Playstation is associated with enough franchises to be the better performer for quite a lot of company's.
Just goes to show how powerful the brand is.

Does Sony have fewer fees to publishers when obtaining games for the PS3 console than Microsoft or Nintendo have for their platforms? If that is the case, then how do they do it? I would expect that Sony would have more fees due to BD since it is the newer format but with these articles it shows otherwise.

The Ps3 does not get modded... The games are not copied like the Xbox... The hard drive only works in one particular console and cannot be swapped therefore eliminating any chance copying so that leads to more sales of software and profit for developers with the Ps3 and less theft.

The difference is huge! The only explanation I can think of, is the strength of the Euro and the Pound compare to the Dollar, as we all know PS3 games sell better in Europe.

Piracy on the 360 is that bad? Yikes!

I hope this means PS3 will be getting Mass Effect and sequels.

Why do you always comment on the disagrees if they don't bother you?

On topic: Surprising news. I thought the 360 would have more revenue since it has a larger install base than the PS3. Congrats to Sony!

Does this mean EA is going to state that if Microsoft doesn't drop the pirce of the 360 then they may have to reconsider their support of them?

http://www.cinemablend.com/...

Seriously, that Activion CEO is retarded

"m guessing most of the Europeans by 360s because they can pirate it"

LMAO @ sack boi, the 360 pirate issue is world wide and until you can prove the quoat above your just pulling opinions out of your ass and generalizing european gamers

also

"you could "disappear" right now and no one will even notice."

honestly i think you would probably notice more then anyone else

Unless something happens between now and the year end, that Activision CEO will take home the trophy for utter stupidity in a public comment.

BTW:

http://www.joystiq.com/2009...

Could it be that the difference in sales has something to do with the disposable income of 360 owners vs PS3 owners. I don't know a single person who only works part time that owns a PS3. All the PS3 owners I know personally all have full time jobs. Probably a fourth of the 360 owners I know are employed full time.

Looks like PS3 owners buy more games then the 360 owners...

Well that good for EA either way.

"the reason why I bring up disagrees/agrees is because of the fact it seems to be a favorite hobby of 360 fanboys who can't even tell me why they disagree"

lol so you, who always responds like you don't care when you get disagrees (or at least try and pretend to not care). only do this because an xbox fanboy or two didn't tell you why they disagreed?

lolol wtf? are you serious? I have no idea how that would justify getting butthurt when you a get a disagree but whatever helps you sleep better at night =\

Did it ever occur to you that perhaps people on this site disagree with you just to get that reaction? Maybe if you stopped commenting on the disagrees you would get less of them?

It's easy to excuse the disagrees with everyone being '360 fanboys' and 'cowards' though. Instead of accepting that some people just don't feel the same way as you and disagree because they think what you write is wrong.

Here are the non-GAAP numbers. It is a better reflection of each platform's performance.

http://investors.ea.com/rel...

Wii 184
360 136
PS3 99
PS2 20

Hipocrisy? Looks like somebody was "cool" caring about sales figures before ultimolu.

http://n4g.com/NewsCom-3662...

http://n4g.com/NewsCom-3616...

http://n4g.com/NewsCom-3287...

http://n4g.com/NewsCom-3287...

http://n4g.com/NewsCom-3287...

http://n4g.com/NewsCom-3264...

And there are plenty more examples.

the ps3 cant play hacked games?

actually the reason is not just the number of games sold but the average selling price of the games.

in the USA, where xbox is more dominant, the average ea game sells for a lot less dollar than in europe where the ps3 is more dominant.. and even though the xbox is dominant in the uk, the average selling price of ea games in the uk is very low (in dollar terms).. also in europe and middle-east - especially southern europe, software piracy is quite rampant.. software piracy affects the xbox more in these regions (i.e. middle-east) which traditionally sell games at a very high price..

furthermore, the average dollar price of a game in japan is quite a lot compared to the USA - another region where the ps3 is dominant.

so even though ps3 might sell fewer games it actually generates more revenue per game sold.

it's all about the revenue/game that is responsible for a lot of the discrepency.

