Nintendo has 50-60% share? The CMA is obviously wrong.
 
But the CMA says that Nintendo is in their own market. How can the CMA then say Nintendo has 50-60% share? The CMA is obviously wrong.

They told too in the appendix they consider Nintendo as different part of the market than Sony and Microsoft.
 
Because MS doesn't give actual figures, we've no idea what their standing is. These charts suggest something from 1:4 XBS : PS5 sales - a highly skewed market - to a nicely balanced 2:3 (which is where VGChartz has it, incidentally).
 
Because MS doesn't give actual figures, we've no idea what their standing is. These charts suggest something from 1:4 XBS : PS5 sales - a highly skewed market - to a nicely balanced 2:3 (which is where VGChartz has it, incidentally).
VgChartz is not accurate. It is probably between the two.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top