| DKII said: Revenue is meaningless anyway. I can spend 100 million on a game and take in 80 million in revenue, or I can spend 5 million on a game and take in 10 million in revenue. But the first game did not do 8 times better than the second. |
I have a degree in Finance and I must say, that has to be the most RETARTED thing I have ever heard. The first example has a negative 20% rate of return and the second one had a 100% rate of return.... I hope you never try to open a business.... These companies are business and when it comes down to choosing projects they are going to choose what will have the BEST rate of return for them. Sometimes they invest for the future like sony did with putting Blu-ray on the PS3(which I believe was a mistake), but usually it come down to the bottom line.
Put it this way if RRR sold 1.1 million and it cost them 15 million to make and made Ubisoft a profit of 35 million, then AC sell 2 million and it cost 80 million to make giving a profit of 20 million, then RRR was more successful.
However it could be argued that by putting more money into AC they built a solid franchise that they might cash in on later, but that is another story.
psn- tokila
add me, the more the merrier.