wow PS3 has about 40% less installed base but sold more for EA. That is great. Lets not get too excited because, it is not the rule but the exception. Wonder which games put them over the top? There is a known fact that there are more children on the xb0x360, and children play outside more, and the fact there is summer school break, so there should be a drop. That being said I bet EA had more adult games to appeal more to PS3 owners because ps3 has the oldest crowd. I hope it has nothing to do with the fact that EA lost the lead as the biggest 3rd party publisher. But I brush it off until I see it happen in one of the big quarters. If it happens in the fourth quarter, this will cause things to change especially with a price drop coming. And a slim, you can have gow3, and gt5, and even uncharted as long as I get a ARC the LAD! Or one of Sony,s other turn based rpg's.

Piracy is One of the Reasons but its not the only reason, I think Fifa could one of the reasons, Its really popular in Europe, especially on the Playstation.

The rest of us.. *yawn*

DOOOMED DOOOMED

To add to his statement which I agree, the strongest regions for Playstation is also the regions (Europe and Japan) where Sony can charge more money for each game due to currency and higher operating cost.

Every month we consistently see that NPD numbers show that 360 outsell the PS3 almost always in games. Unfortunately we don't get these numbers for Europe so it is hard to tell.

Another thing I noticed is that PS3 games tend to not fall in price as fast as 360 games. I almost always find the 360 version on sale before the PS3 version. I think there is a lot more competition on the 360.

It's like this all the time. This quarter we have NCAA Football, NBA Live, NCAA Basketball and Madden NFL 09. Now watch the Xbox 360 come back right on top. It's like this all the time with EA; when a FIFA game etc comes out PS3 slams on top again.

Maybe cause xbox owner can't stand EA, I can't stand EA, atleast there sport games and won't buy them new.

EA's only games that are good are companies they bought and are using to actually make something other than sh-t.

Also take in consideration the underlying facts. MS may have a different deal with those companies. Example, im not saying this is how it really is this is just an example, im not sure how they really do it but anyways. Whenever somebody buy a game for the PS3 sony may get say 55% of the price on it and then the Publisher gets the rest. Now MS may have a deal that they get 66% of each game instead. In the end the publisher is getting a bigger slice of the pie with Sony then MS.\

Thats my theory, correct me if im wrong :)

Ive come to not believe numbers and not to live by them. Who cares if Xbox is outselling PS3 or PS3 is outselling Xbox i really dont. Just bring me the games ive come to love and play and im all for it :)

Well considering you take the quarter of the year when no big releases are made what else were you expecting. How about using the 2nd 3rd or 4th quarter when all the big sports titles come out and not to mention the holiday rush. But glad Ps3 is making some money and catching up.

It's great the EA is getting some major sales numbers from ALL the platforms, eh?

1. NA is not the world. Shocking!!!.

2. EA is a well know brand to the PS fanbase. If you guys see Burnout, FNR4 etc they all preform well on the PS3 despite having a smaller installbase. FNR4 for example last NDP showed that the PS3 version trailed the x360 version by just 10k if i remember correctly despite the fact that there are 7 million more x360 in NA. In Europe i am sure the PS3 version preforms much better.

3. EA games have been quality lately, PS fans buy quality.

4. Piracy on the x360.

5. PS3 gamers buy more games and not just movies. Shocking!! lol.

For those that are using the FIFA excuse. Didn't MS said they are ahead in Europe as well?.

The xbox brand still has a long way to go. Their strength still revolves around shooter based games and the western market. Its still has a long way to go to achieve the level of success the PS brand have achieved in terms of attracting varied gamers from different regions with different gaming taste which has always been one of the PS brands greatest strength. It's why no PS game ever sold to 50% of the PS fanbase and why we see varied games from racing to 3rd action to JRPG's to Kareoke games lol! all doing 5 million plus numbers.

I know the Acti CEO comments were retarded...but it doesn't matter...EA's PS3 performance illustrates just how powerful the PS brand still is...

and either way...the PS3 IS getting a price cut sooner rather than later...then this will really heat up...if Sony can get a ps3 under the $300 barrier by the end of the year, things are going to nothing but swing in Sony's favor for a long while...let alone if games like GT5 really do make it this year...

but PS3 slim at $100 less than available sku's now...with Uncharted 2, modern warfare 2, and the potential of a GT juggernaut all falling this year...that may finally be the end of ignorant 'its cool to hate the PS3' articles still popping up weekly...

