PS4 worldwide sales top 91.6 million, Marvel’s Spider-Man sales top nine million units

PlayStation 4 has cumulatively sold through more than 91.6 million units worldwide to consumers as of December 31, 2018, Sony Interactive Entertainment announced.

Here are some additional latest numbers:

PlayStation 4 hardware sold through more than 5.6 million units worldwide during the 2018 holiday season.
PlayStation 4 games sold through more than 50.7 million units worldwide during the 2018 holiday season, which adds up to a total of 876 million PlayStation 4 games cumulatively sold through worldwide as of December 31, 2018.
Marvel’s Spider-Man, launched in September 2018, has cumulatively sold through more than nine million copies worldwide as of November 25, 2018.

“Thanks to the continued support from our fans during the holiday season, we are pleased to announce that PS4 has reached 91.6 million units globally,” Sony Interactive Entertainment president and CEO John Kodera said in a press release. “We are also happy to announce that the monthly active users of PlayStation Network continues to show strong growth, and has surpassed 90 million as of end of November 2018.”

UCForce1612d ago

Well, Exclusive do matter after all. Congratulations, Sony !

Purrfection1612d ago

Who said they didn't or are you just trying to be sarcastic for attention?

Dark_Knightmare21612d ago

Are you trying to be serious or just being dense for attention?

travestyj1612d ago Show
bluefox7551612d ago

Lots of people said that when Xbox started sharing their games with pc.

bouzebbal1612d ago

thanks to amazing SP games for the most part, and the best is yet to come.

Purrfection1612d ago (Edited 1612d ago )

"Lots of people said that when Xbox started sharing their games with pc"

Why do you care? What is your bigger priority, enjoying Microsoft published titles or letting everyone know you like the PC more than an Xbox?.Microsoft is a valued company of a 1 trillion dollars, do you really think they care if you play on Windows 10 or an Xbox? Do you not see Sony's reluctance to do console crossplay but are more than happy to do PC and PS4 crossplay? Didn't Sony publish Street Fighter V and it's on PC but not on Switch and Xbox One? How many PS4 titles are also on PC? Sure some only use the PS4 for exclusives but the majority still don't and that is why Microsoft offers it on both platforms.

My goodness some of you certainly act like children with your toys. I've never seen so many try so hard to attack Xbox. You also need to consider each company and what their prioritties are. In the past Playstation was not a key division, over the years as TV"s and other electronics dwindled they streamlined the company and put more emphasis on gaming. Nintendo is mostly a gaming company. Microsoft makes most of cloud services and Window products. Now they see Xbox as part of Windows but every day you all want to make it about Xbox versus PS4 versus Switch. Things have changed over the years, it is no longer just about console sales versus other consoles. Microsoft is not investing in studios to just sell you Xbox systems.

Foxhound9221612d ago

First time on N4G? Welcome.

The Wood1612d ago

First of all the replies to question about who said. You've been living under a rock if you think exclusives don't matter wasn't the mantra of many. You'd often hear downplays like 'The best selling game on ps is a multiplat' therefore multiplats are more important. . Well the fact MS are now starting to buy studios isn't to make multiplats . . .It's for exclusives and the apologists now have to change their narrative. If you'd been here long enough you'd have observed this.

Secondly. . . .this is n4g. .if you can't take a bit of banter or ribbing you should vacate. You seem just as invested in defending the weak as those who attack.

2pacalypsenow1612d ago

The massive amounts of people here who say "Exclusives hurt the industry, they prevent people from playing them if they don't buy PlayStation"

Funny nobody says squat about Nintendo exclusives.

darthv721612d ago

@perrfection, you should know by now most of UC's comments are for attention.

I kid, I kid

on topic, congrats to sony. The wii is close to falling and then the grand daddy ps1

Ceaser98573611612d ago

"How many PS4 titles are also on PC"

None, because It won't benefit Sony and also thanks to piracy.. Play anywhere benefits MS via Win 10 which is a MS product...

1612d ago
rainslacker1612d ago

Love when people feign ignorance as if these console war discussions don't exist. Either means you're new, oblivious, or actively ignoring what's being said.

starchild1611d ago

It's BS. I've been coming to this site for around 14 years and I'm as active as anybody. Aside from a couple fanboy trolls I haven't heard the vast majority of people claim that exclusives don't matter.

