CGI-Quality said:
brute said:
CGI-Quality said:
As reported by NPD Group and spotted by our pals at VGC, this means the only first-party Sony titles to top The Last of Us 2 in terms of life-to-date profit are Insomniac's Marvel's Spider-Man and Sony Santa Monica's God of War - and both of those have been out for considerably longer than Naughty Dog's highly anticipated sequel. It addressed exactly what you said, which was based on feelings and not any solid data at all. It's likely that the game made what it needed to in those first 4 million unit sales and everything else was pure profit. It's a better guess than assuming it is "probably the least profitable game made by ND in the last 15 years or so". |
VGC article states life-to-date dollar sales, not profits. So not sure where Eurogamer is getting that. Must be a typo on their end. I tried googling if NPD stated anything about profit and they did not, so you're article doesn't prove anything about profit. However, it also doesn't prove that its the least profitable. |
The article uses data. That's the point. We can argue profit vs revenue all day (which is generally silly anyway, given how these companies judge their products). It was the 3rd highest grossing game for Sony upon release. Then tell us, how do you conclude it is Naughty Dog's least profitable game of the past 15 years? Based on what? |
Development time (cost to make the game) vs sales. I never concluded anything actually. It was just a guess. It is written as a guess. I think that labor is by far the most amount of resources spent when making a video game, and this game took a lot time and a lot of people. It is a decent guess, but just a guess.
And the way a company judges its products does not interest me that much, but profitability does interest me. I don't think its silly at all to talk about profits.
