PS3 games earn big bucks for EA

By Robert Purchese Published 30 July, 2008

Xbox 360 software not so popular.

Games for PlayStation 3 bring home the most money for EA, according to fresh financial papers released just last night.

EA software sales for the system between April and June increased 969 per cent over the same period last year. Sony's console has now been the major bread winner for EA since the start of 2008.

The PS3 made USD 139 million for the publisher during the quarter, followed by PC with USD 86 million and Xbox 360 with USD 81 million.

The PS2 was only marginally behind with USD 79 million, while Wii and PSP tied on USD 57 million.

Mobile games performed well to take USD 44 million, leaving DS in last position - for a change - with USD 21 million.

That means games for Sony systems combined to make a total of USD 275 million for EA during those three months.

Wii and DS development is one of the areas grey-maned EA boss John Riccitiello has already ear-marked for extra focus, revealing he has 40 games in the works for both platforms.

Riccitiello told us earlier this week that he made the "wrong call" by assuming PS3 and Xbox 360 would be the current generation leaders.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (156) Latest comment 4 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • SeesThroughAll #1 4 years ago

    Would be ironic if EA suddenly dropped support on both PS3 and 360...

  • Dizzy #2 4 years ago

    What did EA actually release during that period???

    UEFA EURO 2008 ? FIFA Street 3 ? I can't remember more.

    So the top 2 selling consoles DS and Wii make EA not a lot of money? Someone is going to get fired ;)
    Edited by 3 at 30/07/08 @ 12:19

  • Inquisitor #3 4 years ago

    I can't see how that makes any sense...

    EA do well in, I imagine, the UK and US specifically. Both regions where the 360 version of a multiplatform game will tend t outsell the PS3 version.

    How then did the PS3 make more money? No EA games in Japan so it has to be all down to mainland Europe?

  • miiiguel #4 4 years ago

    Can I say chav?

  • Prodigy_BE #5 4 years ago

    Did he notice that 3rd party software (also called thurd party sofware in most cases), doesn't sell very well on Wii?
    And oh boy, not good for MS, EA making more money on PS3. That will mean more PS3 dev, and porting to 360.

  • Eighthours #6 4 years ago

    I don't understand these figures, when every chart I've seen shows the 360 versions of EA games easily outselling the PS3 ones. Very strange.

  • miiiguel #7 4 years ago

    I mean no disrespect but my collegues from work, who really don't play much (it's more the style of, come to my place so I can show you my TV and Playstation) usually buy the footy game + NFS once a year, so it must be that demographics.~

    "And oh boy, not good for MS, EA making more money on PS3. That will mean more PS3 dev, and porting to 360. "
    by all means, be my guest...
    Edited by 2 at 30/07/08 @ 12:21

  • Darren #8 4 years ago

    This is funny... I'm sure it was this time last year when EA were saying they were disappointed with their PS3 game sales compared with Xbox 360 ones. How things have changed... LOL

    ... but, of course, this is good news in the long run for the PS3 as it means that EA will hopefully put as much effort in their PS3 games as their 360 ones, e.g. PS3 games won't run at half the framerate of the 360 versions like last year's Madden NFL 08.

  • bad09 #9 4 years ago

    Well lots of people got PS1 and 2 for FIFA etc. So I guess it's a natural progression they upgrade to PS3 as that's what they know. I know a few people like that TBH.

    Or maybe it's that 360 owners don't buy EA games.

    Oh and Riccitiello, 360/PS3 are the current generation leaders...for gamers

    / runs

  • Greychapter #10 4 years ago

    Its also possible that some of EA's titles which didn't set the 360 ablaze did better on PS3 due to less competition. Army of Two springs to mind as one possible case for this. Might also be worth considering the slightly higher PS3 games price tag as well as I am sure some of this additional money would filter in to the revenues.

  • SeesThroughAll #11 4 years ago

    miiiiiguel, you know what? I'm going to buy a 360. I want to be cool, just like you!

  • APHIZM #12 4 years ago

    "I don't understand these figures, when every chart I've seen shows the 360 versions of EA games easily outselling the PS3 ones. Very strange."

    What should you believe: internet charts that are never the same or financial reports from the publishers?

    Anyway, maybe EA can put some bloody effort into PS3 ports now...

  • miiiguel #13 4 years ago

    Send me a FR, we'll have a blast.

    Anyway, I said I meant no disrespect, I love my work collegues, they do their thing and they're happy with it, so who am I to judge ?

  • Wash #14 4 years ago

    Bit of a turn around from last sept when 360 was 50% of ea's games sales (according to one website i guess).

    Probably due to the fact army of 2, bad company werent blockbuster successes on the 360.
    Edited by 1 at 30/07/08 @ 12:34

  • miiiguel #15 4 years ago

    I guess not... PS3 last quarter was already PS3 land. Not so much, but already.

  • Inquisitor #16 4 years ago

    Perhaps it's EA games selling consistetnly well on the PS3. We all know that at release, the 360 game easily outsells the PS3, but perhaps as sales of the PS3 grow you're seeing games bought at a far steadier rate than 360 owners, who seem to buy then forget.

  • Rash' #17 4 years ago

    I expect this trend to continue... at least with PS3 and 360. Wii currently is in a race of it own.

  • miiiguel #18 4 years ago

    "but perhaps as sales of the PS3 grow you're seeing games bought at a far steadier rate than 360 owners, who seem to buy then forget."
    er... kinda weird theory. I mean, it'd be crazy to be, perhaps, due to the fact that 360 has almost 1000 titles to chose from where PS3 has mainly mainstream ones ? no... that's crazy!

    "Wii currently is in a race of it own. "
    Where's the Wii sales? I mean trying to tie EA sales numbers to consoles sucess is... fine.
    Edited by 2 at 30/07/08 @ 12:41

  • zuljin #19 4 years ago

    @Greychapter
    "Might also be worth considering the slightly higher PS3 games price tag as well as I am sure some of this additional money would filter in to the revenues."

    I don't buy 360 games or PS3 games over £40. If a game is over fourty I just have a look in Dixons or Tesco, or if I can wait a few days, online.

  • Rash' #20 4 years ago

    miiiguel, As opposed to 1000 hardcore games geared to prepubescent teens. Generalised, sweeping statements FTW!
    Edited by 2 at 30/07/08 @ 13:42

  • miiiguel #21 4 years ago

    Wii is doomed!

    Rash', you bet! 30's are the new 20's! Let's shoot some guns, l33t, lolz, and stuff! oh, and powa of da c3ll! ;)
    Edited by 1 at 30/07/08 @ 12:44

  • Nocturne #22 4 years ago

    There is not one EA developed game in my Xbox 360 collection; primarily because their products rarely exceed mediocrity and are marketed to casual gamers and chavs. The Fifa and Need For Speed franchises exemplify this strategy. It is my experience that the average Playstation 3 owner is significantly less interested in gaming than the average Xbox 360 owner, as much invested in a status symbol as they are in a piece of gaming hardware. They are the kind of people who are never searching for any deep, engaging and thoughtful experience from anything in their lives, nevermind a videogame. In fact, the only reason they purchased a Playstation 3 seems to be that they owned a Playstation 2 and a Playstation, and that 'Xbox' is a geeky name. If it is true that EA developed games on the Playstation 3 are outselling their counterparts on the Xbox 360 then I would not be surprised, since in my exprience EA develops games which would uniquely satisfy the Playstation 3 owning demographic. That said, my experience is solely in a small corner of the UK, perhaps things are different elsehwere.
    Edited by 1 at 30/07/08 @ 13:11

  • penhalion #23 4 years ago

    Wierdly enough this is actually good news for 360 owners. I said a while back that the 360 crowd was wising up to EA putting out constant updates of sports titles and simply not buying them. What this means is that PS3 will most likely get the Maddens and tiger woods before the 360. Original titles like Dead Space will then most likely sell better on 360 than PS3.