What people have said, myself included, is that things other than exclusives also matter.

+ Show (11) more repliesLast reply 1611d ago
hulk_bash19871612d ago

Damn, 91.6M units sold WW is amazing and those Spiderman numbers are great. Congrats to Sony and Insomniac, all well deserved milestones.

rainslacker1612d ago

No doubt. About the only thing that could probably be a better exclusive to get would have been GTA or COD.

Saigon1612d ago

But yet people are worried about them being quiet...pffft...get out of here. Great job Sony!!!

Longadog1612d ago

exclusives does matter a bit

but at the end of the day, has anyone from Sony won the crème de la crème of gaming..

..People of the Year..

UCForce1612d ago (Edited 1612d ago )

A bit ? Nope. It’s huge important factor of gaming industry.

Dark_Knightmare21612d ago

I’ll take them releasing goty winning games almost every year over some exec that I don’t know winning people of the year

S2Killinit1612d ago

I see what you did there lol

RauLeCreuset1612d ago

Ah my N4G peeps. Your inability to detect satire absent a "/s" will forever be a source of amusement.

ArchangelMike1612d ago

I think Cory Barlog won the award for Person of the Year...

I watched his acceptance speech... he cried and everything...

rainslacker1612d ago (Edited 1612d ago )

LOL. I see people don't notice sarcasm

I don't play people myself. But, Spencer loves to play the Xbox user base. He's been doing it for around 4 years now.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1612d ago
badz1491612d ago

so it's true that the PS4 is on a decline this year by a little over 2mil units from last year. but Sony is doing a good job keeping the momentum this high in the 5th year and the PS4 is yet to permanently dropped to the magic $199 price point. I fully expect that they will drop the price this year and the PS4 will keep selling and 100mil by June is looking very likely.

to Nintendo fanboys who still believe that the Switch will do 20mil this year, they should just look at this number and see why it's almost impossible for the Switch to archive it. but there's nothing wrong coming a close 2nd behind the PS4.

ArchangelMike1612d ago

I don't think anyone is a "close second" to the Playstation. Xbox don't release sales numbers anymore, becasue they were being left in the dust. I don't think Sony will officially reduce the price of the PS4 until the PS5 releases.

Saigon1612d ago

If I am not mistaken, I seen a commercial of the PS4 on sale for 199$

NarutoFox1612d ago

PS4 is already making an impact in 2019

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 1611d ago
GaboonViper1612d ago

"SP games no longer have the same impact" Phil Spencer

UCForce1612d ago

I hope he learnt his lesson for saying like that.

1-pwnsause-11612d ago

That’s why Microsoft is buying studios now, well, partly why, hopefully they let them do single player experiences as well.

Kribwalker1612d ago

You guys obviously haven’t learned how to properly read yet, so you obviously haven’t learned your lesson.

“The audience for those big story-driven games... I won’t say it isn’t as large, but they’re not as consistent,” says Spencer. “You’ll have things like Zelda or Horizon Zero Dawn that’ll come out, and they’ll do really well, but they don’t have the same impact that they used to have, because the big service-based games are capturing such a large amount of the audience. Sony’s first-party studios do a lot of these games, and they’re good at them, but outside of that, it’s difficult – they’re become more rare; it’s a difficult business decision for those teams, you’re fighting into more headwind.

“We’ve got to understand that if we enjoy those games, the business opportunity has to be there for them. I love story-based games. I just finished [LucasArts-inspired RPG] Thimbleweed Park – I thought it was a fantastic game. Inside was probably my game of last year. As an industry, I want to make sure both narrative-driven single-player games and service-based games have the opportunity to succeed. I think that’s critical for us.””


Again He wants both to succeed

UCForce1612d ago

@Kribwalker I still remembered what Phil Spencer said. And yet, I look at Phil Spencer face losing his faith on Single Player games. And you keep agreeing with Phil Spencer in every single words. You said we should learn our lesson, but what about you ? Have you learn anything about yourself ?

bluefox7551612d ago

Even if he does, I'm sure they'll screw that up too just like they do their other games.

