a) there’s almost no one to pull away from naval, if they’re making $6000 gross per premium, that’s not a big team, and/or
b) making a profit in naval is not particularly important to Gaijin’s bottom line.
In a bricks-and-mortar store, if one product outsells the other product over 100-1, and yet you still give them both the same amount of storefront and shelf space (F/A-18C and HMS Nelson got the same amount of store promotion), there’s concerns other than profitability at play there (like taking a bit of a loss to try to stay in a niche market with a current commercial competitor cough WoWS cough).
Probably but that doesnt automatically increase profitability and again doesnt automatically mean that one product gains the profitability of another.
What reality lol? You made 2 claims based on nothing but your own opinion, 0 valuable data and a gross misunderstanding of what youre actually talking about. There is no reality here, just MotorolaCROs unfounded mindfarts.
Which is
A. not the point Motorola tried to make and
B. still grossly oversimplified. The storefront argument is moot, because there is no limited space for digital products and like i said there is no automatism that means that stopping investments into product 1 means the same money is being spent on product 2 if theyre completely different products for different customers. We know that naval is vastly less important than Ground and air for Gaijins profits but that doesnt mean that Air+Ground is definitely more profitable overall than Air+Ground+Naval.
No, but higher tier premiums in general are more popular for obvious reasons.
The main point of Naval going down was to use those resources for something else, like improving stuff in other places. Making things better for larger groups of people definitely has impact on their willingness to spend.
And for the gazillionth time: Pulling resources from product a doesnt automatically translate to the same profits going to product b.
We get it, you dont like naval and you dont like anime girls but please for the love of god dont make claims about the profitability of them if you have 0 data and even less expertise about these things.
Its still a semi-realistic game about planes shooting down other planes, and tanks killing tanks and ships killing ships.
Just think of these as modern Pinups. There’s some historical pinups that cannot be added to the game for age restricted reasons.
In general ? Yeah they are.
Grinding out the TT is basically one of the most important reason they are bought.
What ?
As Bruce said before, Naval premiums need to cost Gaijin much less money to create than Ground/Air ones in order to make up for the difference in sales. Obviously, average Ground/Air premium records much more sales and probably costs nearly as much to make, which makes them far more profitable than average Naval premiums.
That said, resources from creating TT ships could be redirected to making Air/Ground TT vehicles or to quality control or anything else for that matter that’d make the game better. So yeah, they’d end up earning more while improving the game for the vast majority of players at the same time.
This is perfectly tied to what Bruce said before, extracting profit from Naval might not even be a main goal for Gaijin, as they have some competition to defeat in that niche market.
Says the dude that thinks Naval premiums are bringing anywhere near the profits Air/Ground ones do lmao.
Omfg.
Are you purposefully oblivious or are you genuinely not understanding what ive been trying to explain to you in the simplest of terms for the past dozen comments?
I do not think naval premiums bring in the same amount of money air or ground ones do. Ive been trying to explain to you 2 that they are different products for different customers which means that taking away resources from naval does not translate into the money going from there to ground. Someone who wants to buy a naval premium is not going to buy a air premium instead if there is no naval premium to buy.
Gaijin supporting naval and selling stuff there catches a customer base that is not caught with air and ground just as the senrai premiums speak to a customer base interested in that type of content. Thats what i was trying to explain to you with my apple example. Someone interested in an ipad is not going to buy an iphone just because there is no ipad so by offering both apple catches more customers overall and therefore makes more profit overall it doesnt mean that the ipad is in itself more profitable than the iphone. The notion that taking resources from naval would result in a profit increase in the other 2 modes is a complete hypothetical that, like i said before, people that are vastly more educated and intelligent than you contemplate for a living.
I hope that was clear and simple enough so even you understand it, because i can genuinely not simplify it more.
That’s the thing.
There are much, much more people wanting to buy Air/Ground premiums than Naval ones. You wouldn’t be overflowing the demand by creating a couple more Air/Ground premiums per year either.
iPad market actually has some people in it in comparison to iPhone market, which can’t be said for Naval vs Air/Ground.
It’s far from hypothetical considering the ratio between players in Air/Ground and Naval is like 100:1.
As you’ve been told multiple times, not all products are completely profit driven through their entire lifetime, which is something you completely ignored throughout the discussion.
Complete conjecture. People dont have unlimited money so creating multiple products competing with itself rarely makes sense especially when you can create a different product catching another market.
Irrelevant. It was an example to explain the concept of different customer bases and different demand for products to you, not a numbers comparison.
