caffeinade said:
The point of the thread is basically to point out that we can keep the price of games at or lower than $60 USD, whilst bringing record breaking profits. |
My problem with this thread though is that you say that but then move on to say that the devs need to make good dlc to make money off a game...
A ) if devs really saw main line titles as "loss-leaders" then they would use microtransactions to make the money back, since that is the easiest thing to do, and beyond that it wouldn't require seperate marketing and development budget like good expansions or standalone dlc would
B ) your data actually shows that developers *don't* need to have triple A titles as loss-leaders, because Horizon had a huge digital attach rate (27%) and sold 3.4 million in two months
Even your Tomb Raider data goes against your idea of a loss leader, since despite Squenix's unrealistic expectations, there is absolutely no way the title took more than 30$ mil to develop and 60 to market(and it was probably more modest then even that).
Your idea of loss-leaders and making a profit off just a game is kind of contradictory, unless your point is that games that don't make back money should become a loss-leader, in which case we've seen this happen and that's when conglomerates start making titles F2P or add microtransactions cause "boohoo our wallets are sad"
