beepum

@OyasumiBastet I never said they were. But new vs pre-owned games is a very different thing than steam vs every other option on PC.

@plumbwane Because new games aren't the only option on PlayStation.

"PlayStation can take a loss cos you have to buy from them, you have to give them money" Let me introduce you to ebay.com

@OyasumiBastet Why? You and I both know that's not the only option on PC. Why are you intentionally just limiting PC options now?

@plumbwane No, Steam Game.

@OyasumiBastet No, PC games.

@plumbwane No Steam games. I know. Yes I have 2, the one I built and the Steam Deck, I've used GoG and Epic on it. Your argument doesn't hold water my guy.

@OyasumiBastet when you want to buy PC* games, steam is not the only option. the SM is a PC.

@plumbwane Sure, but *when* you want to buy steam games the only option is Steam. The point is, saying "yeah there are options, but what about when I don't want to use them" doesn't hold water.

@OyasumiBastet Ok. *when* you want to buy new, the only option is sony. Is that better? The IF wasn't the point. The options were the point.

@plumbwane Yes, that IF, is doing a huge amount of lifting. Steam isn't the only option, but more PS users are gonna buy second hand, than Steam users are gonna use Epic.

@OyasumiBastet But with playstation, if you want to buy new, the only option is them. On SM, steam isn't the only option whatsoever. Not the same profit at all.

@plumbwane I mean it is irrelevant. If 80 people buy new games on PS, and 80 people buy new games from Valve. Then 40 people buy second hand, and 40 people pirate, that's the same profit.

@OyasumiBastet How will sony lose a lot more money from having millions and millions more users that spend money compared to SM users? the percentage of non-spenders vs spenders on playstation is far, far smaller compared to SM.

@plumbwane Yeah, so Sony will lose a lot more money. Steam also have users who will still buy steam games without the Steam Machine, so the losses matter even less.

@OyasumiBastet Sony didn't get $0 from that game though. They got the original cut. Even if there's an original purchase for the pirated game, there's a good chance it isn't from steam. It can be from numerous other storefronts.

@plumbwane No it isn't. Usually it requires a bought title, to get the code, to strip it of DRM to give around. its irrelvant because it's still a "lost" sale, its still sony getting $0 If the person buying it second hand, pirated it, that original copy would have still been sold.

@OyasumiBastet So then with that math, there are millions and millions more PlayStation users that spend money compared to steam machine users. Since the steam machine will sell single digit millions and the PS5 is at like 50 million already.

@plumbwane If you add up every PS user who doesn't play games, only buys second hand, or rents, these are all people who contribute $0 to getting Sony there money back for the console. I recon it'd be pretty close to the amount of people who buy a SM and don't buy games from Steam.

@OyasumiBastet It's definitely relevant. They actually got a cut from the original sale. With pirating, there's no original sale whatsoever.

@plumbwane With second hand that's still 1 less sale to Sony, its irrelevant if they already got there cut or not. A second hand game to sony is as good as a pirated one. I don't think there are many people who would buy a Steam Machine who wouldn't buy games from Steam.

@OyasumiBastet Do you really think there are many people who have purchased PlayStations and have never purchased a game? And again, with second hand, Sony already got their cut from that game.

@plumbwane Yeah Its simple, these are several ways people have bought PlayStations as subsidised prices, and didn't give Sony sales to make up for them Buying a PS, to watch DVD's and blu-rays, with no intention to game, is one way, and those who intend to game, many buy second hand or rent

@OyasumiBastet Really? You're talking about entirely different types of metrics and trying to make them work together. Second hand sales vs direct sales, and now vs dvds? And talking about total number of users vs sales per device. It's all over the place.

@plumbwane Idk how much clearer it can be made.

@OyasumiBastet The point isn't clear whatsoever. You keep glossing over stuff that has already been explained

@plumbwane Yes it does. The point is clear. You do not need to give any money to PlayStation/Sony if you buy a PS5 and play on it. Same with the Steam Machine and Steam.

@OyasumiBastet No it doesn't lol. These metrics won't help them figure out if they can actually subsidize the hardware.

@plumbwane Yes it does.

@OyasumiBastet That metric makes zero sense at all. You're grasping at straws here.

@plumbwane Because more people buy second hand on PlayStation than people buy PC games from.any other store than Steam.

@OyasumiBastet How?? Who else makes games for PlayStation? What other storefronts are there?

@plumbwane PlayStatipn has less guarantee per user.

@OyasumiBastet Less guaranteed than those consoles. Because if you want to buy a game, it has to be a game that Sony gets a cut from. Steam machine doesn't have that guarantee whatsoever.

@plumbwane Its about as guarenteed as the PS2 and PS3, since they were sold as computer entertainment systems PS2's launch day system seller being Men In Black 2 on DVD I'll be buying more games when my parents get one, because they can play games on something more powerful then the deck

@OyasumiBastet Selling steam machines doesn't guarantee any sales on steam, though. So this new market can't be relied on whatsoever

@plumbwane The new market would pay great in the long term, more game sales, more Devs focused on your platform, more developers from other company's contributing to the code SteamOS relies on, and less threat from MicroSoft.

@OyasumiBastet Okay. That doesn't mean they can just start to lose money on a product that they are selling. That's insane logic.

@plumbwane This argument is about if they can or can't not if they should or shouldn't.

@OyasumiBastet Correct, they do make huge profits. But that doesn't mean that they should just start to lose money on a product that they are selling. That's insane logic.

@plumbwane Yes it does Yes they do, partially also why they can cut costs on the SM, they don't need to sell SM's so they don't manufacture as many, so they don't need to worry about making as much money back as PS does, since they'll never lose as much Yeah and they make huge profits.