UltraNova1612d ago


This is probably the 20th time you post that quote. I'm fairly certain you are truly unable to filter political talk from the actual truth of what people in Phil's position have to say or you are simply choosing not to.

Xbox was losing big time. They had almost no exclusives when the competition was literally bombarding their customers with them and raking in the mighty $$$ at the same time. They were criticised constantly about their lack of 1st party support and no love for story based SP games. They had to react. They were desperate. That's why they shifted focus, full time, to two "differentiating" areas mainly: BC and GaaS (gamepass was not a know element at the time of the above quote). MS did what they had to do in order to hang on any shred of relevance they had with their dwindling console crowd. I do understand that, as I understand Phil's position and why he has to say the things he says all the time. He is simply ordered to.

Now to the core of the discussion - does MS(Phil) truly believe SP only games are viable? No they absolutely do not because they refuse to invest in them and it shows. They believe GaaS is. Do they want threir fans/customers to know that for certain? No they do not because they'd risk loosing some of them who appreciate high quality 1st party SP games and want to avoid more negative mindset.

What MS/Phil truly meant when he said that quote was this: We believe SP games do not have long term cash making potential and that they carry an extremely high risk which is unacceptable by our monolithic Corporate standards. We do not like risk, especially the creative kind. Current times have allowed us to part with that risk. But we understand many people still like SP games, for now, so we wont say what we truly think and just pretent to be neutral and support both SP and GaaS in order to keep the xbox boat afloat for a little while longer while we hide our minimal support behind 3rd party.

And all that is proven by the same part of the quote you choose to focus on "As an industry, I want to make sure both narrative-driven single-player games and service-based games have the opportunity to succeed"

Sorry but SP games do not need Phil's/MS support to succeed. They have succeeded for decades now. Its GaaS that needs to be provided the opportunity to succeed as the relativity new entry in console gaming and the ultimate money making poster child of every corporate suit out there.

bouzebbal1612d ago (Edited 1612d ago )

wait til you see crackdown 3 and sea of thieves, the best game RARE has ever made.

/s (in case)

Razzer1612d ago

"big story-driven games"

"I just finished [LucasArts-inspired RPG] Thimbleweed Park"

"Inside was probably my game of last year."

Seems pretty clear that Spencer was diminishing the role of "big story-driven games". He references two smaller indie games as examples of successful narrative games though? When it comes to the big narratives he says "they don’t have the same impact that they used to have, because the big service-based games are capturing such a large amount of the audience". That is hardly Spencer endorsing big narratives. Quite the opposite.

However, hopefully he has reversed on that with all the studios he is building/buying. I don't look at Ninja Theory as a studio who is going to deliver "service-based games". So what he said then, hopefully he has realized how foolish it was to make such statements and realized that all the services in the world don't matter if you can't provide core gamers the games they clearly want.

Kribwalker1612d ago


you are gonna pull a muscle if you keep reaching that far.

Instead of making up some crazy meaning to the interview like you are trying, read it literally and look at the year and a half after the interview. He is doing everything he said and everything you are saying he hasn’t been doing.
Example: He purchased 7 new studios, 5 of which are strictly single player focussed. How have they continued to not invest?

“They had to react. They were desperate. That's why they shifted focus, full time, to two "differentiating" areas mainly: BC and GaaS (gamepass was not a know element at the time of the above quote). ”
Gamepass was announced 2 months before this interview

“What MS/Phil truly meant when he said that quote was this: We believe SP games do not have long term cash making potential and that they carry an extremely high risk which is unacceptable by our monolithic Corporate standards. We do not like risk, especially the creative kind”

Sea of thieves was a massive creative risk. Buying 5 single player studios and telling them they have the freedom and financial backing to create what they want (as told by obsidian, ninja theory and inxile in post purchase interviews) is a big risk.

Everything that has been going on with xbox and their investments the past year and a half prove what Phil was saying in that interview and the spin you are trying to put on it is amazing.

Chevalier1612d ago


No actually those purchases do prove Ultranova right actually maybe you are fo obtuse to actually understand that. If they really supported SP games to the extent they did then why are they making those purchases in year 17? Why did it takd almost 6 years into the generation to even really start? All the hyperbole you offer does NOT change the facts.

