Electronic Arts has issued its Q1 and Q2 2016 financial stats and as we can see, PC remains a really profitable platform for the big publisher. According to EA’s stats, the PC GAAP net revenue was 23% in Q2 2016 and 21% in Q1 2016, whereas the current-gen (PS4 + Xbox One) GAAP net revenue was 41% in both Q1 and Q2 2016. If we assume that PS4 and Xbox One have the same sales, then PC is the leading platform for the company’s GAAP results.
However, we all know that PS4 sales are greater than Xbox One sales, so a more accurate picture would be PS4 leading the way, with the PC following in second place and Xbox One in third place.
Things are slightly different when we take into account the company’s non-GAAP results. According to them, PC is undoubtedly the leading platform in Q1 2016 and the third platform in Q2 2016. The picture, however, is similar to the one of the GAAP results when we take into consideration both of these quarters.
In short, the PC platform brought EA $184 million, whereas both of the current-gen consoles were responsible for $332 million (GAAP results) in Q2 2016. And that alone proves that PC is a profitable platform for EA.
John is the founder and Editor in Chief at DSOGaming. He is a PC gaming fan and highly supports the modding and indie communities. Before creating DSOGaming, John worked on numerous gaming websites. While he is a die-hard PC gamer, his gaming roots can be found on consoles. John loved – and still does – the 16-bit consoles, and considers SNES to be one of the best consoles. Still, the PC platform won him over consoles. That was mainly due to 3DFX and its iconic dedicated 3D accelerator graphics card, Voodoo 2. John has also written a higher degree thesis on the “The Evolution of PC graphics cards.”
Contact: Email
UFC then and native VR support for Mirror’s edge)
I don’t think my heart could take Mirror’s Edge in VR. I’d have to wear a diaper.
id say something but i wanna see the peasant butthurt and how we dont have uncharted 4 and how pc gaming is expensive and so fourth.
LOL.
pc gaming is expensive unless you use that site that sells stolen keys what was it g2a.. you say steam steam sales? that means you dont play AAA titles at launch and wait 6months for a deal. pc gamers are hackers, cheaters, use shady sites like g2a, and pirate. at launch games on steam and every other lgit site is $60 for AAA.
so i WONDER a how its cheaper. if you say steam sales you dont play at launch.
next gen was almost double pc profits… lol so that alone should tell you what platform they want to make games for. consoles are definitely #1 priority. sure and dev would like to make an extra 100m off pc who wouldnt. the point is consoles make the most money for dev’s and the first paragraph explains why.
ready for the pc flame to start and fyi i can prove you all wrong if you start.
as long as they are satisfied with naughty dog it’s a win-win for PC since Naughty Dog’s strongest point is it’s writing and we can just use youtube for that.
tell me about it to be fair they are really good at action scenes, i dont get why everyone else sucks so bad at that sector.
yea they are also overall a great company but it doesn’t make me want to buy a console for it really. for example MGS V’s story felt incomplete but the gameplay is amazing so i would feel i am missing something if it was a console exclusive. Konami haters are not gonna like my comment though probably.
David Cage games are good too for youtube. oh and Until Dawn i don’t know whats with Sony and Interactive movies lol.
so fourth is what?
30 fps
Whooshhhhhhhhh….
why did the peasant cross the road? To see the buildings rendering.
The more EA stays away from my platform of choice, the better.
Nothing but awful ports and dumbed down unfun games for the common denominator, just awful overall.
Bet 18% of that was Sims and Fifa
Electronic Arts. ARTS. Arrrts. If there was ever a name that illustrated a need for some kind of verbal equivalent of social services who come and forcibly take words away if they’re being misused — then again, they do mainly go by “EA” these days, so maybe they quietly changed their name to “Extruding A**eholes” so as not to offend reality. My point is if there ever was a time where artistry was important enough to the company to be eponymous, then that is not a time in which we are currently living! Now, they’re just all about money and being a d*ck about things. Perhaps “EA” now stands for “Expel all. Your money. From your wallet. So that we can have It. And then be a d*ck about It”
that was the last year EA will ever get a dollar from me.
you want a 30 fps lock?
30fps is 6fps too cinematic. They need to dial it back a bit.
obviously if you unlock it the game is run at twice the speed.
most battlefields are 60fps on consoles.
dont tell that to me tell that to those “devs” who argue 60 fps is difficult to do so if its done it should be celebrated and appreciated…..SOMETHING THAT IS THE NORM AND HAS BEEN FOR DECADES.
They should have known this before start making this game that we dont want 30fps cap. did they not watch Totalbiscuit’s video? or not hear how everybody hated RIVAL on pc because of how FPS is tied to game speed?
well its not like this will sell on pc
Racing games are a little bit different – it’s really beneficial to tide physics to your framerate, but at the same time it requires locked framerate. So I’m not surprised at all that they did this on consoles, cause they need every little bit of performance they can squeeze. But it creates a problem on PC where locked framerate is not acceptable. The only solution is basically develop 2 physics engines: one for PC and one for console (they are not 100% different, but they differ a lot) – and this takes time. So I’m not that mad that they delayed PC version. As long as it’s going to be fairly well optimized I’m ok with waiting.
it’s a frostbyte engine iirc. you enable FPS limit by inputting one single command.
