Osm

@667anakin @Khalil091106 Yuta a littéralement sorti un Violet en combat après 2 entraînements

@Khalil091106 Aucun humain à part Gojo peut maîtriser le 6eme œil et l’infini

La question ne se pose pas

@jaketyoung90 @Faksback666 Whatever you say.

@Omega769Omega @Faksback666 It is the market. We’re using real spending and official reporting, not hypotheticals. You don’t ignore actual data because it’s “limited”, that’s how markets are measured. If preferences were different, behavior would reflect it.

There’s no significant upgrade between PS4 & PS5

@jaketyoung90 @Faksback666 Basing conclusions about preferences on a limited market makes no sense. There can be no market shift under these conditions.

@Omega769Omega @Faksback666 Your analogy still fails. You’d sell more apples because that’s what customers actually buy more of. Profit follows demand. If people preferred subscriptions, they’d spend more there and the market would shift. It hasn’t—so behavior already answers it.

@jaketyoung90 @Faksback666 But that’s not possible because of the nature of the market itself. If you sell apples and pears, you can’t expect people to suddenly tell you that they prefer pineapples, since you’ve never sold them any.

@jaketyoung90 @Faksback666 Let me go back to my example of apples and pears: I ask you which of the two your customers prefer, and you answer “apples” because they make you more money. I can’t put it any simpler than that—there’s a huge, obvious problem with your reasoning.

@Omega769Omega @Faksback666 You can’t separate them. What exists in the market is determined by profitability and publisher decisions. If subscriptions were preferred, supply would reflect that. It doesn’t, so the data we do have already reflects real demand.

@jaketyoung90 @Faksback666 That’s the problem—no matter how many times I explain it, we’re not on the same page. I keep saying it: I’m not talking about profitability and the publishers’ perspective, that’s a completely separate issue.

@Omega769Omega @Faksback666 Bad analogy. Publishers choose what to “sell.” If subscriptions were more profitable, more games would be in them. They aren’t, because full sales still make more money. Availability follows demand, not the other way around

@jaketyoung90 @Faksback666 You can’t sell apples and pears and, just because you only sell those two, claim that out of ALL the fruits that exist, people prefer apples.

@Omega769Omega @Faksback666 You didn’t explain it, you just asserted it. Spending data reflects preference. If subscriptions were truly preferred, they’d dominate revenue. They don’t. That’s why companies still rely on full game sales.

@jaketyoung90 @Faksback666 As I explained, the analysis we can draw from the current market is limited because the subscription model is restricted. Most games aren’t available through a subscription.

@jaketyoung90 @Faksback666 I've already explained why your reasoning is wrong, but we're just going around in circles. I give up.

@Omega769Omega @Faksback666 It literally is the point. Consumer preference is shown by what people spend money on. If subscriptions were preferred, they’d already dominate. They don’t, so the behavior doesn’t match your claim.

@jaketyoung90 @Faksback666 Once again, that's not the point.

@Omega769Omega @Faksback666 If that model made more money, publishers would already be doing it. They’re not, because selling games is still more profitable. Companies follow revenue, not theory.

@jaketyoung90 @Faksback666 There isn't a choice rn. When I say there isn't a choice, I'm talking about launch. Not all games are available through subscriptions at launch. What I'm saying is that if there were a choice to play EVERYTHING through a subscription, the shift in behavior would be immediate.

@Omega769Omega @Faksback666 They already have that choice right now, and they still buy games at full price in huge numbers. If subscriptions were what people preferred, sales wouldn’t still dominate. Reality doesn’t match that assumption.

@jaketyoung90 @Faksback666 What I mean is that, in a situation where someone wants to buy an Xbox and the games they want are available through a subscription,they’ll choose the subscription because that’s what people do when they have a choice. And so, this isn’t a deal-breaker for the majority.

@Omega769Omega @Faksback666 That was my whole point, what people actually spend money on. If unit sales are still more profitable and still dominate, that reflects consumer behavior too. Subscriptions are popular, but they haven’t replaced buying. Buying is the majority of the consumer preference for gaming

@jaketyoung90 @Faksback666 I agree, except for the last sentence. It’s a consumer habit that’s been imposed, not one people prefer—that’s the key difference. It’s the publishers who are pushing for individual game purchases.

@CBattleblade @hvnssencorr Do you realized Rika had to protect the civilians during half the fight ?

@hvnssencorr Yuta used everything he had, everything uro had, and even some of what Ryu had. Hating yuta glazers is so easy but it makes me sad cause it shows the declining literacy rates. x.com/CBattleblade/s…

"Extreme diff"

@jaketyoung90 @Faksback666 I'm having trouble understanding what you're getting at. Yes, the unit-based sales model is more profitable, but that wasn't the point of the discussion. We were talking about consumer preferences and the reasons for buying an Xbox or a PS5.

@Omega769Omega @Faksback666 You just proved my point. Publishers don’t put games on subscriptions day one because selling them makes more money. If subs were more profitable, everything would launch there. They don’t, because sales still drive the industry.

@jaketyoung90 @Faksback666

@Omega769Omega @Faksback666 That’s fair for you, but that’s personal preference, not the market. If most people didn’t care about owning games, full-price releases wouldn’t keep selling millions. Subs are an option, not a replacement.

@jaketyoung90 @Faksback666 Personally, I don’t replay most of the games I’ve finished, for that matter. But my point isn’t to say that an Xbox is for everyone, it isn’t. My point was to explain why I disagree when you said that the PS5 is the only option.

@Omega769Omega @Faksback666 Game Pass is great for heavy players, I agree. But long-term is where it falls apart, you’re paying monthly forever and don’t own anything. With PS, you build a permanent library. And Series S being cheaper upfront doesn’t change that it’s a weaker, all-digital system.

@jaketyoung90 @Faksback666 I agree that digital and renting mean this console isn't for everyone. But it's also worth noting that this is what most consumers want. Netflix, Game Pass, PS Plus, and others show that consumer habits have changed: people no longer want to maintain a long-term game library.

@jaketyoung90 @Faksback666

@Omega769Omega @Faksback666 Game Pass is still solid, but the price hikes matter. $30/month plus higher console prices changes the value long-term. PS5 isn’t for everyone, but neither is Game Pass at those prices anymore.