You can make every excuse you want for MS, but, the results and facts of what has transpired for largely the whole Xbox generation does not change. Its funny to see you're false narrative though. Look at how many SP games both Nintendo and Sony release and then look at MS and there is a huge disparity. Its not even close in any way and yet here you are lining up one excuse after the other. Sorry its truly idiotic to ignore the facts as hard as you do.

RauLeCreuset1612d ago (Edited 1612d ago )

Here's the thing. Phil's actually in a position to choose what he wants to push or what he wants to take the wind out of the sails of. It was a disappointing response by the head of Xbox to the big single player offerings Nintendo and Playstation had out. It was a lukewarm response. Imagine had they thrown such tepid endorsement behind the cloud. "Well, the infrastructure isn't at a place where it's really worth implementing at the moment from a game development perspective." No. They told people the cloud was so great it would multiply the power of their Xboxes. The same goes for Day 1 exclusives on Game Pass, digital games, backwards compatibility and more that MS hypes or pushes without talking about marketshare or return on investment to undermine them.

Update: How could I forget the X? Most Xbox gamers don't have one. That doesn't stop them from marketing like most of their players do. You aren't going to see Phil undermining the X by talking about how most Xbox purchases aren't X.

RauLeCreuset1612d ago (Edited 1612d ago )

It's also worth noting the little observed financial incentive to push multiplayer over single player Phil mentioned in the same interview. Cloud servers. Phil spoke of how their cloud rental service makes it feasible for smaller dev teams to do multiplayer games, by reducing previously prohibitive server costs.

Hardiman1612d ago


"What MS/Phil truly meant when he said that quote was this: We believe SP games do not have long term cash making potential and that they carry an extremely high risk which is unacceptable by our monolithic Corporate standards. We do not like risk, especially the creative kind. Current times have allowed us to part with that risk."

This^^ so much this! Why is it so hard for certain people to understand what he was saying?!?!

You are also right in that SP games most certainly do not need GAAS to succeed because they have been and still are!

The main thing for me is if everything was subscription based I don't see games like Spider-Man, GOW, HZD, TLOU2 etc being made because they don't fit the model and of the creative/financial risk. Sure those games have proven themselves but imagine M$ as the industry leader. There's no way we get the God of War we got last April, no way! It would've been something more like Accension. No way GG would be allowed to chase their creative desires for what Horizon became.

Even with them buying up studios like Ninja Theory, I have little faith because they bought up promising studios before and now they are either a shell of their former selves or they are closed!

One embraces creativity, challenges each other with each new release and pushes narrative driven predominantly SP interactive media to new heights. While the other does not, in fact it's the exact opposite.

Many of us were at one time Xbox customers and supporters but the last decade has shown what they are and what they want the industry to become. The bitch of it is they have the capital to hire the talent and fund some amazing experiences but as you stated, they just can't except the risk!

yomfweeee1612d ago

Krib is so delusion where Spencer puts out a whole thing about SP not being worth the costs, but he takes a single line out of that and ignores the rest.

- Audience is not consistent
- They don't have the impact that used to have.
- Service games are taking up more of the audience.
- Sony is good at them, but it is difficult.
- It is a difficult business decision and you're fighting into the headwind
- The business need has to be there
- I loved these small indie games.

He completely makes the argument about it not being worth it. Him saying at the end "I want them to have an opportunity to succeed" doesn't mean much when he just listed all the negatives.

rainslacker1612d ago (Edited 1612d ago )


Sony's SP games have been pretty consistent this gen in terms of sales. Actually seem to be getting better with each release....although I suspect Days Gone won't hit as high. Probably more people are playing Spider-Man, and potentially some of Sony's older games as time goes on, as have played SoT or any other MP game from MS.

Spencer's quote was to justify why MS was focusing on MP games more. While he may like nothing but SP games, his excuse was to mitigate the criticism that MS wasn't making as many as they used to. Instead of trying to make games, and make them a thing, he used an excuse to try and explain away why MS wasn't even trying. His quote was the same BS drivel that publishers have been pushing for most of last gen and this to try and say why MP was becoming more popular, or to try and sway the public to care about MP games.

