| Smidlee said: Barlog just stated they were just getting used to 20-30 million dollar games so I assume that's on PS2 (last generation). Isn't Wii supposed to have better graphics than last generation consoles? The way Barlog is talking we should start expecting cheaper made games including cheaper than last generation. I really don't like the sound of that.
|
Smidlee brings up an interesting point, if you extend out the thought. If the PS2 was 20-30M, was the 30M at the beginning of its life when it was more unknown how to program all the new nuances. And then closer to 20M at the end of its life when you could perhaps swipe code from other games you had done, twick it a bit and go with that?
Thus the Wii being close to the GameCube in design would have the lower costs built in, somewhat at least.
----------------
+1 to FishyJoe. So many will say how many games it takes to break even with the costs as if that were the only goal in mind. Hopefully the true goal is to make a decent profit, enough to cover the costs and then some. Ideally, it would be enough to produce 2 more games, in case one of them flops. The only criticism is the simplification, Fish. Revenue does not give you return on investment, income does. Throw in a $4M in overhead (ads, production and shipping of the game), and come up with $76 in operational income. 1900%, while less, still isn't that bad.
Torturing the numbers. Hear them scream.
