Quantcast
Locked: 3rd party sales math games!

Forums - Sales Discussion - 3rd party sales math games!

Kwaad said: 1. The fact almost all TVs are LCD/Plasma now. Wii looks noticebly worse on them. Meaning in 2 years when CRTs are gone. You will have to buy used TVs to get the best graphics out of your Wii. 2. Have you seen 300? at the movies? The trailer looks better at 1080p than the movie looks at the theater. (this is sheer detail. 1080p has more detail than a film theater) 3. I dont know anyone who has experienced HDTV at home, that a HDTV is *not* on their 'to buy' list. I watch Greys Anatomy, Ugly Betty, Men in Trees, and such in HD. When I go visit my parrents... they dont have HD. And I watch it in SD. And I sit there for the first 15 minutes. Cussing saying. "This looks like CRAP. CRAP!!!! Get a real TV." When my 26inch HDTV looks better than their 27inch SDTV from 10feet. You can Notice the diffrence... that far away... It is a MAJOR diffrence. 1080p is the future of HD. But in all honesty, I dont care if it's there yet or not. 1080p is what the *new* digital theaters run at. They look 2x better than a film theater. Well not quite 1080p They are 68pixels taller. I feel HD will be very imporant starting next year. 2007 is the year of HD... at least that's what every retailer, and manufacturer is saying. 720p is enough for me. Why the Wii cant do it. I dont know.
1.) Most new TVs are LCD or Plasma but most people only upgrade their TV every 5 to 10 years; we should see 50% of households have HDTVs in 2010 or 2011 ... 2.) I haven't seen 300 ... It may be pretty but I actually like plot and acting ... 3.) My brother has a 1080p HDTV and I have a 720p HDTV, I have seen 1080p and I'm in no rush to move away from DVD quality movies/games ... The Wii will run into trouble when HD-DVD or Blu-Ray sales start to surpass DVD sales; which, if these formats are adopted at the same rate as DVD was, will mean that the Wii will be in troulble in 2011 or 2012 ...



Around the Network

http://www.forbes.com/2006/12/19/ps3-xbox360-costs-tech-cx_rr_game06_1219expensivegames.html Many people have been complaining about the $60 price tag for next-gen console games. Forbes takes time to explain why. You can read their article here. Art/Design $15 Programming and Engineering $12 Retail $ 12 Console owner fee $7 Marketing $4 Market Development Fund $3 Manufacturing Costs, Packaging $3 Licensing $3 Publisher Profit $1 Distributor: $1 Corporate Costs: $.20 Hardware Development



I guess it's just my area then (near Flint, Michigan) but our regular stores have about 60/40 in favor of HDTV's but guess which sell faster? :p



Nobody is crazy enough to accuse me of being sane.

Kwaad said: 2. Have you seen 300? at the movies? The trailer looks better at 1080p than the movie looks at the theater. (this is sheer detail. 1080p has more detail than a film theater)
This quote, above all else, CLEARLY shows how clueless you are. Film has a FAR FAR FAR higher resolution than 1080P Film is analog so there are no real "pixels." However, based on converted measures, a 35mm frame has 3 to 12 million pixels, depending on the stock, lens, and shooting conditions. An HD frame has 2 million pixels, measured using 1920 x 1080 scan lines. With this difference, 35mm appears vastly superior to HD



Quantum Tarantino said: Kwaad said: 2. Have you seen 300? at the movies? The trailer looks better at 1080p than the movie looks at the theater. (this is sheer detail. 1080p has more detail than a film theater) This quote, above all else, CLEARLY shows how clueless you are. Film has a FAR FAR FAR higher resolution than 1080P Film is analog so there are no real "pixels." However, based on converted measures, a 35mm frame has 3 to 12 million pixels, depending on the stock, lens, and shooting conditions. An HD frame has 2 million pixels, measured using 1920 x 1080 scan lines. With this difference, 35mm appears vastly superior to HD
You saying that amuses me. Yes, film is higher quality. However to make it proper focus/display/colors it is hard. http://www.vgcharts.org/forum/thread.php?id=568 Read that thread and what I say. I'm not gonna go into it here. You are barking up the wrong tree. Why is 'digital' movie theaters superior to 'film' movie theaters then? You answer me that, and you'll prove I am right. And if you wanna get real smart. Prove 'film' theaters look worse than 'digital' 1080p is higher quality than a film movie theater.



PSN ID: Kwaad


I fly this flag in victory!

