No i'm arguing you guys are overexaggerating.

and it isnt jrpg its a high profile high budget game. The numbers I provided just showed how a game (which not many other games cost more to make) turned profit easily.

If you know that then you know that Gears development budget could of been a lot more.  Yet "cost" less as it was written off.

Heck if they wanted they could of wrote off all of Gears of War off as an "Advertisment for the Unreal engine."

They simply used the 250,000 number to give an overly rosey impression of their engine so people would buy and use it.

First of all I don't see how that has much to do with anything considering the game costs more to develop than most HD games so... even though it coulda have cost more isn't an issue.

Second, that last line doesn't make sense.

I'm guessing you don't understand how accounting works then.

It all makes sense if you know accounting.  Gears of Wars "massive budget" was largely written away into other areas.

^ again would only matter if more games cost more than GoW to make

i think WKC has done really well considering it is the first true exclusive JRPG that the ps3 has had. yh the 360 may have a better attach rate when it comes to JRPG's in JAPAN but thats what happens when you get so many rpg's exclusive to a console.

But devs dont care about attach rate it is numbers sold that matter and as for WKC being the 2nd best selling HD-RPG in Japan in its first week of sales is impressive.

No... it wouldn't.  Not with accounting, which you don't seem to be able to graps.

Alright, then.

Do companies make revenue based on attach rate? No they do not. If a console has 10 million userbase and a game sells 5 million, and if another console has 100 million userbase, and the game sells 10 million, which is the company profiting from more?

The first has a 50% attach rate, the second has a 10% attach rate. Does that matter? No.

The PS3 sells software in Japan better than the 360 BECAUSE it has a larger userbase. Even if a game outsells a 360 game by 20k copies on three times the userbase, the company has still made more money from the game with the extra 20k copies, right?

show me the #"s

How come so many of these sales related discussions turn into arguing about game financials, without much real knowledge of a) the game development budgets b) game marketing budgets c) publisher/dev/manufacturer profit margins and finally d) corporate financials and accounting?

@Kantor

Your question is pretty much meaningless if you don't consider the development costs, marketing costs and profit structure. Sure, 20k more sales MIGHT bring in more revenue, but that does no directly translate into more profit.

@Max King of the Wild

What you are not understanding is that, in reality, GeoW cost way more to make than what 250k sales bring in. However, the engine development costs were written off to another projects, probably a wholly separate engine project the costs of which were not accounted in the GoW project. The fact is that we do not know the real cost of making GeoW, and it would be hard to determine anyway since the engine is done for licensing, not only for GeoW. Any game developer developing a similar game in-house would have to develop the engine and add the costs to that game, resulting in much higher costs. To put it in another way, it would be nigh impossible to develop a GeoW-clone so that it would break even with 250k sales.