By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo - Myth busting; 3rd party games are unprofitable on Wii U

eyeofcore on 28 December 2013
fatslob-:O said:

eyeofcore said:

I wish that was true for your sake...

Playing the denial game, eh ?  <- provocation

I am not being in "denial" about anything and you should stop provoking me like you provoke other people on the forum.

eyeofcore said:

 I have by statements of several publishers that they gave to several websites and it is not only 1 publisher and why I would put sources that you can easily find out by googling. lol

Sorry but sources or it didn't happen. BTW pointing to ubisoft alone does not make any conclusions.

Your logic and anyone using that kind of logic in the end has a flawed logic for good reasons. A rumor article mostly does not have a source yet you logically would not believe it yet you probably did for some rumors, my explanation might be flawed and why Ubisoft's reveal of the cost of Wii U port would not apply to other big 3rd party publishers in the first place? We see sequel of games that sold "just" 150K thus we should logically conclude that the cost of the port is not high then we need to consider the fact that developers/publishers nowadays won't risk losing money.

eyeofcore said:

That does not mean that there aren't 3rd party games on Wii U and current install base is not huge nor the audience for some of these games is there really then the fact that there were ports that were feature gimped thus it damaged the reputation/trust that 3rd party developers had. In the end shoody ports create distrust towards 3rd party developers...

Did I say that there wasn't any 3rd party games on the WII U ? The current install base isn't huge on the WII U because nintendo gamecube'd themselves LOL. Feature gimping means nothing for the most part if the content of the versions are nearly identical for the most part. 

No you didn't, I was rushing with response. I meant to say that does not mean that there arenn't profitable 3rd party games on Wii U. Now you are provoking me and the others which I underlined, you should have expressed your opinion more differently and point out the "mistakes". Features are essentially the content in the first place and it plays a role in the purchase for the consumer and no, they are not nearly identical if feature are missing.

Notable for example Sniper Elite V2 on Wii U has no multiplayer component which is an integral part of the game and I played the original which I loved, specially the multiplayer. If you gimp the game then you show that you don't care about the consumers and then consumers of that platform won't care about your presence thus it is an eye for an eye.

@underlined This surely can be classified as provocation and in a way a flame bait as in the end you are aiming at certain group of people. You should expresses your opinion differently by pointing out "mistakes" if you think you know the mistakes rather than try to taunt/provoke me and/or other members.

eyeofcore said:

I know that, I explained it and I did not said profit, but "profit" and I already discussed that. In the end it is profit once the costs are recouped like development, marketing and production of boxes, copies and other misc. things. If it wasn't profitable then there would't be COD:Ghost nor AC4 on Wii U, nor B:AO nor TASM2(in Spring 14)...

How do you know that the costs were recouped ? These publishers didn't say so. Last I heard W101 and ZombiU was a flop.  If the costs were not recouped then successor of these games would likely not be present on the platform except if the publisher/developer is willing to bite the bullet. I am certain that successor to S&ASRT will arrive on Wii U because of very good sales for a port and Giana Sisters: Twisted Dreams also had early good sales. Two Tribes is also satisfied with sales of their games and Capcom labeled Monster Hunter Tri Ultimate on Wii U as "Smash Hit". @underlined This is borderline a provocation

eyeofcore said:

You missed the point of the thread, people can check out and come to conclusion by them self and I wasn't covering games because off topic.

Just how exactly is the development of exclusive 3rd party games off topic ? It sounds like you need to brush up your english before posting. I wasn't covering the games themselves, I was bringing up the development issues of exclusive 3rd party games.

This thread is not about development issues of 3rd party games and you were covering two games which is Zombiu and W101(Wonderful 101), you mentioned these two games while this thread is not about cost of games primarily, but about how much does a publisher/develop gross per copy/unit. @underlined Another provocation I see... Its borderline, but still...

eyeofcore said:

Wonderful 101 is developed by 3rd party developer, but it is a franchise owned by Nintendo and funded by Nintendo so it is a 1st party game and new IP which in todays world is a hit or miss. ZombiU was first a game for Wii that had Rabbits and had a different title, then its development was transfered to Xbox 360 and become a game in london involving alien invades in first person view. Then it got transfered to Wii U to be an exclusive and later changed to Zombie Apocalypse theme. So costs of development was higher than it would be if it was a Wii U exclusive from start. ZombiU is not a Triple A game, it had a rather low budget and a relatively small team, I think that right now it grossed 10 million US dollars(don't know if the tax is already accounted, if not then take 10-20% of it) while I assume that the development, marketing, production and misc. things totals it probably at 15 to 20 million US dollars(with tax?).