    Not sure why they suddenly want to flood the Wii with their games though, as clearly the Wii crowd are so not interested in the Madden and realistic Golf etc. etc.

  • Rash' #24 4 years ago

    miiiguel, Power of intented grammatical and spelling errors!!! ;o)

  • zuljin #25 4 years ago

    @Nocturne
    "There is not one EA developed game in my Xbox 360 collection; primarily because their products rarely exceed mediocrity..."

    If you were anywhere near me I'd smack you over the head with my copy of Battlefield.

    *shakes fist*

  • miiiguel #26 4 years ago

    what I find it funny is why the problem to admit what Nocturne and I said is true? I mean, it's not like we're saying EG's demographic is like that, but generally PS buyers do it for some kinda of status or "oh it's kinda stylish in my living room" + NFS.

    on gramatical and spelling errors: I do my best in english (which I know, sometimes is not enough), I'm not from the island, and I prefer it here than EG.pt (for now).
    Edited by 3 at 30/07/08 @ 12:51

  • Rash' #27 4 years ago

    miiiguel, Oh, absolulely, I agree. The PS brand is a more stylish commodity than Xbox. It's one of the reasons MS will regret their bullish E3 sales prediction.

    I was joking about the spelling thing as I suspect you were with the C3ll. If you weren't, I'd be seriously worried!
    Edited by 1 at 30/07/08 @ 12:52

  • GamerG #28 4 years ago

    These figures are wrong, read the financials. PS3 did $68m not $139m.

    Bizzarely EA have decided because they don't know enough about PS3 DLC royalties they have decided to estimate what to expect and have taken all expected ESTIMATED royalties for games released in the past and in the present quarter in one hit now! (so the bulk is probably Rockband)

    Its a huge fudge to make their loss for the quarter not look so bad, they did not do this for 360 as MS can give them reliable data so the revenue for DLC for MS comes in as when it is paid by gamers.

    At the bottom of the quarters accounts it shows the 360 on $81m and the PS3 on $68m so they basically improved their figures by $61m by taking future revenue and only on PS3!!

    http://in vestor.ea.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=8...
    Edited by 1 at 30/07/08 @ 12:54

  • SeesThroughAll #29 4 years ago

    So... can we say chav now?


    Just joking, btw.

  • mcbi4kh2 #30 4 years ago

    @miiiguel
    England isn't an island.

    I hope EA start to develop lead on PS3 now, no more crappy ports ftw!

  • Rash' #31 4 years ago

    GamerG, I wouldn't be surprised if you're right. Neither MCV or Edge online have posted this "news".

  • bad09 #32 4 years ago

    While I'm unsure about Nocturne's whole take on things there is no question on two things.

    1. True there are people (according to many game store workers who I've seen post over the net) of a certain demographic who enjoy a lot of EA games like NFS and FIFA street etc, but I'm sure that is not the only demographic for EA games or indeed PS3, 360 has it's angry little chavs to you know.

    2. There are people (again not ALL) out there who do buy Playstation purely because it is Playstation and that's all they've ever owned no other reason. I always find that bizarre but horses for course I suppose.......

  • urban #33 4 years ago

    so stop fucking delaying the ps3 titles ya dicks

  • Ryze #34 4 years ago

    @mcbi4kh2

    Have I missed something about England?? WoooHoooo!!! Who fancies a roadtrip to Amsterdam this weekend!?!?!? I'm not driving back!

    /Facebooks...

    edit: OK then, mainland Britain
    Edited by 1 at 30/07/08 @ 13:10

  • Slikz #35 4 years ago

    imo, game standards are higher on the 360, i didn't rush out to buy Army of Two or Bad Company. If EA want to sell big on the 360, Dead Space must >>>>>>>>>

  • Nocturne #36 4 years ago

    Zuljin,

    Both Battlefield 2: Modern Combat and Battlefield: Bad Company were published by EA, not developed by EA in-house. I myself own one EA published game, a very good game called The Orange Box, but EA had nothing to do with its development so far as I know (except for the shoddy Playstation 3 port). Besides, I was careful to say that EA developed games 'rarely exceed mediocrity', because even EA can make a good game. I did not intend to suggest that EA have never or will never develop a game which 'exceeds mediocrity'.

  • Beek4257 #37 4 years ago

    Maybe I'm being overly cinical, but why would EA make PS3 the lead platform?
    Their - sometimes - crappy 360 ports seem to sell just fine on PS3. It IS still EA, after all.

  • Moonprince #38 4 years ago

    Original titles like Dead Space will then most likely sell better on 360 than PS3.

    Having seen it throughout dev I can assure you that's not the case ;)

  • Nocturne #39 4 years ago

    bad09,

    I am as unsure as you, and make it a policy to be unsure about these things. And, of course, I agree that no console or publisher has a monopoly on 'angry little chavs', and never meant to imply as such.

  • Luvbeers #40 4 years ago

    The only EA game I have ever bought was FN3 and that was bargain bin. I would agree with some of the others that Playstation has a bigger chav market share hence the better sales or maybe that extra 5 quid per game on the PS3 adds up!

  • SpaceMidget75 Verified Senior Software Developer, Minerva Computer Services #41 4 years ago

    My experience in the UK has been exactly like Nocturne's.

    I only own 1 EA game which is Burnout Paradise. (Bought for my son. Although I think it's great so far.)

    It appears that GamerG has given us the real info (thanks!) unless someone can discredit it.

  • Shabtai #42 4 years ago

    Hmm, if GamerG is correct with what he said, that makes the PC the most profitable platform in the last quarter for EA.

    Ironic, isnt it?

  • ps3owner #43 4 years ago

    Resistance is futile! You will all be assimilated ... ;P

  • chrisjm #44 4 years ago

    ps3 owners in buying more rubbish non shocker.

  • mcbi4kh2 #45 4 years ago

    @Nocturn

    It is my experience that the average Playstation 3 owner is significantly less interested in gaming than the average Xbox 360 owner, as much invested in a status symbol as they are in a piece of gaming hardware. They are the kind of people who are never searching for any deep, engaging and thoughtful experience from anything in their lives, nevermind a videogame. In fact, the only reason they purchased a Playstation 3 seems to be that they owned a Playstation 2 and a Playstation, and that 'Xbox' is a geeky name.

    Read that back to yourself.

    Are you saying that becasue I bought a PS3 I am not "searching for any deep, engaging and thoughtful experience from anything in (my life)"!?!?

    A very sweeping statement about 15 million people.

    edit: and im not surprised spacemidget65 agrees :)
    Edited by 1 at 30/07/08 @ 13:38

  • LunatikCajun #46 4 years ago

    Does this financial information relate to EA developed games solely? Or does it include games that they have published too?

  • oreillymj #47 4 years ago

    I was quite surprised at the number of EA games I actually had, even though I usually steer clear of them.

    Burnout
    Orange Box
    MOH Airborne
    Fight Night 3
    Tiger Woods 07
    I got rid of NFS Carbon as it's complete tripe, but it will probably get a sales boost now that it's available on Platinum.

  • oreillymj #48 4 years ago

    @mcbi4kh2 England not a island? What do you call a land mass surrounded by water?

    Or better still, how do you keep an idiot in suspense?

  • Razz #49 4 years ago

    Makes sense with all the sports franchises they have.

  • mcbi4kh2 #50 4 years ago

    @oreillymj

    wow. Just wow.

    def. island
    is any piece of land that is completely surrounded by water

    Ever heard of Scotland or Wales?

  • LunatikCajun #51 4 years ago

    @ oreillymj

    "What do you call a land mass surrounded by water?" -

    An Island

    What do you call England? - A Country attached to 2 other countries.

    EDIT: Damn, too Slow
    Edited by 1 at 30/07/08 @ 13:47

  • Gnort #52 4 years ago

    @Shabtai
    I don't think it's ironic that the PC would be EA's biggest earner, considering the sixteen billion expansions for the Sims they have released. As everyone has already pointed out, the "hardcore gamer" that tends to frequent gaming sites like EG and EA's typical customers are probably two groups without a great deal of overlap.

