Battle of the Bombs - Haze Vs Too Human

[starcraft]

hanafuda said:

starcraft said:

tombi123 said:

starcraft said:

tombi123 said:

starcraft said:

Dallinor said:

Too Human is possibly the biggest bomb this generation given it's rumoured budget.

We can all speculate as to the 'hype level' attached to either project, but in reailty when the production and marketing costs far exceed the overall revenue of a project, it constitutes as a bomb/flop. Not when it fails to meet critical expectation or 'hype' (A project can still be a financial success without those).

It would seem as though Too Human comes off the worse to wear in the financial department, ergo making it the bigger 'bomb' of the two.

I guess that is open to interpretation.

Given the game was in development with Sony assistance on the PS1, Nintendo assistance on the Gamecube, then finally got out the door with Microsoft assistance on the Xbox 360, it's fair to say this game bombed hardest for Nintendo and Sony, as they saw literally zero return on their investment.

What? I doubt Sony or Nintendo gave SK any money at all. Wasn't it published by Microsoft? 

It doesn't even matter what console it was on. The game had an astronomical budget and it bombed, badly. Haze probably had an average budget, judging by the graphics. It has sold 410,000 and has a chance to break even.

It was going to be published for Gamecube by Nintendo and was going to be on the PS1 (published by Sony I think).  A great deal of the budget came from the early years and was funded by Sony, Nintendo and SK back in the day.  Microsoft themselves might well break even on this game.

And almost certainly on the trilogy.

Can I have links for the Nintendo and Sony publishing this game? 

I doubt most of the budget was for the PS1 and gamecube period. HD games cost way more to develop, compared with PS1 and gamecube games. 

Either SK, Microsoft or both lost out big on this game. There is no denying that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Too_Human#Development_history

Ten years of development and Microsoft has only been involved in three of them.

It is believable that SK lost out big on this game, it is not believable that Microsoft did.  Especially with two, far cheaper to make due to sequel status, more games on the way.

Hardware manufacturers don't pay third parties to make games for them.

Of course, there are exceptions, but I don't see any evidence of such an exception here.

Microsoft did, however, publish the game.  Want to see what Wiki has to say about that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_publisher

'A video game publisher is a company that publishes video games that they have either developed internally or have had developed by a video game developer.

As with book publishers or publishers of DVD movies, video game publishers are responsible for their product's manufacturing and marketing, including market research and all aspects of advertising. They usually finance the development, sometimes by paying a video game developer (the publisher calls this external development) and sometimes by paying an internal staff of developers called a studio. The large video game publishers also distribute the games they publish, while some smaller publishers instead hire distribution companies (or larger video game publishers) to distribute the games they publish. Other functions usually performed by the publisher include deciding on and paying for any license that the game may utilize; paying for localization; layout, printing, and possibly the writing of the user manual; and the creation of graphic design elements such as the box design. Large publishers may also attempt to boost efficiency across all internal and external development teams by providing services such as sound design and code packages for commonly needed functionality.

Because the publisher usually finances development, it usually tries to manage development risk with a staff of producers or project managers to monitor the progress of the developer, critique ongoing development, and assist as necessary. Most video games created by an external video game developer are paid for with periodic advances on royalties. These advances are paid when the developer reaches certain stages of development, called milestones.'.

Ouch. 

Self pawnage?

At the very least Nintendo had a similar relationship with SK for TH too the one MS has.  I think Sony did too but I'll try to find another link for that. 

All you proved is that for the last three years Microsoft has had a hand in funding TH, three years out of ten, which was my original point anyway.

So Nintendo and probably Sony lost a shitload for a game they never released, and Microsoft will sell half a million copies on a game with three years development, probably breaking even and with all art assets, engines and story in place for the next two games.