Only reason I care about these numbers and all sales numbers, is so I know my console will continue to have the support of devs and pubs! So these numbers are great and since the PS3 has sold more consoles in 2 yrs than XBOX1 and GC sold in their lifetimes , plus these companies keep reporting more revenue from PS3, I know the support will continue.

So, I guess I will never have to visit sales articles again! Lucky me!

P.S. I will also check to see how the Slim is doing(if it exists) and to see what effect the price cut will have!

I Think you are looking at the wrong numbers, because the ps3 is ahead in revenue in FY09 and FY10

take a look again...

PLAYSTATION 3
FY09 197 Millions
FY10 121

Xbox 360
FY09 132 Millions
FY10 73

So Activision is EA now?

no. he said non-GAAP.

It's a section down and it's exactly the way he said it. I don't really care to look at what they do to make it not qualify as GAAP, but his numbers are correct for what he said they were.

I just think it has alot to do with the games themselves. Either way I'm surprised, I would of thought 360 easily would have earned more for EA than ps3. Sure would like to see a breakdown of the top titles. Also I'm sure Euro helps recover some ground but 360 often does better in the UK which is the individual largest Euro market. This is good news for sony selling more games for EA.

JOY

I really wish they broke down better. At the end they show the releases they had, and the best one was Fight night round 4, and the sales aren't that different globally.

All their other games were pretty crap for sales and sold similarly too.

Good lord, people cant even read a reporrt correctly.
The Xbox360 made significantly more for EA, its under deffered revenue section.
They just havent been paid out for it yet.

Most friends I know doesn't buy the games for XBOX360...there is this thing called PIRACY!

Now I hope all those people who kept saying EA made crappy games will keep this mouth shut!

X = 31.46M total Xbox 360's sold

Y = working Xbox 360's = X - X/3 = 20.97M

Z = 23M total PS3's sold

Since Z > Y, and the profit margin is directly proportional to the amount of consoles still working, the PS3 sold more games this past quarter.

There, was that so hard?

^^^ YES WE CAN

...i must order more Body-bags off Amazon later for the MASS-ChatBot Zombie Lemming Suicides that are coming!!! ;-D

Because we all know 'Them Red-Neck-Chav-Bots love them Sales'!!! ;-D

+ ALL 'EA' Games look better on the PS3 to;) + FREE On-line Play!!! ;)

translate into higher sales.

"but, but, but 360 install base is still 7 million larger"

That is why I stated on multiple occasion that the RROD60s install base is INFLATED and the reality is that RROD60 is just a FEW million ahead of the PS3.

Furthermore, xbots dont have unlimited funds. And even though many xbots claim they buy more games, eventually they are just like wii and PS3 gamers: meaning they have LIMITED funds so they can only chose soo many games.

This theory simply means the following: if game X is bought by an xbot, game Y is automatically left untouched in the stores by the same xbot. Because xbot only has enough dough to buy one game.

you cna't have it both ways?

It's well known the Xbox has high attach rates. But you guys keep saying that the xbox 360 hardware sales are inflated because of RROD. But if that were the case the attach rate would actually be HUGE. if as you say thousands of people are buying multiple 360's because of RROD then it doesn't logically follow that they're ALSO buying more games for each new console does it.

So which is it?

RROD means Less hardware sales in rality but MONSTER attach rate - at least a thrid bigger than what currently reported

or

Hardware sales don't include RROD and xbox attach rate only marginially higher than PS3?

Choose?

Ladies and gentlemen, xbox stupidity shown right here!

Hey retard, do you buy a new copy of your existing games everytime your xbox dies?

In the wise words of Nelson: HA HAA!!

"Wii - $161m
PS3 - $121m
360 - $73m "

I think the bots better shut the f*ck up from now on.
It seems almost every major publisher is making more money from PS3 than 360.

Even with less consoles on the market.LOL!
Oh the shame..i would leave N4G for good if i was a 360 fanboy.