  • SpaceMidget75 Verified Senior Software Developer, Minerva Computer Services #53 4 years ago

    @mcbi4kh2

    Would you prefer it if I lied?

  • seasidebaz #54 4 years ago

    What do you call England? - A Country attached to 2 other countries.

    But England still has water on 3 sides... Does that make it a peninsula?



    Back on topic, and to do with chavs... The 360 is about £150 cheaper than the PS3. So the chavs have moved from Playstation to Xbox360. Plus you can get 4 games on the 360 with your dole money, as opposed to 2 on the PS3. It's a similar phenomenon to the chavs / nobheads moving from BMW M3's to Audi...

  • mcbi4kh2 #55 4 years ago

    @spacemidget55

    Would you prefer it if I lied?

    We haven't got on with a lot of issues, but I almost respected you ;) as you seem to know a lot about technical issues.

    But if you agree with this:

    They are the kind of people who are never searching for any deep, engaging and thoughtful
    experience from anything in their lives, nevermind a videogame

    Then, to use your own language, you are a twat.

    @seasideBaz

    I dont care what it makes it, certainly not an island though!
    Edited by 1 at 30/07/08 @ 13:56

  • andywilkie35 #56 4 years ago

    i own both consoles so i'm not biased

    but surely the reason why EA games sell better on PS3 than xbox is because....well there are basically fuck all games out on PS3? because all EA games are cross platform that means that they're essentially the only thing PS3 owners can buy? I know thats a bit extreme but I look at my ps3 game collection and MGS4 and Ratchet aside, they're all EA games because there is nothing else to buy. Meanwhile xbox owners will buy less EA games because there are much better alternatives to their annual updates out there

    faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaact.

  • Nocturne #57 4 years ago

    mcbi4kh2,

    I have read that back to myself and cannot see the part where I said anything about you.

  • mcbi4kh2 #58 4 years ago

    @Nocturn

    You said PS3 owner

  • Widge #59 4 years ago

    fuck all games? is that one still going around?

  • spammage #60 4 years ago

    I see the same old points again. All PS3 owners are chavs. All 360 owners are hardcore.

    The term "hardcore" is used an awful lot to assume some kind of cool image or superiority, at points of my life I have considered myself a hardcore gamer but the terminology has become passe, like calling someone "n00b" or "l33t". You soon realise when / if you grow up you have more responsibility and less free time to play videogames. People have different gaming habits nowadays, sometimes i might want to dip into a game for 30 minutes, another day perhaps 8 hours+. EA have some "lifestyle" titles that allow the freetime constrained to play, quick games of Fifa, few races on Burnout, they know their demographics, even if their QA is sometimes lacking. The Wii tapped into the casual nature of gamers who have lapsed into kids / jobs that used to play, just like EA aim to.

    Playing games is a pass time, NOT a way of life, much like watching movies or spending time down the pub with your friends.

    "They are the kind of people who are never searching for any deep, engaging and thoughtful experience from anything in their lives, nevermind a videogame."

    Astonishing, honestly. I'd love to know what it is that makes you so insightful, is it your XBOX? I very much doubt it is the books you have read.

  • Steroyd #61 4 years ago

    Wha!?

  • Nocturne #62 4 years ago

    mcbi4kh2,

    Perhaps you should read what I wrote once more. First, I clearly stated 'the average Playstation 3 owner', not every Playstation 3 owner. Second, I am referring to those who I have had experience with, which oddly enough is why I began that sentence with the words 'it is my experience'. It has only been within the last 10 minutes that I have had any experience of you, mercifully. For the record, I would like to own a Playstation 3 myself when either the price decreases or my earnings increase, because there are good games to be found and played on the console, a view which does not contradict a more discerning read of my previous comments.

  • SpaceMidget75 Verified Senior Software Developer, Minerva Computer Services #63 4 years ago

    @mcbollocks2k8

    Almost respect is better than no respect at all I suppose.

    Can I just paste what Nocturne just said to you as it's what I meant too:

    Perhaps you should read what I wrote once more. First, I clearly stated 'the average Playstation 3 owner', not every Playstation 3 owner. Second, I am referring to those who I have had experience with, which oddly enough is why I began that sentence with the words 'it is my experience'. It has only been within the last 10 minutes that I have had any experience of you, mercifully. For the record, I would like to own a Playstation 3 myself when either the price decreases or my earnings increase, because there are good games to be found and played on the console, a view which does not contradict a more discerning read of my previous comments.

    Just add a cockney accent and it's me saying it!!

    I can't help it if all the PS3 owners I know hardly own any games and when they do it's usually fucking Fifa. I can pretend that's not the case just for you next time.

  • mcbi4kh2 #64 4 years ago

    @Nocturn and SpaceMidget45

    Unfortunately, I could not disagree with either of your sheltered experiences any more.

    SpaceMidget considering you work in the games industry I thought you would have known a hell of a lot of gamers.

    You both know what I think of people who agree with that post so sadly the time has come for me to ignore you both. Cheers for some good 'debate' though.

  • Nocturne #65 4 years ago

    spammage,

    Nothing depends on terminology. If you do not like the word 'hardcore' then do not use it, or be careful to define what you intend to mean by the term to avoid unwanted connotations. Like you I prefer to avoid the term, but when used I usually mean to refer to a person who enjoys videogames in the way that a movie buff enjoys cinema, as more than a mere time-killer or light entertainment, but for the art and escapism. The number of hours a week spent playing videogames is more a function of spare time and boredom, and would not determine whether someone is a 'hardcore' gamer.

    In regard to your other comment. I am referring to the people who I know from experience and feel quite comfortable stating that they are not looking for any deep, engaging or thoughtful experience, because everything they say and do betrays it.

  • Shabtai #66 4 years ago

    Gnort, you are right and i agree with you that the fact PC is generating alot of money for EA shouldn't comes as a surprise, but it is quite ironic seeing as alot of publishers are bent to paint the platfrom as not worth the effort. EA representives were pretty vocal about that (Moore) but the numbers speak for themselves. Having a wide casual offering like The Sims shouldn't deminish the fact that the platform is doing just fine. I'm sure Mass Effect for pc helped too. Anyhow, outdoing the 360 and possibly the ps3 is a healthy indication anyway you look at it.

    I'm not even mentioning the Wii, which seems to be underperforming but somewhat EA are happy with the ~half million copies sold of Bloom Blox- a well recieved,casual,with-Speilberg's-name-on-the-box game.

    It would be interesting to compare the list of games released to each platform in that time-frame.

  • spammage #67 4 years ago

    More to the point, who cares?

    I used to spend thousands on account that PC gaming was the "hardcore" platform, I honestly just laugh at the masses now proclaiming their hardcore status with a white box which has cost roughly 50% of most of the GFX cards i have bought over the years? Is it status or is it having a sad outlook. You decide.

  • slave23d #68 4 years ago

    its because the same droves that bought a PS3 are the same droves that buy any EA game. That and theres more choice (and competition) on 360 from the EA stuff.

  • SpaceMidget75 Verified Senior Software Developer, Minerva Computer Services #69 4 years ago

    YAY!!! I've been ignored. =]

    Christ, it comes to something when you're completely honest about your personal experiences of something and all of a sudden you either must be lying or live a sheltered life.

    I other News - almost every Wii owner I know in my sheltered life hardly plays it any more!

    /runs.

  • Nocturne #70 4 years ago

    mcbi4kh2,

    I think what you mean to say is that your experience has not been similar to either that of mine or SpaceMidget45, not that you disagree with our experience. The latter would at best imply that we are mistaken about our own experience, and at worst suggest that we are both lying. In any case, the experience I am referring to is that with people who I know personally and my time working at GAME, where I watched many Playstation 3's, Xbox 360's and Wii's being purchased. In regard to those who agree with my post. If they had misread it as you seem to have and yet agreed, then my feelings toward them are probably little different from your own.