How come you want people to read Spencer's quotes literally, but Sony makes comments about why they aren't doing cross play, which is even more direct and also BS, and you can cut through the BS like a red hot knife through melted butter. Spencer who has been accused of making false promises, and comes across like a snake oil sales man should be taken at his word, but anyone else has to be scrutinized under an electron miscroscope? Makes sense.

Purrfection1611d ago (Edited 1611d ago )

You have a PS4, do you ned an Xbox too or is this just concern trolling? I really don't get this fascination on this site about what MS is doing to the point of trashing them every day. If they are not giving you what you want there are options, such as a PS4. isn't that enough?

Article is about PS4 sales. The reaction should be awesome job Sony.

Instead it's a forum to keep saying take note Microsoft, you're doing a lousy job MS, why would anyone buy an Xbox, Phil is all talk, they don't have real exclusives.

At what point do you just forget about them and stop talking about them?

+ Show (12) more repliesLast reply 1611d ago
gangsta_red1612d ago

"I believe the traditional single-player game experience will be gone in three years.” – Mark Cerny

UCForce1612d ago (Edited 1612d ago )

So you want us to give up the fight so easily ? That quote was from 2011. But after the successful of PS4 and great Single Player games, I think it changed Mark Cerny mind. I hope it will change Phil Spencer mind one day.

gangsta_red1612d ago

I want you to realize that both parties have similar quotes when it comes to single player games.

But for some reason you and others like to pretend it was just Phil Spencer, not to mention either misquoting or leaving things out of context.

Just showing you how it looks.

Gameseeker_Frampt1612d ago

Seems like you don't understand that quote or are deliberately trying to make a false comparison. Phil Spencer was talking about single player games while Mark Cerny was talking about the single-player experience.

"Right now you sit in your living room and you're playing a game by yourself – we call it the sp mission or the single-player campaign. In a world with Facebook I just don't think that's going to last."

Cerny pointed to 2009 action RPG Demon's Souls as an example of the single-player campaign of the future.

"We're already seeing the wall starting to crumble a bit," he said. "Demon's Souls, even though on one level it's a single-player game, as you're walking through the world you're seeing the ghosts of everybody who died in that world via the internet. You can leave messages for them. They can leave messages for you. There's actually a boss you fight in that game which is controlled by another player.

"We're talking five, 10 years out. I believe three years from now, if you aren't doing that, you are being criticized in your reviews for your lack of innovation."

Shuhei Yoshida then went on to say "all games will have social elements because hardware will be connected." Mark Cerny then developed the PS4 with the Share Button and the interconnected game experience.

Rimeskeem1612d ago

Mark Cerney was not the head of PlayStation though, he is a developer and created the console, that is all.

UCForce1612d ago (Edited 1612d ago )

I know that. But the thing is, Sony have pushing Single Player games from left and right more than MS doing. Sony will keep doing so. Like I said, Phil Spencer should learn from them. And you should know better. Again, Exclusive do matter, but you want it to be shunned.

Nitrowolf21612d ago (Edited 1612d ago )

The problem with both statements made from both parties is that they’re being taken out of context.

Cerny was addressing more so the experience and how social aspects has changed the single player game

Phil was comparing how gamers were more likely to go back to replay a single player over and over back in the days to today where more people are hooked on the idea of Online play. I mean he’s not entirely wrong about that, more people are inclined to replay a multiplayer game versus a single player game just due to that fact that online connectivity makes being able to connect with anyone possible.

This issue however, is that Phil’s thinking lead to a more focused online centric gaming space that in the end has “harmed” them whereas Cerny thinking lead to a more social space (IE Share button in the ps4) where people are sharing their SP experience )and everything else) with others versus just themselves

OffRoadKing1612d ago

Mark Cerny - game designer, programmer, producer, consultant.

Phil Spencer - Executive Vice President of Gaming at Microsoft

One of these things is not like the other. Nice try though.

1612d ago
Godmars2901612d ago (Edited 1612d ago )

Thing is, has Sony repeated such a statement at least 2-3 a gen?