People buys the big ol BOT to pirate games .....A lot of foreigners and people here do that because there broke so they don't have the mula to buy them . The ol bot is a piece of crrrrr*p

Oh WOW! droids are "playing sales" I think I will bookmark this page and use it next time a droid hypocrite says "we don't play sales" these comments are pure gold for future pwning.

All lies.

well atleast they aint defending crappy games with 'OMGZ it sold 5.5mil games!~ its the bestest game around"

http://i26.tinypic.com/27x2...

And that is what i have been saying all of this time too.
Those RRoD units CAN'T play games, that's why games like Resident evil 5 sold closer to 50-50 than the 65-35 it is supposed to.

@ Jason360
Well now the "droids" can play both sales AND games.
and you can play, uhm, what can you play? oh, SUPERIOR ONLINE!!! (AKA Cross-game chat/invite)

Very true Jason 360, very true. They're hypocrites. Sales aren't important only when the 360 wins at something. I guess that means only EA's sales are important, right guys?

The extreme ps3 fanboys on this site are some of the biggest hypocrites ever. Sales don't matter, only when the PS3 is losing.

It's all "we don't play sales" ..until the ps3 generates a little more net revenue for one publisher and then it is suddenly "look how mighty the ps3 is".

@1 - I will see your LOL and raise you a LMFAO

~~
http://tiny.cc/yzUel

The PS3 almost doubled the x360 and you say "a little more"

Well i dont buy EA games so maybe its my fault. i have 2 EA games out of my 20 games Bad Company and Burnout Paradise. Dont like the sport games that EA produce, simply because its all American sports that have no relevance here in australia.

PS3 owners need all the games they can get, especially with the lack of first party exclusives......... HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

DROIDS GOT NO GAMES!

SO THEY GOTTA SETTLE WITH EA GAMES! LOL!

"No it isn't EA is the only one, you did have UBI but anymore... you just have one. "

Am I the only one who can't understand a thing he is saying?

Navy guy, very good point , this won't fly in here though.
people in here are not very intelligent and don't understand how it all works out. That would mean xbox made more money and they would not want to hear that.

no one will agree with a good point if it attacks the ps3.
they just want to recognize a bullsh=t win in there corner, normal for the ps3.
don't win, lye to your self.

You work for Microsoft?

"Since the majority of the games are Xbox 360 lead platform, the majority of the costs are placed under it. They do not split the revenue evenly between the platforms."

If that's true then these numbers are totally bogus and do not accurately reflect pure sales on the level the fanboys are trying to make it out to be.

Sounds pretty typical.

Navyguy nailed it. He has a very good grasp of how it works. Sadly, it will go over the heads of many people on this site.

@ Navyguy21...

"You can't count the same person multiple times or find a way to split up his "cost" among the platforms, that is a poor accounting practice and not proper GAAP."

As a CPA, I can unequivocally state that your wrong with the second half of that statement. You absolutely can allocate a person's time among platforms/projects. You certainly can as long as there is a reasonable basis for it.

Not to mention, that according to all the Xbox loyalists... it's hell of a lot harder to code for the PS3 SO it must have taken MORE time to code and therefore it'd be MORE expensive on the PS3 platform. Right?

Of course, you can't count his labor / overhead multiple times as you said. You're correct there.

Then you said "Their Non-GAAP net revenue calculations seem to more accurately represent the worldwide market trends and sales of their games."

So... let me see if I understand.

You contend that they can't split a person's labor between platforms/projects how they see fit because that wouldn't conform to GAAP. In other words, if they want to accurately reflect their financials, they need to follow the rules of GAAP.

BUT, when it comes to reporting which platform had higher sales.... You're ALL about ignoring the GAAP numbers and using the Non-GAAP numbers.

Hmmm... interesting. I wonder why that is.

No i dont, but i minor is business economics (major is Computer Programming, want to be a game dev :) )and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) is the term used to refer to the standard framework of guidelines for financial accounting used in any given jurisdiction. GAAP includes the standards, conventions, and rules accountants follow in recording and summarizing transactions, and in the preparation of financial statements. In short...