  • spammage #71 4 years ago

    The term "movie buff" infers some kind of superiority in opinion, which is exactly the same as "hardcore" in gaming circles. Just because one is not a "movie buff" does not mean they're value on entertainment allows them to enjoy only blockbusters or shallow films. To EA a gamer is someone who downloads a mobile game to their phone as much as someone who sits in front of COD4 for 8 hours straight every night, or revenue for short.

    I'm not going to split semantics or definition on this, its just that in my experience 360 owners are all spotty 14 year old gimps, who cant afford a high spec PC to play their FPS on, most of them only bought Gears of War and Halo 3 to play on it. :D

    (irony before flames people)

  • spammage #72 4 years ago

    "I (sic) other News - almost every Wii owner I know in my sheltered life hardly plays it any more!"

    I have a Wii upstairs, not plugged in since i moved 4 months ago and a box fresh copies of Mario Kart and SSBB. Tbf i don't even consider myself a Wii owner, it was bought after a drunken night of 4 player tennis at a friends once. Oh yeah and because i'm casual too.

  • Vice.Destroyer #73 4 years ago

    its just that in my experience 360 owners are all spotty 14 year old gimps, who cant afford a high spec PC to play their FPS on, most of them only bought Gears of War and Halo 3 to play on it. :D

    If it wasn't embarrassing to argue with a complete stranger about how blinkered their world view was, I might take offence at that. :)

  • Nocturne #74 4 years ago

    spammage,

    If you choose to define 'hardcore' in such a way that it becomes a function of how much money someone spends on their gaming hobby then I suggest that you make that clear in the future, because I suspect that it diverges from how most people define a 'hardcore gamer'. For example, I have rarely considered my habit of buying games second hand to make a me a less 'hardcore' gamer, but simply a way to enjoy my hobby whilst having more money to spend on other things. Perhaps not so for you. In any case, I am surprised to learn that being 'hardcore' is a way to increase social status, because it has never been that way in any of the circles I have mixed in.

  • Nocturne #75 4 years ago

    spammage,

    I think that some people may infer some kind of supriority of opinion from the terms 'movie buff' or 'hardcore' gamer. However, I would never assume such a superiority of opinion, and I guess that neither would you. That said, I do think that 'hardcore' gamers typically enjoy videogames in a more complex and refined fashion, but this should not be taken to mean that their opinion is superior, since if that is not the experience which a 'casual' gamer is looking for then there is nothing superior about the 'hardcore' gamer's preferences, except for himself and other like him. Moreover, that I tend to want more from my gaming than time-killing and light entertainment does not mean that I do not enjoy those things on occasion, only that my priorities lay elsewhere. All this is not too difficult to understand and I have been very careful with my words throughout, so there should be no argument here.

  • SpaceMidget75 Verified Senior Software Developer, Minerva Computer Services #76 4 years ago

    I love it when a discussion descends to what the definition of what a hardcore gamer is. I wouldn't rise to the bait nocturne as I suspect most people know full fucking well the difference between a gamer who's gaming is their hobby/passion and a casual gamer who plays the odd sports game when their mates come around. They're just stirring it up.

    It could be almost any number of the following:

    Knowing a lot about games.
    Spending a fair amount of their free time playing games.
    Buy games mags or visiting this fucking place!
    Just generally enthusing about gaming.

    Casual gamers are NOT the above to any great extent.

    Edited by 1 at 30/07/08 @ 15:05

  • mischief #77 4 years ago

    I thought "hardcore" was where you actually get to see stiff willies and penetration. I dunno what you lot are warbling on about.

  • spammage #78 4 years ago

    I merely used the vehicle of expensive PC's to illustrate that people's perceptions of quotationmarks-hardcore-quotationmarks is simililarly a shallow persuit. Nothing is so engulfed by status as the high-end PC crowd, OC'ers etc. I'm fairly platform agnostic, but hate the will waving and people using opinion as fact.

    Alas these forums are an extension of my love of gaming, in whatever form it takes.

  • mcbi4kh2 #79 4 years ago

    @mischief

    lol +1

  • GamerG #80 4 years ago

    ELECTRONIC ARTS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Unaudited Supplemental Non-GAAP Financial Information and Non-GAAP
    Business Metrics
    (in millions)

    Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 YOY %
    FY08 FY08 FY08 FY08 FY09 Change
    -------- ------- ------- -------- -------- -------

    PLATFORM NON-GAAP
    NET REVENUE MIX

    Non-GAAP Net
    Revenue

    Xbox 360 47 218 196 128 81 72%
    PLAYSTATION 3 20 98 196 138 68 240%
    PlayStation 2 69 204 324 52 40 (42%)
    Wii 29 83 156 61 39 34%
    Xbox 3 12 3 1 - (100%)
    Nintendo GameCube 1 3 1 - - (100%)
    -------- ------- ------- -------- --------
    Total Consoles 169 618 876 380 228 35%

    PC 96 116 153 92 70 (27%)

    Wireless 34 37 39 42 43 26%
    PSP 30 43 111 47 26 (13%)
    Nintendo DS 25 47 122 36 21 (16%)
    Game Boy Advance 2 4 2 - - (100%)
    -------- ------- ------- -------- --------
    Total Mobility 91 131 274 125 90 (1%)


    If you look the PS3 is now on $68m below the 360 on $81m this is because in this table..

    "The Company's non-GAAP net revenue excludes the impact of the change in deferred
    net revenue (packaged goods and digital content). The Company's non-
    GAAP gross profit excludes the impact of the change in deferred net
    revenue (packaged goods and digital content), COGS amortization of
    intangibles, and stock-based compensation."
    Edited by 1 at 30/07/08 @ 15:14

  • Nocturne #81 4 years ago

    SpaceMidget75,

    It has not been my intent to argue about the correct definition of the term 'hardcore' as it is applied to gamers. The term 'hardcore' is just an assortment of pixels on a screen and has no inherent definition to argue about, and so such an argument will tread a path with no end. However, there is some utility to specifying what different people in a discussion mean by the word 'hardcore', since without a common understanding of terms confusion, argument and misunderstanding will reign where there need be none. That said, some definitions are certainly more useful than others so long as everyone understands what is meant, and that can be sensibly discussed by interested parties.

  • SpaceMidget75 Verified Senior Software Developer, Minerva Computer Services #82 4 years ago

    Yeah, I wasn't knocking you nocturne. The complete opposite in fact.

    You should be able to use the term hardcore gamer in a discussion without people claiming it to be many things to many people. I completely agree with your term for a proper gamer and I suspect that everyone else here does too. It's properties I listed in my earlier post.

    They just won't admit it when it comes to discussions about Wii, EA, Chavs and Fifa etc.

    That's my point really. You shouldn't HAVE to explain what you define it as, as I think we all know what a proper gamer is and some people will just question you on the definition to prove a point or be pedantic.

    Forgive me I've I gotten the wrong end of the stick here as I'm trying to work at the same time!
    Edited by 1 at 30/07/08 @ 15:27

  • Nocturne #83 4 years ago

    spammage,

    Thankfully, I have little or no contact with the high-end PC crowd which you are referring to. The only thing that fuels my platform preference is a combination of quality and price that best satsifies my desires. Brand loyalty is for chumps and inevitably rewards bad performance. Why make quality products at competitive prices when the suckers will buy your output out of brand loyalty? The strategy which has long been used for movie tie-ins. I think that Sony are benefitting from something similar now, though I hope in time they can get their act together. In regard to opinions and facts. I presented my comments as opinions which I hope correspond to the facts, and I invite criticism from anyone who disagrees.
    Edited by 2 at 30/07/08 @ 15:37

  • HolyJebus #84 4 years ago

    Nocturne and SpaceMidget

    Can I join ye on your boat, pretty much everyone else scares me.

