Stagflation hitting right as dev costs are crushing nine figures (USD) is just a recipe for disaster. Indies will flourish, but AAA could be in a very bad situation. Saros sounds like a game worthy of tons of success… but when the economy is as poor as it is, it makes total sense how such a niche title would underperform at a $70USD price tag. Reminds me a whole lot of the Mario Tennis Fever situation.

Just a reminder that Saros cost close to €50m in Development(before marketing costs). So we are talking about a breakeven point around 1m sales lifetime.

$70M USD from what I’ve heard. It would need at least 2M to break even when accounting for marketing and the cut that retailers receive. But still, that’s a pretty okay budget. It’s definitely nothing small… Expedition 33 wasn’t too much higher than $10M USD IIRC. But much better than something as insane as Concord or SpiderMan 2 blasting past $300M.

The $70m is just the typical internet thing where someone runs with a vaguely correct but lazy number and people repeat it until it gets treated like a fact. The budget actually comes from an interview with one of the Housemarque execs who says the development cost is similar to Alan Wake II. That game cost €50m to develop(+20m in marketing, so that’s where the 70m number comes from, but it’s the wrong currency and it’s total cost including marketing). It should also be noted that the cost is almost certainly less than AWII since that game is famous for being the most expensive “cultural product” ever produced in Finland, and they made no claims about Saros surpassing it. So “Similar” to AWII probably means slightly less.

The breakeven point is very likely to be closer to 1m(maybe as high as 1.5m) due to the very high digital rate(the digital deluxe edition was playable 2 days earlier than release date) and the fact that almost 1/3rd of players at release played the game early via the more expensive Digital Deluxe edition, and that doesn’t even account for people that bought the deluxe edition during release week but didn’t play early.

Also, btw Concord had a development budget of $50m. No one knows how much it went over budget but it was made in a decent timeframe and with a peak studio count of 150 people, so the whole $300m is complete nonsense that comes from exactly one podcast source that sites ran as a real story because it got massive clicks.

I don't think there's reason to presume that yet

Although Japan numbers would be a curious reflection point. Returnal done 6.5k first week physical, Saros should be slightly more digital leaning but still interesting point of comparison.

The game having a "slow start" is not surprising but I don't think there needs to be any fuss right now. It charted relatively well at launch.

1 day of sales got it to No. 11 in the PSN monthly US charts and around 17 in the EU, that probably equates to few 100k+ in 1 day.. But it's legs aren't showing well (dropped out of UK top 10 after week 1). But I don't think that is massive cause for concern yet...

Q1 has been heavy with brilliant releases and I think Saros arrived at the wrong time (After RE9/Pragmata/Crismon Dessert and even Nintendo hits like Pokopia/Tomadochi)... I just think it's the bottom of the bundle in terms of viral/media attention. Why I would compare it to these other releases is simply that gamers need a breather, especially coming hot off the heels off Pragmata which probably shares a large audience of people curious for AA Sci-fi shooters.

Games continue to sell. According to the Insomniac leak even Sackboy Adventures did 1.2m within its first 2 years. Saros I think has plenty of opportunity to continue selling under the radar throughout the summer with fewer big releases after 007, with discounts and eventual DLC it can do several million in the long run. The game could go on to be an underperformer but it simply isn't the title we ought to expect to be a hit and run smash.

I think Saros could reach 3M+ sales in 5 years, it just needs to get discounted.
I still only played a bit of it but it feels like an even better game than Returnal was, which was already very good.

Aside from the ok character models it also doesn't look like an AA game at all, it look gorgeous, specially when the saros period (moon covering the sun) starts, it really looks stunning.

It is a smaller game regardless, like Astro Bot was, but Astro Bot did have the potential to be the GOTY, which it delivered. Saros doesn't have this potential IMO.

I'm happy Saros exist, and I hope sales pick up when the price is better, and based on Returnal and the few hours of Saros I've played so far, I definitely would recommend it (and Returnal too) to people that have a PS5.

Same here. I won't pick it up for a very long time but some part of me wants the gameplay to more explorative/interactive, but then I remember that diversity and different niches in the industry is important. The same world/blueprint could sell twice as much if they followed a more adventure puzzle route but it's valuable that people are doing different things and that games don't blend into the same 3rd person template.

Having said that I do hope their next game switches things up. This was essentially a Returnal Sequel. Hell I wouldn't mind them doing a smaller indie title to reflect their roots

I didnt really enjoy Returnal, so I have no interest in Saros and I think some people feel the same. Just the word "Roguelike" put me off a game these days. Its such an oversaturated genre imo. Just like Soulslike and Metroidvania. Although Im yet to get tired of Metroidvanias.

They won't be axed. They are too talented. And arcade will always come around even if they think it's apparently dead for some stupid reason.