BTW the W101 is technically a 2nd party game. FYI ZombiU didn't profit.

http://www.cinemablend.com/games/ZombiU-2-Scrapped-By-Ubisoft-First-Game-Didn-t-Make-Profit-57360.html

I wasn't sure should I call Wonderful 101 a first or second party since Platinum Games was developing, but does not won the franchise thus by your definition then Hyrule Warrior's is a second party game as does Eternal Darkness on Gamecube. I have not said that ZombiU was profitable and you can see it in my last sentence so you are correcting me for a thing that is correct. Good job.


This is my last response to you in this thread.

(I need to find an ignore or block option to not see your posts if there is any.)

You have gone off-topic too many times by mentioning ZombiU and Wonderful 101 and its sales, this thread in the end is not about development costs of ports, nor budget of it nor profitability and point of this thread was about how much a developer earns per copy and other minor detail and let the choice to members to read this thread to conclude which port was profitable and which is not.

This was an educational thread, it was not about directly about profitability or development costs of 3rd party games on Wii U since it is about revenue and in the end profit generated. I only gave guidelines for the members of this forum to come to their own independent conclusion thus them being more "standalone"/independent in their own opinion and to easier make their points.

From your replies it can be seen that you are trying to provoke me and possibly other users as you is evident by your behaviour in other threads including one of my threads. I improved by behaviour by a lot, you haven't changed one bit by the looks of it.

I answered your questions and you continued to go off topic, this is the last time I am answering to your questions that are off-topic. I don't mind your presence as long as you behave well and don't be instrusive and provoking in some aspects. We all can get along and now it all depends on you, not me. Choose your next move wisely, that is my final advice to you. Hopefully we will have more positive and friendlier contacts in the future.

curl-6 said:
Porting from PS3/360 to Wii U is not an expensive process.
Black Ops 2, AC3, and Arkham City sold 190k-210k, yet apparently profited enough for their followups to be ported as well.

That is only viable logical conclusion that makes sense to bring a follow up is if the game sold well enough to be profitable or at least when it recoups the costs.



Around the Network
menx64 on 28 December 2013
JWeinCom said:
What's the cost of game development specifically for a Wii U version? If we use this formula, then a game like Blops 2 for Wii U made something like 5.2 million dollars in margin. That's all well and good, but what did it cost them to develop the game? 5.2 million dollars seems a bit high for a port. 2 million maybe? 2 and a half? I don't really know.

What I do know is that you're not including opportunity cost in this decision. Suppose Activision made 2 million on Ghosts for Wii U. That's nice, but what else could they have been doing with that team at the time? Could the team have been working on another project that would have netted 5 million? You have to take that into account too.


While that is true, there are several things to keep in mind as well. Is that team big enough to create a game on their own? Normally one would think a team making a port is a very small team, which would be only dedicated on code optimization and working on assets.

 Furthermore making a port can be seen as easy money, while creating a game from can takes several years, teams and of course a lot more money...  



Menx64

3DS code: 1289-8222-7215

NNid: Menx064

burninmylight on 28 December 2013
episteme said:
ICStats said:
episteme said:
ICStats said:

Ok so we established that some cheap ports might be making a small profit.  Great myth busting.  I am sure glad we will maybe still keep getting cheap ports for Wii U :(.

It's unlikely that any exclusive 3rd party titles that are any good made any profit (except maybe Zombi U).

Rayman Legends was a 210K
Scribblenauts 190K
Dragon Quest X 170K


ZombiU wasn't profitable.

Rayman Legends, Scribblenauts and Dragon Quest aren't only on Wii U.

Oh right.

I assume 3DS/Wii -> Wii U versions (with graphics updates) cost more to produce than something from PS360 -> Wii U.


Not so sure about that. Dragon Quest Wii U looks like the Wii version with higher resolution and better shadows.

Not only that, but it's a subscription game. It doesn't need to sell millions if it keeps a loyal base of subscribers.



ICStats on 28 December 2013
eyeofcore said:

Porting from PS3/360 to Wii U is not an expensive process.
Black Ops 2, AC3, and Arkham City sold 190k-210k, yet apparently profited enough for their followups to be ported as well.

That is only viable logical conclusion that makes sense to bring a follow up is if the game sold well enough to be profitable or at least when it recoups the costs.