  • spammage #85 4 years ago

    Holyjebus

    Three is a crowd :D

  • Daymare #86 4 years ago

    "I think that some people may infer some kind of supriority of opinion from the terms 'movie buff' or 'hardcore' gamer. However, I would never assume such a superiority of opinion..."

    As a movie buff I, of course, kindly disagree:) As would probably everyone who's passionate about any subject. Trying to equal informed opinions of someone who's passionate about something with someone's, who only has a passing interest, is down right blasphemous - and it doesn't matter what subject we're talking about: games, movies, music, whatever. Of course the *only* opinions that matters to people, no matter how uninformed and hastily made, are their own but that doesn't make them equally knowledgeable and truthful. Relativists will of course disagree but that's okay:)

  • thebuzzard #87 4 years ago

    EA clearly make a Train/Horse/Tentacle simulator for school girls in Japan that sells buy the bucket load for PS3 but is not allowed to be spoken of in the west.

  • SpaceMidget75 Verified Senior Software Developer, Minerva Computer Services #88 4 years ago

    @Daymere
    + 1
    Edited by 1 at 30/07/08 @ 15:44

  • HolyJebus #89 4 years ago

    Ok Daymare, you can join us in our boat. But that's it, no more.

  • miiiguel #90 4 years ago

    er... I wasn't talking about England, I was talking about UK, since the whole UK speaks english. UK is an island, innit? By any definition.

  • SpaceMidget75 Verified Senior Software Developer, Minerva Computer Services #91 4 years ago

    Lol...I think I see a problem with time difference too miiguel. ;)

  • HolyJebus #92 4 years ago

    "er... I wasn't talking about England, I was talking about UK, since the whole UK speaks english. UK is an island, innit? By any definition."

    Try remember ALL the countries in the UK
    Edited by 1 at 30/07/08 @ 15:55

  • Daymare #93 4 years ago

    @HolyJebus

    Yay! \0/
    Where're we goin'?:/

    Oh and, GamerG; good journalism, there:)

  • miiiguel #94 4 years ago

    oh... I think I got it now (I'm kinda slow), you think I said "island" in a prejorative way ? lol! Not at all. I love London. Been there thrice. Expensive but awesome.
    Edited by 1 at 30/07/08 @ 15:58

  • mcbi4kh2 #95 4 years ago

    @miiguel

    You are wrong.

    Firstly, UK is NOT an island.
    UK = England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireleand.

    the whole UK speaks english.
    Again wrong, some people in Wales only speak welsh. Not many but some.
    Edited by 1 at 30/07/08 @ 16:02

  • SpaceMidget75 Verified Senior Software Developer, Minerva Computer Services #96 4 years ago

    "Where're we goin'?"

    We're all going to see miiiguel. Then we're gonna track down blig_merk and give him a damn good thrashing.

  • miiiguel #97 4 years ago

    ^ ok, you're right, and I'm wrong. You clearly know a whole lot more of Geography than I do, and I apreciate you taught me something. You could've been more polite, but that's ok.

    UK is not an island, I got it. It's something else. Still like London a lot, water or no water.

    Had no freakin clue that there were a "welsh" language...
    Edited by 1 at 30/07/08 @ 16:06

  • IronCladChicken #98 4 years ago

    "The PS3 made USD 139 million for the publisher during the quarter, followed by PC with USD 86 million and Xbox 360 with USD 81 million."

    So, PC games sales were higher than XBox360 games sales?
    If PC gaming is dead - XBox360 gaming must be buried and rotting by now?
    Edited by 1 at 30/07/08 @ 16:08

  • mcbi4kh2 #99 4 years ago

    You could've been more polite

    How was I rude? Sorry if I was. Could come up in a pub quiz one day :)
    Either way your english is better than my (insert your language here).

  • SpaceMidget75 Verified Senior Software Developer, Minerva Computer Services #100 4 years ago

    So what the fuck is the floating rock surrounded by water actually called then? The British Isles? That covers all of them. What about just the bit with England, Scotland and Wales in it? Britain? As opposed to Great Britain which covers Northern Island too.

    The bit with England, Scotland and Wales in is definitely an Island.

  • HolyJebus #101 4 years ago

    "Where're we goin'?"

    We are all off to a magical land where people who all really enjoy games come together to discuss their favourite games in a sensible, mature manner without resorting to name calling and console bashing. Who knows we may even make friends with similar minded people and enjoy some online gaming together. Imagine that. Lalalalalalalalalala

  • Nocturne #102 4 years ago

    Daymare,

    I am passionate about many subjects and yet am not inclined to disagree with myself just yet. First, whether someone has an informed or merely passing interest in a subject does not dictate the truth or falsity of their opinions. There would be nothing equal, according to the standard of truthseeking, between a true and a false opinion, and so no informed false opinion will be superior to an uninformed true opinion. I have no desire to equate the opinions of the informed and uninformed, one or the other may be superior--informed opinions have no monopoly on the truth.

    Second, whether or not a particular game is better or worse can only be evaluated according to some standard, and nothing can be evaluated in a vacuum. It may be true that some particular game is superior according to the standards of some hardcore gamer. However, the superiority is not intrinic or transcendent but relative to the standards by which it is judged and standards which not everyone is obliged to share. The hardcore gamer, like a movie buff, evaluates experiences by their own desires, preferences and standards, and while it may be true for everyone that, according to those standards, a particular game is superior, it is not true that everyone must share those standards.
    Edited by 2 at 30/07/08 @ 16:33

  • amcd28 #103 4 years ago

    Hang on.

    So, everything they told me in my Geography lessons at school and my Geology labs at University was wrong and we in fact don't live on an island?

    I know the UK is England, Scotland, Wales and NI, but they're all islands so technically that's correct. They're also the British Isles except NI which is of course Ireland as it's rather inconveniently joined to the Republic of Ireland.

    Dagnabbit and buggery all round.

    Website definition - Island - (a land mass (smaller than a continent) that is surrounded by water).

  • HolyJebus #104 4 years ago

    Nocturne, be careful or I might have to push you out of the boat for using too many big words ;)

  • Nocturne #105 4 years ago

    simakperrce,

    The companies who make videogames have to answer to their owners and shareholders. Their job is to make money. Brand loyalty creates incentives which breed laziness, since less work is needed to make money when people continue to buy your products at the same rate even when you let quality slip. The smart consumer is one who is ever critical and unforgiving, ever threatening to jump ship to a competitor, and so creates incentives for better service, quality and innovation. If you want value for money, then make sure that companies like Sony and Microsoft needs to work hard to get it, or else they will treat you like a chump for the benefit of their shareholders and to the detrement of the videogame industry. In regards to your other question: I am not at all 'bitter' and do not know where you got that idea from.
    Edited by 1 at 30/07/08 @ 16:27

  • mcbi4kh2 #106 4 years ago

    @amcd28

    Great Britain = Scotland, England and Wales. (= island)
    UK = England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (!= island)

    I know the UK is England, Scotland, Wales and NI, but they're all islands so technically that's correct.
    Technically that is not correct as Northern Ireland is NOT an island.

  • spammage #107 4 years ago

    I'd love to stoke the island debate further by throwing the Channel Tunnel into the mix, doesn't that make us an extension of France? (god forbid)

  • HolyJebus #108 4 years ago

    Nocturne +1

    That's why I'm hoping, as a 360 owner, that Microsoft don't end up being no1, if so they'll stop spending all the millions they currently do to try and bring the best games to their console. They'll get lazy.

  • HolyJebus #109 4 years ago

    "I'd love to stoke the island debate further by throwing the Channel Tunnel into the mix, doesn't that make us an extension of France? (god forbid)"

    Well the channel tunnel is under water so makes no difference.

  • amcd28 #110 4 years ago

    You're right....

    my definition = fail

    My wife would have a field day with me on that.

    But; they are a wee island of religious nuttery on the mainland of Ireland :¬)

  • spammage #111 4 years ago

    "Well the channel tunnel is under water so makes no difference. "

    You win! But your little 3 man boat wouldnt work so well in there would it? :D

  • HolyJebus #112 4 years ago

    Look if ye just give back Northern Ireland ye thieving bastards all of this will be solved. Well, not EA's dilemma but who really cares about that anyway.