Its completely hypothetical which is precisely why i have been ignoring that statement the entire time. You havent got the slightest bit of evidence for naval being unprofitable or the Senrai tanks being too much effort for their sales numbers, which were your initial claims. I dont have the slightest desire to interact with the fantasies of someone who has neither data to back them up nor expertise or education in that field.
People don’t have unlimited money, but implying that WT community already reached the absolute maximum for their spending is naive.
You can create various different types of premiums that can, rather than solely competing, complement each other, like adding MBTs, light tanks and AAs. People that buy MBTs might also pick up an AA or a light tank with it as well, which is something that’s not even possible currently in plenty of tiers.
Makes sense if that market consists of anyone.
It’s definitely relevant in this case. Apple abandoning sizeable iPad market is a completely different story from Gaijin abandoning Naval that has very, very limited population. If a specific market you’re in makes up like 1% of your profits and customer base, then it’s pretty safe to say profits from that market alone are irrelevant and you might be still in there just for vanity and market share reasons.
Do you think nVidia is still making entry-mid level GPUs because they care about profits there ? Do you think they wouldn’t accept some losses there if they get to keep their market share and vanity ?
That said, regular spender is much more likely to buy MBT, light and AA combo than just buying 3x iPhones, as former is actually built around various products complementing each other.
Oh yeah, it’s surely hypothetical that companies will fight for market share and vanity.
Not a single company did that ever in history of business.
Yeah and you can even create premiums for a completely different type of vehicle getting money from even more players and opening a new market. Insane, I know.
Are they unprofitable? Because if they aren’t then there’s no reason to throw away the infrastructure and initial investment associated with it, just like with naval.
Ofc they do but you’ve still not provided a single bit of evidence that naval or senrai are unprofitable and therefore pure vanity investments except for your uneducated opinion.
So for all intents and purposes: as long as there is not a bit of proof that any of that is unprofitable it’s stupid to assume that it is considering the still ongoing investments Gaijin is putting in.
Why is it not possible to just buy the tanks without the anime stuff on top? It is breaking my immersion into the game and it is a deal breaker. Same for the anime pillows there should be a toggle inside the game to turn them off specifically.
Market that is open for years now without ever housing relevant amounts of players.
Cost of creating vehicles don’t scale up and down based on popularity of the mode they’re going into.
Them being profitable or not doesn’t change the fact consumer GPUs have been and most likely always will be a very sizeable market they can return to, so cutting off that market share and vanity makes no sense either way, as vast majority of their money is earned elsewhere.
Unlike consumer GPUs, Naval is all but a very sizeable market.
If they were purely driven by profitmaxing, completely cutting off certain segments of consumer GPU market to make room in manufacturing facilities for their AI products would make sense, as they’d surely make more money off of that but it would come at a cost of market share reduction elsewhere.
Again, continuous investment in a product that makes little to no money can be done for reasons that aren’t directly tied to profitability of a said product.
Microsoft reportedly sold various versions of Xbox at a loss, basically buying market share and getting that loss back from somewhere else in the chain.
Yes precisely and you don’t even have proof that naval is unprofitable in the first place so your claim that naval is just freeloading is double stupid.
Let’s face it dude, you have nothing that would actually remotely constitute as proof and you don’t have any clue outside of that either. You just made 2 stupid, unsubstantiated claims based on your personal dislike of naval and Senrai and you’re too proud to admit that.
You mean what has been happening for the past two years?
Sony did the same with the ps3. The difference is one company shot itself in the foot early on (Sony) and the other later (microsoft).
Edit
If you’re going to make an argument on resource management vs cost, an aircraft and tank take considerably less time and resources to bring to an ‘acceptable level’ of quality vs basically any warship with the exception of some patrol vessels.
Thus the time vs resource margin for profit is higher for the former. Before taking into account the playerbase size for each branch of the game.
Naval’s profit margins overall may be slim but that doesn’t make it ‘unprofitable’.
It does, however, raise the question of if the resources are better spent elsewhere.
How is that stupid when it’s obvious that something has to support the continuous development of that unprofitable product. Xbox consoles freeloaded for literal decades and weren’t shut down.
Naval has no indication that it’s self sustainable.
Yeah, you aren’t accepting any amount of circumstantial evidence you get from people and you’ll just keep repeating the same old gib actual proof from Gaijin as a convenient way out. No one can provide you with that so you’ll always end up being “right”, what a smart cookie you are.
It’s like you find someone split in half and instead of accepting they’re dead you end up saying something along the lines of: “Uhmm, akshually guys, they aren’t dead until we get the official report, so they’re still alright, trust me”.
I mean, dreams are always free of charge so you’re free to do whatever you like.
