dib8rman said:
jammy2211 said:
dib8rman said:
Production Expense
PS3/Xbox360 > Wii
Revenue
PS3/Xbox360 > Wii
Profit
Wii > PS3/Xbox360
That's the usual, not sure how true it is though; I mean logically I could say that if a product operated at a loss, let's say MGS4 sold 200k while Game Party sold 1 million units, then lets say that MGS4 needed 800k units to break even that would mean MGS4's Revenue was 800k + 200k. Then let's say Game Party needed 20k to break even, then that means it's revenue was 1 million + 20k.
By that point Game Party would have the higher Revenue and profit. However MGS4 sold upwards of 5 million I believe, so it would be fair to compare it to M&S Wii which is around the same numbers, which had the higher profit? That's a no brainer. Which had the higher Revenue? That's a no brainer also.
Ans 1 : M&S Wii
Ans 2: MGS4
In both cases the software resulted in a profit, this is regardless of platform. What I see in the OP only makes my day a littler funnier. |
That's a very extreme example, cuts out the wider pictures and uses a third party game co-developed by Nintendo, published by Nintendo in Japan and has the two most token gaming icons in the world on the front cover, one of which belongs to Nintendo!
But yeah, you think third parties will be looking at Mario and Sonic and thinking they can match that success? You think they'll be willing to pour the amount of money Nintendo did into a constant tv advertising campaign from November to Christmas? :/.
I just find it an odd example and don't really see the relevence, very few developement begins trying to top the best selling (sort of) third party game on any platform. Wii is a very profitable platform but not the gold mine many people suggest. It's the same as the PS360 really, if you want to make money you have to put alot of money in, it's high risk stuff. Which platform is more high risk? I couldn't possibly say until I have a better idea of marketing costs on the Wii.
|
That's too bad, because it really does simplify the general situation between platforms. Wish you did see the relevence.
I should go tit for tat because your neglecting the ad campaign and redesigned PS3's specifically made for MGS4 and of course it's bundle.
Two sides to the same coin.
|
My point was that only 1% of developement begins with them setting their sights at matching the top selling games of the past 5 years or so. Look at one game which sold well and thinking it's a good example for others to follow is just plain idiocy.
I'm not ignoring MGS4 but I think with games of that scale trying to 'guess' figures is foolish. No one knows how much it cost to make, how much it cost to market and how much Konami got out of Sony to keep it exclusive - but you can bet they didn't just let the game stay on PS3 without 'incentives'.
I hate the fact that people regard M&S as third party anyway. For all intents and purpsoes it's first party, Nintendo did the marketing, they helped make the game and they published it in Japan. EA ain't gonna look at that and think "Wow we could get 6 million sales too!".
But if your point was to just say that M&S on Wii was probably more profitable then MGS4 then er, well done. I'd agree with that too, albeit I do stress the "Probably".