  • Bumhug360 #113 4 years ago

    ""The PS3 made USD 139 million for the publisher during the quarter, followed by PC with USD 86 million and Xbox 360 with USD 81 million."

    So, PC games sales were higher than XBox360 games sales?
    If PC gaming is dead - XBox360 gaming must be buried and rotting by now? "

    Well $85 million of the PC figure was just for Sims 2 and its hundreds of expansions

  • Salvia #114 4 years ago

    Sheesh here we go; "360 owners are cleverer and more discerning than PS3 owners".

  • Daymare #115 4 years ago

    @Nocturne

    You're taking a relativist's route, as I have predicted, which is nigh impossible to argue as it always boils down to "yeah, well, that's your opinion and this is mine and you can't prove which is closer to the truth":) Which is why art, compared to science for instance, is so liable to all kinds of opinions.

    I gather from your post that you agree that an opinion can be right or wrong and superior/inferior ("First, whether someone has an informed or merely passing interest in a subject does not dictate the truth or falsity of their opinions. There would be nothing equal, according to the standard of truthseeking, between a true and a false opinion, and so no informed false opinion will be superior to an uninformed true opinion.";) but you don't agree we can decide which is which based just on somebody's love and passion for the subject at hand. Of course we can't (they're "mere" opinions, right?;) but I believe that someone who loves something has a much better disposition to get to the truth of the matter (or closer to the truth) then the one who doesn't care for something, "glances" at it, judges it against few information it has about the subject and declares his opinion about it.

    "Informed opinions have no monopoly on the truth."

    Yes, of course; in fact, *no* opinion, period, has monopoly on the truth. But my opinion is (hehe) that informed opinion is closer to the truth then uninformed. It doesn't matter if it's applicable to the people that have less interest in something or not (they'll judge everything by their standards anyway) but that doesn't mean we should value every John Doe's opinion about, let say music, equally or even over a music teacher's or a composer's. Just because art is very subjective, doesn't mean there's no knowledge involved.

    So, in short: IMO, opinions are equal in their limited applicability to other people (read: nobody *really* cares about others' opinions unless they affect us directly) but the basis on which they are formed are anything but equal. Someone who loves something, reads about it, spends a lot of time on/with it, is usualy the one who knows more about the subject at hand then the one who doesn't. It doesn't matter if that passionate and knowledgeable person's opinion on a subject we don't particulary care about is useless to us or if we don't agree.

    Edited by 1 at 30/07/08 @ 17:20

  • seasidebaz #116 4 years ago

    @Nocturne:

    Why make quality products at competitive prices when the suckers will buy your output out of brand loyalty?

    Why make bad quality products at competitive prices when you then need to foot the RRoD repair bill?

    ;)

  • muscleblade #117 4 years ago

    "PS3 games earn big bucks for EA "

    Thats bcause the PS3 owners doesnt have much else too play. Isnt this obvious??

  • Pedrolot #118 4 years ago

    @ muscleblade

    Flawed arguement imo.

  • JayBuchanan #119 4 years ago

    Great BS by Eurogamer in reality what this means is the PS3 has way more owners in the UK/EUROPE

    where games retail for almost double the price they do in America in some cases or a good $20-30 minimum extra so if FIFA 08 sold 7 million worldwide and 5 million in Europe and 3 million of those were for the PS3 the sales would be a good 40-50 million more than the 360 even if the 360 version of the game sold more worldwide... due to the bigger sales within Europe where RRP is been considered... so PLaystations marketshare could be smaller for EA Games but because there are probably more European PS3 owners than 360 the games will sell the same or less yet still make more profit when looking at worldwide sales for both consoles!

    I don't make too much sense but just writing some Jibba jabba :p
    Edited by 1 at 30/07/08 @ 17:51

  • assache #120 4 years ago

    @oreillymj

    Britain is an island you dick! England is one of three countries on that island you dumb fuck!

    Check a fucking map you Muppet!

    I hope, for your dumb arse self, you or not from Britain? Can you peel a banana?

  • Nocturne #121 4 years ago

    Daymare,

    The view which I offered was more nuanced than that commonly associated with relativism. To restate, one opinion can be superior or inferior to another, but not in a vacuum. There needs to be some criteria, standard or goal by which to evaluate opinions. If your goal to to seek the truth then you will evaluate opinions by their correspondence to the facts, and if your goal is to discover what is right then you can judge opinions by some set of moral principles. And if your aim is to decide which movie is the superior this must be done relative to some standards by which it can be ranked. These standards may be very personal, reflecting what you want and expect from a movie, and will rarely be shared by others.

    Here is the important part: there is nothing "relative" about the truth, which by definition is constant for everyone. Moreover, even if I do not share the standards and expectations by which you evaluate a movie, whether a movie is superior or inferior according to your standards is not relative i.e. if a movie is superior for you according to your standards then it is also superior for me according to your standards, since any opinion held on the matter will either correspond to the facts or not. However, in regard to the differing standards and expectations of a movie, each is free to choose there own and it would seem like folly to try and argue which is true because such standards cannot alone correspond to any facts.

    The only difference between science and art is that scientists have agreed upon an aim, which is to seek testable opinions, theories and hypotheses which correspond to the facts i.e. true opinions. It is rare to find any group who can each agree on a common goal for what art should achieve, and so there appears to be something especially "relative" about art. There is not.
    Edited by 1 at 30/07/08 @ 18:31

  • assache #122 4 years ago

    @mcbi4kh2

    What the fuck is going on with Geography as a subject? I can't believe you've had to explain the composition of a fucking island to the game playing masses! Fuck this, I'm going to have to start agreeing that gaming is dumbing the world down and start buying the Daily Mail!

  • miiiguel #123 4 years ago

    "So, PC games sales were higher than XBox360 games sales?
    If PC gaming is dead - XBox360 gaming must be buried and rotting by now? "

    Yes, clever argument, and since Wii was a no show, Wii must really be a flop, because, as we all know games=EA. Good job!

  • Daymare #124 4 years ago

    @Nocturne

    "And if your aim is to decide which movie is the superior this must be done relative to some standards by which it can be ranked. These standards may be very personal, reflecting what you want and expect from a movie, and will rarely be shared by others."

    Yes, standards. Standards that you get by watching alot of movies (playing alot of games, listening to alot of music, ...), reading about them, reading history about them and thinking about them. You pay attention to the people who are passionate about it, who are involved with making them, etc. This way you're constantly refining your knowledge and improving standards about said subject. Those standards are not so arbitrary as you imply (and if you do, that ties directly to the "all opinions are equal" sentiment). There *are* better and worse standards, ony any subject. Maybe they're not written in stone in this case but they *are* shared and passed on. Sorf of like knowledge only more vaguely. It doesn't mean every movie buff will, for instance, recognize Alien as a great movie, but majority of them will.

    To express my views on this subject as simple as possible: I value Steven Spielberg's opinion on any movie more then I do Gordon Brown's.

    What you're basically saying in your last post is that "all standards are equal" (equal in that there are no solid standards in this case so everyone is "left all by himself to form any kind of opinion and it's all good";) instead of "all opinions are equal" - pretty much the same thing. If that's the case, we'll just have to agree to disagree;)
    Edited by 1 at 30/07/08 @ 18:51

  • bonker #125 4 years ago

    FFS, I don't think I've ever read such a blatantly got-to-be-BS article/headline.

    There's no way, no f*cking way that PS3 trounced 360 in software sales/revenue during that period by some 70%.

    I haven't got time to read all 130+ comments but I hope someone has since systematically debunked this bollocks!

