zarx said:
There problem wasn't with over spending, even if they didn't spend all of the budget it's not like they would have got to keep that money anyway Square Enix payed them enough to make a game with whatever budget it had. It just sold really poorly and they couldn't get more work in time. Lets face it no matter the size of the studio or the budget of the game if you make several games that under perform in a row people aren't going togive you money to make more. Not unless you make critical darlings and a publisher goes looking for a prestige project anyway. If they made low budget indie games that floped they would have gone under just the same, hell their previous game was a low budget downloadable title that also didn't sell well. It's not like they were really a AAA studio anyway, more of a mid tier one. I am sure the budget for Murdered wasn't even a quarter of something like Tomb Raider. |
No, that's BS.
If SE paid for the game to be made, then making the game shouldn't have bankrupted them. This is a business. If your client gives you money to perform a project, you don't spend ALL of the money to create that project. A business's life shouldn't be run by the flip of a coin. What I mean by that is, your business's success should not ride on the outcome of ONE project! Or even 3 projects! If I make 3 horrible games that sell 300k each, then I better be making profit from those 300k sales! However, these developers don't work like that. They create games that cost over 3 million dollars to create and because they don't make that money back, they go away. There's nothing you can say to justify this. Nothing.