Around the Network

this thread has strayed so far away from kwaad's original intention it's not even funny. we're comparing PS3/wii and perhaps 360 sales of same-titled games, not exclusives, since, you can't directly compare them. it's very hard to come up with numbers--every negotiation is different. to say the developer gets a cut of $18/game i doubt makes sense, since usually the developer gets paid upfront, and depending on the deal, gets a certain cut AFTER the game sells enough to make a profit. and then there the distribution costs, marketing costs, packaging, etc etc etc. plus who knows how much really goes into a game. it's impossible to know unless you've worked in the industry, and even then every situation is different. still, it's fun to speculate. $60--$12 markup for retailers sounds about right (20%). video games i think is known to have lower markup than a lot of other merchandises. $8.6 mil average: games like gundam certainly exceed this figure by a factor 2 or more. ports are obviously cheaper. now i have no idea if 360 --> Wii ports are really more expensive than a 360 --> PS3 port. Kwaad--how did you come up with the $500,000 and $2,000,000 estimates? 500,000 break-even point: certainly not every PS3 game. for gundam, maybe. then again gundam games are never known for their quality. who really knows other than the accountants. even then it's a whole mess. blu-ray: argue all you what, and even though you can't talk about blu-ray without mentioning ps3 and vice versa, it's again next to impossible to do your analysis. sony is a conglomerate. you need to know so much to know what strategy they're pursuing, like what numbers stringer used to convince the company (or decided unilaterally) to bundle blu-ray with PS3. gaming is but one division of sony... it ties in with so many other sony products i can't even think of a way to intelligently talk about numbers on blu-ray and PS3. moving away from hard numbers, however, there's no doubt PS3 is being used as leverage to promote blu-ray. the success of the PS3 itself is becomes less important. the above is also why a while back i had commented that the bundling blu-ray with PS3 the home hub is too risky of a bet for a company the size of sony. it's so big it shouldn't make that kind of bet. of course, that might be why stringer is the CEO--it's all about vision, and we'll find out if he's got the right vision. 4-6 mil for the "average" wii game: the average might be 4-6 mil, but the median i suspect is closer to the 1 mil range, 1.5-2mil seems like as good a number as any. does anybody know how much twilight princess cost to make? i'd estimate around 15 mil. how about Super paper mario? 10 mil? brawl? 12-15 mil? i mean, take Cooking Mama coming out soon. i can't imagine it costing much more than 1 million to develop. (not including licensing costs etc) 1.5 mil max. games like SSX, it seems 4-6 mil is a good estimate. what is it... EA's montreal studio... 30 people, programmers, designers, artists? generous $100k salary, generous 2 year development, that's 6 mil. plus overhead maybe 7 mil. royalties: $8-$12 reasonable. the N64 was like $11? the strange thing about royalties in video games is that apparently you pay it upfront for each unit manufactured, not each unit sold like in music. yeah, it sucks to be publishers of games that sell way below expectations.



the Wii is an epidemic.

1080p is higher quality than a film movie theater.
Noone in the film industry agrees with this, except for perhaps, George Lucas



Quantum Tarantino said: Noone in the film industry agrees with this, except for perhaps, George Lucas
Believe what you want. For the media to record it to. Film is higher. However the mass production 'crap' they call film. Is *NOT* as good as 1080p. Basically what I am saying is, the original is higher quality. The 'crap' the local movie theater gets. Is lower quality than 1080p. The new digital theaters run with 2048x1080. And they look MUCH better. MUCH clearer, MUCH crisper. I am not compareing my 1080p TV to a theater. (ok yeah I am) But from what I have seen from a 2048x1080 DLP theater... That looks LIGHTYEARS better than film. Considering my TV runs at 1980x1080 That is fractionally lower than the DLP theater that looks LIGHTYEARS better than the film ones. Quantum Tarantino - You are one of two people. 1. A computer nerd that thinks numbers are god. or 2. Someone who don't understand photography. I had a 2mp cell phone camera. It took better pictures than a Kodak 6.1mp camera I had. The colors were better, and the pictures were clearer. I had a 35mm camera and the pictures looked WORSE than my 2mp cell phone pictures. Untill I got me a 400$ film camera... I never really passed the 'colors' of my 2mp cell phone camera. After playing with my 400$ film camera... for a few months. I realised a 20x30 was WAAY out of 35mm's class. That print would never look too great. I invested a substantial amount more money in my new camera. It has AMAZING more detail than the film camera. Now let me give an example of how you get film... to a movie theater. 35mm film it then goes into a film scanner. Scans the film digitally. (I am not a insider, so I do not know this resolution. I would guess close to the 2048x1080 just because that is what the digital move theaters run at) After being 'digitally' enhanced, edited, and CG'd. The video is THEN put back onto the film. Each time it moves from analog to digital, or digital to analog. It looses detail. It looses alot of detail. The digital projectors do not loose the detail going back to film. I am not saying the Digital cameras are superior to the film cameras. I am saying the Digital projectors are superior to the film projectors. I just saw my first movie on a digital projector 2 weeks ago. I was BLOWN away at the... clarity.



PSN ID: Kwaad


I fly this flag in victory!

Where is everyone getting a 20% mark up on games? The stores don't make that much, many stores have complained about this in the past.(Remember the whole DVD empire letter of complaint) The mark up is only 10%. It's low that's why stores like Gamestop have their used games business and bigger stores like Best Buy make much higher percentages on accessories and foot track in the store on other items. They make comparably low percentages on cd and movies as well. In fact it can be lower the 10% on the 59.99 games they buy them for 54.99 so they only make 5 bucks per game. Here read DVD Empire's complaint for yourself in this article: Next Generation Article



[Quantum Tarantino - You are one of two people. 1. A computer nerd that thinks numbers are god. or 2. Someone who don't understand photography.
Listen up kwaad you self important arrogant windbag. YOU much like in many of your other threads, dont have CLUE ONE about what you are speaking here, you need to shut up, get off the internet, and do some research, before opening your mouth, and infecting this forum again.