  • Nocturne #126 4 years ago

    Daymare,

    If there indeed better and worse standards as you suggest then by what standard are they judged? As noted before, one cannot be superior to another in a vacuum, there must be some criteria or standard against which they are measured. If you provide an answer to this question the same question can be asked of whatever new standards you have invoked, ad infinitum. There is an infinite regress here, a paradox formally similar to Godel's incompleteness theorum or Russell's paradox. There is no end point or final standard by which you can decide, once and for all, who really has the superior opinion. Now, I agree that movie buffs or videogame buffs may garner a more complex and refined enjoyment from their hobby, and there is a knowledge to be learnt from the study of literature, film and videogames, but that knowledge is not of the kind which you seek, and it cannot be so on pain of contradiction. I understand that you would value Steven Spielberg's opinion on a movie more than Gordon Brown's, but I may not if I thoguht that Gordon Brown's movie preferences more closely met my own.

    It is not my intent to suggest that 'all standards are equal' or that 'all opinions are equal', since no opinions are inherently equal unless some standard is first adopted by which to judge them the same. The fallacy of relativism is to deny or reject every criteria or standard by which ideas may be evaluated, and then claim that every idea must therefore be equal. But equal in what way? By what standard? For example, take the following formulae:

    1. P -> Q
    2. ~(P & ~Q)

    The first can be read 'if P is true then Q is true' and the second can be read '"P is true and Q is false" is false'. Now, the question I ask is whether or not these two formulae are equal? If you have studied logic then you may be tempted to answer affirmitively, and point out that they are semantically equivalent and have the same truth-value distribution. However, if you were to say this then my retort would be that they are clearly not equal since one has a '~' symbol and the other doesn't. My point here is that equality, like superiority and inferiority, can only be judged by some standard. Therefore, when the relativist claims that 'all opinions [and standards] are equal' he is implicitly adopting some standard by which he finds them equal, or else they would not be equal.

    The fallacy of the relativist is to reject all standards while your fallacy is to assume that there is some ultimate standard with which to evaluate every other. The truth and its consequences do not depend on such chimeras, and none of this detracts from the value a movie buff gains from his hobby.
    Edited by 2 at 30/07/08 @ 19:19

  • SpaceMidget75 Verified Senior Software Developer, Minerva Computer Services #127 4 years ago

    I think I sit somewhere in between you guys when it comes to opinion. Let me give you an example.

    I'm a movie buff.

    Apocalypse Now is one of the best films ever made but it's not my cup of tea.
    But Armageddon is one of my favourite films.

    Seeing as many films as I have, and having a deeper interest than most about films allows me to make a far better critique about Apocalypse Now than if I was just a casual movie watcher.
    But seeing as many films as I have and having a deeper interest than most about films doesn't make any difference about how much I love Armageddon.

    I do really believe that people who have broadened their experience of a subject will be able to form a far better judgement on the QUALITY of a given film/album/painting etc.

    Does that mean that people can't love something regardless (based on their own opinion)? Of course not.




  • seasidebaz #128 4 years ago

    @Nocturne and Daymare:

    Get a life. Gaming is gaming is gaming, it is NOT psychology, sociology, philsophy, or anything else ending with a "Y".

    Gaming should be enjoyed. Opinions should be shared, as they were in the NES / Master System days (Master System RULED, btw) and sure, people may not agree. But that's the whole point, we're opinionating about gaming, which means once again we're competing to be the champion.

    Gaming to me has been more than a hobby over the years, it has been a form of escape, but I don't view it as art. No games can compete as art. There is nothing that can be pondered, searched for hidden meaning, debated over by snobs with too much money who pay millions for some crusty old oil painting of a boy who looks like a girl. It's GAMING, ffs, it doesn't need a category. It is its OWN category.

    I buy games because I like them. I buy consoles because they offer the games I like. Simple as that. EA sells some games? Great, that's how they became the biggest publisher in the world anyway. So what if more of those games were sold on PS3. EA gets more money, makes more games, everyone wins.

    Oh, and seriously, everyone, stop with the spinning that EA made up some numbers. It makes your fellow xbots look bad. Then again, they are all either chavs or loners with no offline social skills, so I don't think you can make them look much worse...

  • seasidebaz #129 4 years ago

    SpaceMidget: +1. Armageddon is great :)

  • mkreku #130 4 years ago

    I wonder if this has anything to do with how much Microsoft and Sony each charge for every game they sell on their respective console? I mean, Microsoft are kind of known for charging more than Sony when it comes to everything else, maybe their cut from each game is higher than for Sony and that's what makes this weird difference in earnings for EA?

  • makeamazing #131 4 years ago

    Always the same people and the same complaints whenever there is a PS3 post. You know who you are (the same 3 or 4 people ;)

    Though I own a PS3 and am a gamer (unlike most PS3 users apparently) and I have lots of good games (on the PS3 which must be a shock to a couple of the fanboys who keep appearing).

    Anyway back to the original thread, As it was stated along time ago, the actual figures and the headline reporting doesnt seem correct. It seems the Xbox sold better than the PS3 but they put intheir statement that the PS3 sales would increase in the future. So I dont fully understand the news report or how they can say the PS3 is selling more when at the moment it clearly isnt. Unless Im missing something..

  • Daymare #132 4 years ago

    @Nocturne

    You do realise that whatever your view or statement on this subject of opinions and knowledge we were discussing is, it's a "victim" of the same paradox which you just described, don't you? "There is no end point or final standard by which you can decide, once and for all, who really has the superior opinion." When you take that position, you're instantly "traped" in it. Every discussion ends here since that statement is still, basically, an opinion that implies something (always) questionable and is based on some predefiened "standard". My imperfect and easly questionable answer: because there is no end point *we, humans, equal in imperfection* can decide, it *doesn't* mean there is no end point (The Truth, God, whatever you wonna call it) or that someone isn't "closer" to it then the other.

    When you bring that kind of radical stance on the table, your every statement about anything other then the paradox itself can be instantly rejected. How could we live our lives like that? We couldn't, basically. So we have to "stop" somewhere and make due with what we do know in our limited world.

    "As noted before, one cannot be superior to another in a vacuum, there must be some criteria or standard against which they are measured." I told you there is a shared criteria and standard with which a group of avid lovers of whatever medium share. It involves knowledge of its history, its form, love for it, etc. You and everyone else can easly debunk them for being "limited" and "undefined" and "unapplicable to your preferences" (which is especially true with art since there are so much emotions and instincts involved) but everyone can also, in turn, question your standards and knowledge and everything else you enjoy in life, which would get us nowhere. We can't know the ultimate standard (of anything and everything) but we can and must make due with some standards we can, at least a group of like-minded people, agree with. Just like politics or religion: we just have to ground ourselves with something, right?

    I grounded myself with an opinion, that a worthwile opinion on anything in our imperfect world is based on knowledge about the subject at hand (history, form, etc.) and love for it. And I grounded myself with an opinion, that opinions of people that don't love and know a particular subject, but do indulge themselves with it from time to time, are lesser ones. That is, of course, merely an opinion you can easly throw away because it's only an opinion and you have your own, which you find the best of them all. But before you question any opinion with such a radical stance you did in the last post, first apply it to your own opinions - any kind. I'm sure you have many, since they are the basis of our simple, deluded lives.

    With that I conclude my participation on this subject since it was brought to the point of absurdness - exactly what I was "afraid of" will happen when I started it:)

  • Daymare #133 4 years ago

    @SpaceMidget75

    "But seeing as many films as I have and having a deeper interest than most about films doesn't make any difference about how much I love Armageddon."

    Hey, I have many "guilty pleasures" myself:) I enjoy a lot of "stupid" films but it's about knowing the difference between a good film, an enjoyable one and a bad one (please don't call me on that one, Nocturne, you know it doesn't lead anywhere;). I enjoyed Die Hard 4.0 immensley, for instance, even though it's a dumb and shallow action flick:)

  • bonker #134 4 years ago

    "@SpaceMidget75

    "But seeing as many films as I have and having a deeper interest than most about films doesn't make any difference about how much I love Armageddon."