~200k units probably recoups the costs and turns some profit in these cases.

Though, early on there are fewer titles on the market and attach rate of a given title per-user is higher.  As the game library grows you need a lot more users to sell an equal amount.  Publishers take chances based on estimated future sales, and they would look at Nintendo's forecast of 10 million Wii U's sold in 2013.

Missing the forecast by a factor of 3 is really going to throw cold water on publisher's estimates... but if there's an uptick in sales thanks to SM3DW or other new titles then publishers will regain some confidence.




My 8th gen collection

Conina on 28 December 2013
eyeofcore said:

This was an educational thread, it was not about directly about profitability or development costs of 3rd party games on Wii U since it is about revenue and in the end profit generated. I only gave guidelines for the members of this forum to come to their own independent conclusion thus them being more "standalone"/independent in their own opinion and to easier make their points.

So you give educational guidelines by mixing up revenues and profits and drawing wild conclusions?



Around the Network
eyeofcore on 29 December 2013
Conina said:
eyeofcore said:

This was an educational thread, it was not about directly about profitability or development costs of 3rd party games on Wii U since it is about revenue and in the end profit generated. I only gave guidelines for the members of this forum to come to their own independent conclusion thus them being more "standalone"/independent in their own opinion and to easier make their points.

So you give educational guidelines by mixing up revenues and profits and drawing wild conclusions?


No and if you read this entire thread then you would not ask this questions, it seems I need to repeat myself...

I didn't call revenue a profit, I just labelled it as "profit" not profit. By meaning "profit" I meant revenue that could contain profit, the product that gathered enough revenue to recoup the costs and be profitable and all of the sudden a logical conslusion is a wild conslusion in this forum? Anyway, revenue always in the end becomes profit... You spend that and that amount of resources/money and you earned that and that amount of resources/Money that exceeds amount that you have spent thus it is profit.

Revenue > "Profit" < Profit = middle/state condition, it could be just revenue and it could be profit afterwards as costs recouped entirely.



Conina on 29 December 2013
eyeofcore said:

I didn't call revenue a profit, I just labelled it as "profit" not profit. By meaning "profit" I meant revenue that could contain profit, the product that gathered enough revenue to recoup the costs and be profitable

Yeah, that's the way of busting the myth of unprofitable 3rd party games... relabeling precise terms with other precise terms, which have a totally different meaning and embed them in quotation marks.

eyeofcore said:

Anyway, revenue always in the end becomes profit...

No. Njet. Nada. Nein. Non.



RenCutypoison on 29 December 2013

What's up with these people thinking making a game is about having an idea and getting it out of your ass with no cost whatsoever ? That's depressing.

And this myth about "just a console port" too. Bigger studios often have to hire smaller studios for console ports, and if they could do otherwise they would ! But it has a cost, and it ain't nothing, or every small devs would go multiplat'

If third parties don't make games anymore for wii U it means it's not profitable for them. There is no conspiracy theory or whatever because their goal is to make money.



Netyaroze on 29 December 2013

I don`t think thats how they calculate. If they use ressources to develop something for the Wii U and tie up their employees with a Wii U Game for a couple of months who could have done something else that could make twice or trice the money then even though they profited from the Wii U Game in the end. They lost money because they didn`t use their employees for something that could have given them more money. In that case the Wii U game would be unprofitable. Because it makes less profit then a potential other project they could pursue in that time instead.



eyeofcore on 29 December 2013
Conina said:
eyeofcore said:

I didn't call revenue a profit, I just labelled it as "profit" not profit. By meaning "profit" I meant revenue that could contain profit, the product that gathered enough revenue to recoup the costs and be profitable

Yeah, that's the way of busting the myth of unprofitable 3rd party games... relabeling precise terms with other precise terms, which have a totally different meaning and embed them in quotation marks.

It seems you forgot when some people put quotation mark for some  that it does not mean that the word in that quoation mark has the same meaning as the one without it. Resident Evil 6 is a "survival horror" game, but in reality it is more of an action adventure game than a survival horror game... Portal 2 is "first person shooter" while it is more correctly said that it is a first person puzzle solving game.

eyeofcore said:

Anyway, revenue always in the end becomes profit...

No. Njet. Nada. Nein. Non.

You are right then again you are wrong, same thing for me... I called it "profit" because they have profit from a single copy otherwise making and selling those copies would be unprofitable. Profit from those copies covers the cost of the game and once enough of them are sold to cover all the costs of the game then it is for real a profit.