kowenicki said:
fps_d0minat0r said:
kowenicki said:
fps_d0minat0r said:
kowenicki said:
I said less than $100m before I read all of your post. I would agree with pachter.
Revenue does not equal profit, far from it in this case and they seemed unlikely to develop any more Gears games anyway.
Your guess of half a billion dollars is insane.
|
I know revenue is not profit, thats why I added in development costs which are low compared to other games.
Even if you say each gears of war game took $100m to make (even though its no-where near that amount), they still made over half a billion in profit from it so far.
|
Nonsense. Half a billion profit!? Nowhere near.
My understanding is that the publisher was Microsoft, the platform was microsoft. The vast majority of the money went to Microsoft.
Epic were just the developers and may have been paid a fee to do it, or perhaps were paid a percentage of the revenue. But 50% of the revenue as profit for the developer is an absolutely ridiculous statement.
|
Sorry, I assumed it was revenue for epic.
But still...even if that chart is correct, Epic's share would be ~$500m and take away the reported development costs, they still would have have made hundreds of millions from this.
Furthermore, thats just games revenue, you also have to factor in either the money MS were paying them for exclusivity, or the money they would have gained by going multiplatform. Those two options would have made them more than $100m easily.
|
How would epic share be $500m in revenue?
They arent the publisher. Microsoft is.
Microsft would get the publisher part and the platform part. Gears owned the IP and will have been paid a fee plus perhaps a small percentage of revenue generated.
|
So your saying all Epic made from each game was $7?
Sorry I dont belive that.