360 Version =
Revenue - Dev costs = Net revenue

PS3 version =
Revenue - PORT COSTS = Net Revenue

As you can see, the cost of PORTING a game is drastically lower that actually developing a game.........and is responsible for the monetary difference. Accountants use this method, not the number posted in this article to determine profit........or "Net Revenue"

EDIT @ Above

Look dude, dont go there with me, how just stating facts, how the CURRENTLY RUN BUSINESS PRACTICES IN GAMING are, and not the method you mentioned. Sure, not all business benefit from the GAAP method, but GAMING does, which is why it is used. Im not trying to be a fanboy here, i do own a PS3 you know, i was just trying to correct the errors in the article............THATS IT. I said nothing about EITHER platform. Had it worked in PS3s favor, i wouldve stated the same thing. Chill out dude, im not here for a fanboy war, im 27 years old, i dont have time for that crap

Navyguy... stop... just stop.

You know a little bit about a topic (which is dangerous).

You (nor I for that matter) have any way of knowing HOW EA allocates it's labor / overhead / materials to their projects. Nor do you (nor I) know what projects are "lead" for which platform.

And again... based on your argument, then the GAAP numbers are the definitive numbers to go by which is what this article is talking about.

If, as you believe, GAAP is the "holy grail" to achieve logical financial numbers (and I tend to agree although there are some quirks with GAAP that alot of ppl don't understand), then the GAAP reported numbers are the ones everyone should go by.

Edit: Look "dude", don't spin things. I'll most certainly "go there" when someone is spouting off crap that isn't true. Like I said... a little knowledge is dangerous. You're not telling the truth, at least not the whole truth. I could give a rat's ass what platforms you own. This isn't about that. If you would have said the same thing about the PS3, I'd be saying the same thing as well...

The only thing I'm "upset" about is people spreading FUD, especially about what I do for a living.

On a side note... You're 27 years old and you're posting pictures of your gaming rig and KZ2 with the receipt. Well, damn. I guess you DO know what you're talking about! /sarcasm

No offense man, but why on earth are you defending Microsoft's sale figures? it's not like you work for them. Btw, I didn't disagree with you.

agree with 2 up...

someone comes in who has obviously taken an introductory accounting class in college or something...moves into the 'pc' way of showing financial statements, then points to how 'inaccurate' they are out of pure speculation...non-GAAP accounting practices nearly always fall into that category, as they allow plenty of room for gray areas in terms of moving money in different directions...

there is ZERO proof or presented evidence of what games are leads on the 360...in fact last year EA stated that they would be making most games from then on as leads on the PS3 first, as that is more economically sound because of the radically different architecture of the PS3...which contradicts your entire statement...but it doesn't matter, as it has not been confirmed in either direction...

further...how EA handles division of labor, costs, and revenue allocation is NOT explained in detail within these documents...as it does not need to be...I am not saying what you said is incorrect...only that its not the entire story...you are jumping to a conclusion that fits a predetermined slant when you in reality are lacking a good bit of the information needed to get there...we all do it sometimes...

Whether navyguy is right about gaap or non-gaap reflecting actual sales performance doesn't matter, it still invalidates Activision's take on not developing for PS3. You develop for PS3, and you will have more revenues, end of story.

I'm sure EA's multi-million dollars worth of accountants have no idea how to properly account on EA's financials! Why do they not just call you? /sarcasm

I'm sure EA, Ubisoft, Capcom and Konami all thought of that before they made these announcements. Do you think they factor the actors and writers pay only to the 360 version?

Thanks DaTruth for seeing my point, I was thinking of posting this some time ago but I didn't want to embarass Navguy21.

Revenue is the money that comes into your business. It does not take into account expenses and cash outflow. As a result, revenue is not a good measure of sustainable success. This is especially true when the necessary cost of doing business is high.

Profit is that money that your business retains after all expenses have been paid and accounts have been settled. Profitability (and not revenue) is a much more accurate measure of the potential sustainability of your business success.

Now I don't know what the cost to develop for the three systems are, but I'm almost sure it cost more to develop for the PS3 than it does for the 360. Once you add in all the intangibles, who knows what the profit margin (bottom line) would be. But a lot of you guys (including the writer of the article) doesn't understand the difference between profit and revenue.