    Hey, I have many "guilty pleasures" myself:) I enjoy a lot of "stupid" films but it's about knowing the difference between a good film, an enjoyable one and a bad one (please don't call me on that one, Nocturne, you know it doesn't lead anywhere;). I enjoyed Die Hard 4.0 immensley, for instance, even though it's a dumb and shallow action flick:) "

    Indeed.

    Any offers on Tom Thumb? lol
    Edited by 1 at 30/07/08 @ 21:34

  • bad09 #135 4 years ago

    @ bonker

    Die Hard 4.0? Enjoyed? Don't admit that mate ;)

    Mind you I'm no better, a grown man and I sat and watched TMNT the other night and enjoyed it??!!

  • hmmmmm #136 4 years ago

    Figures are misleading (to me as well - had to have several attempts to unravel their financial data... hence the number of edits!) if you look further down the accounts sheets for more realistic figures:

    Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 YOY %
    FY08 FY08 FY08 FY08 FY09 Change
    -------- ------- ------- -------- -------- -------

    PLATFORM NON-GAAP
    NET REVENUE MIX

    Xbox 360 47 218 196 128 81 72%
    PLAYSTATION 3 20 98 196 138 68 240%

    ie XBOX 81 Million, PS3 68 Million in current quarter (or 13% Xbox 360, 11% PS3) and they pretty much matched each other previous two quarters.

    What is more interesting is EA's statement: "Net loss for the quarter was $95 million as compared with net loss of $132 million for the prior year." i.e. they have lost nearly as much in Q1 as they did in the whole of the last year, despite the PS3 sales coming online -very poor results off the back of some very poor games (except Bad Company)
    Edited by 5 at 30/07/08 @ 23:17

  • SpaceMidget75 Verified Senior Software Developer, Minerva Computer Services #137 4 years ago

    "Mind you I'm no better, a grown man and I sat and watched TMNT the other night and enjoyed it??!!"

    TMNT is wicked mate! Really surprised me how much it played on character rather than action.

    Unfortunately my son love's it so I now end up watching it once a week!

  • zisssou #138 4 years ago

    hahahaha i love how everytime an article about figures put up its always the same conversation.

  • bad09 #139 4 years ago

    @ SpaceMidget75

    Yeah i like it as it harked back to the darker style of the comic, not the old cartoon (which was still cool!). Plus that battle in the rain looks great! I may pick it up cheap on HD DVD

  • wingzerosys #140 4 years ago

    Ps3 gets shoddy ports? Lol.

    I can name 3 top EA titles that are identical to the 360 version.

    Army Of Two, Burnout Paradise (actually looks/plays better), Battlefield:BC.

  • myke6699 #141 4 years ago

    It's fun reading through all the crap reasoning that fanboys do come up with when they can't rationalize their own thoughts. Funny.
    Edited by 1 at 31/07/08 @ 06:20

  • Yaz #142 4 years ago

    @myke6699

    Your post history, including your comments in the following links shows you're the last person who should be talking about fanboys. ;)

    [link url=http://www.eurogamer.net/arti cle_discussion.php?article_id=134315&comment_start=150 ]http://ww w.eurogamer.net/article_discuss...[/link]

    http://ww w.eurogamer.net/article_discuss...

  • Crovax20 #143 4 years ago

    I wonder why... oh wait, actually I know. There are no good games for the PS3, okay well there are like 4. Xbox360 has better stuff than the generic crap that EA churns out.

  • spammage #144 4 years ago

    "I wonder why... oh wait, actually I know. There are no good games for the PS3, okay well there are like 4. Xbox360 has better stuff than the generic crap that EA churns out."

    Thank you for being so insightful, is this one of the more constructive posts today?

  • MGG #145 4 years ago

    So, apart from GamerG, has anyone actually read the report? Eurogamer obviously haven't, or they really do like their misleading headlines.

    I'm not an accountant (thank god for that) but my reading of the results puts the 360 miles ahead of the PS3 in *actual* profits? Not in predicted profits?

    So where does the headline and indeed the article, come from exactly? Other than to generate page hits of course.....

  • CannonAnBall #146 4 years ago

    So, basically this thread is all about the 360 owners being a little upset because they are not no. 1? 360 owners then slam EA and PS3 as the dummy is well and truly spat out. One person actually read results and put 360 back at no. 1. We can all breathe a huge sigh of relief - I thought someone was going to cry at one point!

    Oh and there seems to be an argument over whether England (UK?) is an island.

  • MGG #147 4 years ago

    @CannonAnBall: Do you want to try reading the report as well? 360 *is* number 1 according to EA's own figures.

    Jeez, how many people can't be bothered to read the source material and just take at face value what journos say?

  • seasidebaz #148 4 years ago

    360 owners then slam EA and PS3 as the dummy is well and truly spat out.

    Xbots: Unable to handle the truth since 2005 ;)

  • Amoebalove #149 4 years ago

    Xbots: Unable to handle the truth since 2005 ;)


    seasidebaz: Console neutral since 2008 :)

  • GamerG #150 4 years ago

    @ MGG

    Thank you MGG someone else has a brian,

    Yes the 360 was more proitable for EA and also generated more recieved income $81m>$68m , the PS3 income has been fudged by taking future revenues! Something they did not need to o on 360 because the data they get from MS is better.


    At the bottom of the report EA basically state if we had not done this fudge and looked at the results on both platforms on the same basis, the same basis they had done in past then the results would be, Here we show 360 clearly in the lead.

    Its a pitty Eurogamers journalism skills does not stretch to being inquisitive about obviously anoloymous results.

    And yes sadly am an Accountant!!
    Edited by 2 at 31/07/08 @ 10:05

  • CannonAnBall #151 4 years ago

    To correct the touchy few, I was commenting on what the fuckin' thread had descended into. A sort of quick review for those people who didn't want to start at the begining and waste precious time reading all the replies.

    I'm not arsed one way or another.

    @ MGG

    chill out and sit the fuck down you muppet.

    Why are people so touchy about sales figures?

  • wyli #152 4 years ago

    GamerG, i get that EA have fudged them, but i don't get *why*. What reason would they have for doing it?

  • BigE0n #153 4 years ago

    *wyli

    To keep share holders happier, if you can account for more revenue your shares dont drop in value..... :-)

  • GamerG #154 4 years ago

    @ wyli

    Basically these companies are always tryng to bring forward revenue because often their bonus's and jobs are reliant on looking good to their shareholders.

    By estimating the amount of revenue that they expect to receive on PS3 DLC from all games already released in one go now their loss for the quarter does not look anywhere near so bad. In quarters to follow that are more profitable they will take the hit then but by then they will be making money so the reverse will be hidden.

    Notice that labled all over these accounts is the fact they are unaudited as no auditor worth his or her salt would allow this treatment.

    Presumably their argument is that the accounting concept of matching is that costs should be matched with revenue and as these games have all been released and their costs suffered then the income from future DLC should be included now but if you do it for DLC then why not actual games as well?

    Its a complete fudge, creative accounting at its worst!
    Edited by 2 at 31/07/08 @ 12:04

  • Sevens #155 4 years ago

    "They are the kind of people who are never searching for any deep, engaging and thoughtful experience from anything in their lives, nevermind a videogame."

    True. That's why the Metal Gear and Final Fantasy games have always sold exceptionally well.


    "MGS4 and Ratchet aside, they're all EA games because there is nothing else to buy."

    Virtua Fighter 5, Motor Storm, Heavenly Sword, Resistance, Ninja Gaiden Sigma, Devil May Cry 4, COD 4...
    Edited by 1 at 31/07/08 @ 12:37

  • MGG #156 4 years ago

    @CannonAnBall: Interesting, so the person posting just to help fan the flames of an argument is calling me a muppet?

    Sales figures are useful for those of us in the industry, but are never truly interesting unless they are your own company's. However, what would have been truly interesting is if PS3 *had* out-performed 360. Which it hasn't and isn't even close to according to those figures.