Honestly mate that’s no excuse for a very long PC delay, they should’ve removed that lock way back in development, no excuse for delaying one platform when they should delay all platforms in order to provide a fair experience for all day 1.
Not going to going in detail on this statement but there is surely some games that were finished on PC first and held back so that the console versions were ready as well, so why shouldn’t it be the same for PC.
very long? well i didnt know that but still you want a batman arkham knight?
It’s taking 6 months roughly to remove a fps lock?, that to me sounds like it’s on the back burner while they work on the console version, Ghost games is an experienced developer whom if you may ask have remnants of other developers such as Criterion among other plus they have EA and all it’s infinite resources that could easily work on.
As such for the Batman “excuse of optimization” that was given to inexperienced and very small development crew, yes even after they halted sales and worked on it they still stuffed it up, but that is solely on the fact that they took a leaky pipe and wrapped duct tape over the leak instead of redoing the whole pipe work, if my metaphor gets the point across.
So what your saying is your happy that you have to wait months before you can play this game and no I don’t mean the 30fps excuse, I understand a month max but to me it seems like they’re stalling sales in order to boost EA’s financials next quarter.
“remove” no make the game for pc and not a crappy port, sadly yes.
EA is the “devil” alongside Activision but they still see us profitable enough to care.
this year we got Knights of the Fallen Empire instead which is way better than NFS. it is a subjective matter of course but objectively they could use the money on Battlefront or anything else instead and yet they didn’t.
yet they treat PC Gamers (every gamers) with criminals. i was stupid enough to buy DAI, no more EA games, sorry.
Dont worry dice might sucking right now and bioware is candian as “godamn they are becoming sweden 2″…..but ea is looking at ubishaft and they will also make open world games in the near future…i wonder if they will flop and they close down the studio.
I actually rather liked DAI. Nowhere near on par with the original Dragon Age or Witcher 3, but it had some interesting storylines and cool combat mechanics if you played mage.
game was basicly an single player MMO. go to this map collect x amount of shards, collect x amount of herb, etc… yeah it was way better than DA2, graphics were good, story was ok, but i had tons of problems with it, unable to update the game was one of them which made my game unplayable since april. game asked to be activated, i activated it, then it said it needs to be updated, it failed since then. i now use a crack to play it.
EA lose PC sales due to not selling games through Steam.
yes that true.
but at the same time they don’t need to pay to Steam for selling games.
thedt man steam cd get stolen and sold on g2a and other sites liek that..thats why
more theft of steam keys is why. safer on orgin
If they were selling through Steam the sales would be double even triple of what they were through Origin.
exactly this.. Maybe they will decide to come to steam again in the future.
But they would probably get less money because Valve takes 30%.
Simple math:
3*0.7x sales > 1x sales
2.1x sales > 1x sales
They can go F themselves, I aint buying their garbage
???
when they start making their games have better textures yes I mean better textures better lighting a variety of anti-aliasing options. 60 frames per second should not be a standard a standard should be a 144 I could go on and on but for a publisher to say that they care about PC gaming while continuing to have their developers make console ports it’s just another slap to the face of people who spend more money on a GPU then what a console itself is worth
144 fps as a standard is not going to happen anytime soon. The consoles are having trouble with reaching 30 fps. 144 fps is a pipe dream for them. 4k/60fps is a more realistic standard target for high end PC gaming since most games are designed for a slow pace 30 fps gameplay experience.
As I get older my expectations for how games on PC should be just keep going up. Optimization should be key now. But better visuals and not just a higher resolution should be standard as well.
I guess that means PC versions would have to go up in price…. Or they could at least sell a high visual pack separate for people on higher end gaming rigs. I mean I would gladly pay $20 Bucks extra if Visuals Matched my hardware.
PC is not much higher than mobile platforms
…interesting
This is a bit embarrasing for PC gamers in my opinion.
Care to explain? o.O
I expected us to buy less EA crap.
With that I’ll have to agree. :s
Two words: Fifa, Denuvo
While i find that they treat pc games like second class citizens in the nfs case, i prefer a good delay so the game can be played at its full potential. Mind you, there’s going to be a sht ton of bugs but it’ll be 60fps ;).
Yeah right….EA
Here you go EA, some nice GIF from PC community:
http://1.images.southparkstudios.com/blogs/southparkstudios.com/files/2014/09/1801_5a.gif
Every Publisher who delay PC version are doing this to make consoles sales grow.
So the sweet words “more time is needed to ensure that the game is as polished as possible” are Totally lies,bullsh*,crap!
They think the more consoles nerds&noobs will buy their games,the more money they will have in the pockets.
The love for PC was long time ago,now they play dirty.Lets play togheter dirty,shall we?
The education and information about what publishers do against PC platform need to be do it by all of us.
lol first rate hardware second class citizen…lol
At least their porting on Pc are not garbage. Better than Warner Sh*** and Ubitroll.
Yet they piss on us…
So much for the PC community sticking it to EA. All that whining hasn’t done a thing.