Would say that is MS's standby statement, but of course they never standby it.

1612d ago
Sharky2311612d ago (Edited 1612d ago )

What if he’s saying that it could be a totally different style of single player game? There’s a big difference in what he said and what Phil said.

johndoe112111612d ago

Seeing now that you've been called out on your obvious deceptiveness by Gameseeker, will you respond or are you just going to pretend not to see his response?

gangsta_red1612d ago


What's funny is how most will accept not only a misquote but half a quote that's out of context from Phil Spencer but then go into damage control for Mark Cerny.

"The audience for those big story-driven games…I won’t say it isn’t as large, but they’re not as consistent. You’ll have things like The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild or Horizon Zero Dawn that’ll come out, and they’ll do really well, but they don’t have the same impact that they used to have because the big service-based games are capturing such a large amount of the audience. "

Where's the lie?

"As an industry, I want to make sure both narrative-driven single-player games and service-based games have the opportunity to succeed. I think that’s critical for us.”

Yeah, but let's all pretend Spencer just said SP games don't have an impact and leave it at that with no argument.

UCForce1612d ago

And yet, you still making excuses and always follow logic. So I say it again, should we give up a fight ? You need to take your logic away for once moments and think what is right and what is wrong. I’m sorry, but you take the logic way too much in your head. I learnt from this :

Imalwaysright1612d ago (Edited 1612d ago )


I don't want to enter in this conversation about who said what but I have to say that to me Cerny was the most important person for the Playstation brand in this entire generation. The reasoning that Sony had that consoles had to be difficult to develop for was mind numbingly stupid and all it did was hurt developers especially japanese devs. Cerny threw all that away and as result it didn't just help the Playstation brand but also this industry as whole. He deserves a lot more credit than he is given.

Gameseeker_Frampt1612d ago


The problem is that you continue to not understand or distort what both Spencer and Cerny are saying. When Spencer says "but they don’t have the same impact that they used to have because the big service-based games are capturing such a large amount of the audience" how does one explain that with 9 million sales Spider-Man would be the 4th best selling PS3 game and and the 5th best selling PS2 game? If big service-based games are such a good business opportunity, explain how Evolve, Titanfall, Battleborn, Lawbreakers, Sea of Thieves, State of Decay 2, and all the Fortnite clones have failed so badly commercially?

The issue that people have with Phil Spencer's quote is that he mistakenly thinks that it is an either-or situation. Single player game sales in 2018 have not suffered because Fortnite has been successful and that because gamers are not some homogeneous mob that all want the same thing. Problem is Phil Spencer thinks that we all are and since he has made that quote has been serving us multiplayer after multiplayer game - all which have failed to improve XBox's position and most have been failures.

Also, in the future try to pick a better website when you link quotes. Halo 5 never had 16.5 million players since it never passed 5 million in sales. It is quite humorous if you read about how they come up with that number.

bluefox7551612d ago (Edited 1612d ago )

Actions speak louder than words. Also, as the other guy pointed out, you don't understand the quote apparently.

Godmars2901612d ago

The lie "lies" in that except from early on MS failed to put any real effort into SP, and even then when they did it was often derivative. They went from attempts at high concepts, a planned trilogy tile based on a sci-fi author which only ended up getting canceled, to pick ups like ME and KOTOR which they then let go, to things like Sea of Thieves. Riding names and hype but not really putting anything into them.

Mr_Writer851612d ago (Edited 1612d ago )

@gangster Red.

That's some reaching there bud.

A) Sony are still producing single player games. And plenty of them, when was the last SP only game a MS studio developed or MS published? My guess is Quantum Break?

B) Cerny is a producer, game designer and hardware architect, not an executive, he has no sway on the people who run Sony.

C) He said that in 2011, so he got it wrong. Then again he was only offering an opinion, you could argue, that due to Spencers actions. That he is offering a reason why they don't.

A reason and an opinion (or even prediction) are not the same.

Hope this helps.

OffRoadKing1612d ago


"I don't want to enter in this conversation about who said what", proceeds to enter the conversation. lol

I never said Cerny wasn't important to Playstation simply that he is not on the same level in terms of hierarchy and company decision making as Spencer is.