zarx said:
darkknightkryta said:
zarx said:
darkknightkryta said:
Tomb Raider had about 100 people working on it (roughly counted in the credits). At an average wage of 70k and a dev time of 3 years, the game should have cost 21 million (Which is roughly what Uncharted 2 cost). 3.5 million copies, even at 30 dollar profit, that's 105 million Square should have made off of Tomb Raider in revenue... 85 million in profit, did I screw up somewhere? |
licensing (middleware and tools, music, console development), equipment (PCs, furnature etc), building up keep (lease, utilities etc), outsourcing, Benefits (insurance, health plan etc), the game was in development for over 4 years (tho the first 2 were likely preproduction with a small team of 10-50), and the big one marketing. Total buget is probably $80m+.
|
Depends what they did with middleware and tools. Those also don't cost that much in the grand scheme of things (Unreal 3 for instance is 700k per game). Lease, utilities, etc, are all subsidized by other games (If any are in development, though likely not and can rack up). If they built their own tools then that's all covered in employee salaries. I still don't believe that 80 million figure though. God of War 3 was in dev for the same time and came under budget at 45 million.
|
I am guessing $40-50m for marketing. the other stuff may be small in the grand scheme but it all adds up, especially benifits health and savings plans etc.
|
And God of War had none of this? Well, benefits no, but everything else yes. It's impossible for Tomb Raider to not have been profitable unless there was some terrible mismanagement, or stealing happening. Plus the Eidos PR guy were actually happy with what Tomb Raider did, he must have had some idea of the game's budget. There's something going on behind the scenes at Square, most likely Final Fantasy 14 is costing the company a lot and they were expecting Tomb Raider and Hitman to bail them out which is terrible.
