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

Forums - Sales Discussion - Modern Times - Budget Analysis ...

jammy2211 said:
Pristine20 said:
I'm gald no one has claimed that nintendo came to save the day on this thread because if you ask me, they did what was best for themselves not because they had any particularly altruistic intentions for the gaming industry as a whole.

 The article is more explaining a trend of what has happend in the industry for many years. What it's saying is collective to the whole industry.

 The Wii has helped keep costs low but ultimately it'll succumb to this trend, marketing budgets will go up, games will get more ambitious etc. In some ways I think Nintendo are encouraging this, Wii Fit's marketing budget is beleived to be ~ $40 million in the USA alone (Can dig up a source if you want), I'm sure they're not marketing any other games that high but you can bet Wii Sports and Wii Music and Mario Galaxy etc were huge investments.

 I'd say it's only a matter of time until EA or Activision or someone start trying to out-do Nintendo, push the budgets higher, market it even further etc, and then the trend continues and costs go higher, risks are more dangerous and most of what was detailed happens.

 I don't think any console will change this unless we saw a revolution to the entire video games model (Digital Distribution could be that revolution) but for now the trend will continue on and on.

Thanks for pointing that out because the word I seem to keep hearing is that Nintendo was the only one who tried to save gaming by keeping costs down when in reality wii fit probably cost as much as Killzone 2.

I do also agree that costs are only headed up until a revolution or crash, whichever comes first. Or until we have a monopoly where a single company or two companies dictate everything...similar to the OS market.

 



"Dr. Tenma, according to you, lives are equal. That's why I live today. But you must have realised it by now...the only thing people are equal in is death"---Johann Liebert (MONSTER)

"WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives"---Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler

Around the Network
NJ5 said:

Thanks celine. This part is almost scary to read considering the time it was written at:

The answer has to do with a concept called "market share". The basic strategy is to "buy market share". That is, you spend a lot of money to make a product that will sell very well. You still lose money on the product, but the huge sales you make put you in an excellent position to make money with a followup product.



The concept is sound and has been proven to work in many markets with different products. Unfortunately, there's an unintended side effect of such products in our industry: they raise the expectations of the consumers to levels that simply cannot be sustained. Once a customer has been dazzled by a money-losing yet fabulous product, he'll turn up his nose at a normal product delivered on a normal budget. And this is precisely what is happening to our customers. Nowadays, if you don't spend a half-million-plus on your product, it won't sell.

 

This is prety much what I have been saying about projects on the 360 and PS3.



Switch Code: SW-7377-9189-3397 -- Nintendo Network ID: theRepublic -- Steam ID: theRepublic

Now Playing
Switch - Super Mario Maker 2 (2019)
Switch - The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening (2019)
Switch - Bastion (2011/2018)
3DS - Star Fox 64 3D (2011)
3DS - Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney (Trilogy) (2005/2014)
Wii U - Darksiders: Warmastered Edition (2010/2017)
Mobile - The Simpson's Tapped Out and Yugioh Duel Links
PC - Deep Rock Galactic (2020)

theRepublic said:
NJ5 said:

Thanks celine. This part is almost scary to read considering the time it was written at:

The answer has to do with a concept called "market share". The basic strategy is to "buy market share". That is, you spend a lot of money to make a product that will sell very well. You still lose money on the product, but the huge sales you make put you in an excellent position to make money with a followup product.



The concept is sound and has been proven to work in many markets with different products. Unfortunately, there's an unintended side effect of such products in our industry: they raise the expectations of the consumers to levels that simply cannot be sustained. Once a customer has been dazzled by a money-losing yet fabulous product, he'll turn up his nose at a normal product delivered on a normal budget. And this is precisely what is happening to our customers. Nowadays, if you don't spend a half-million-plus on your product, it won't sell.

 

This is prety much what I have been saying about projects on the 360 and PS3.

 It's a trend that has been happening for 15 years+ and is elusive in gaming on all platforms.

As I said above Wii developement budgets (or at least marketing) is only going to get bigger and bigger, causing the smaller budget stuff to be ignored and thus the trend illustrated will continue. Just in a less tradional sense of the money being focused not on making a (subjectively?) better game, but on making the most marketable project with the widest mainstream appeal.

 



jammy2211 said:
theRepublic said:
NJ5 said:

Thanks celine. This part is almost scary to read considering the time it was written at:

The answer has to do with a concept called "market share". The basic strategy is to "buy market share". That is, you spend a lot of money to make a product that will sell very well. You still lose money on the product, but the huge sales you make put you in an excellent position to make money with a followup product.



The concept is sound and has been proven to work in many markets with different products. Unfortunately, there's an unintended side effect of such products in our industry: they raise the expectations of the consumers to levels that simply cannot be sustained. Once a customer has been dazzled by a money-losing yet fabulous product, he'll turn up his nose at a normal product delivered on a normal budget. And this is precisely what is happening to our customers. Nowadays, if you don't spend a half-million-plus on your product, it won't sell.

 

This is prety much what I have been saying about projects on the 360 and PS3.

 It's a trend that has been happening for 15 years+ and is elusive in gaming on all platforms.

As I said above Wii developement budgets (or at least marketing) is only going to get bigger and bigger, causing the smaller budget stuff to be ignored and thus the trend illustrated will continue. Just in a less tradional sense of the money being focused not on making a (subjectively?) better game, but on making the most marketable project with the widest mainstream appeal.

 

This is much less of a problem on the Wii.  There are plenty of smaller budget, innovative projects on the Wii.  I don't see many of those on the 360 or PS3.

As it currently stands, the technology in the 360 and PS3 has outpaced the business model of the industry.  The people who own these systems demand amazing, realistic graphics for every game.  That doesn't make sense.  Not every game can be a multi-million dollar production.  There needs to be middle and lower end games for every console.



Switch Code: SW-7377-9189-3397 -- Nintendo Network ID: theRepublic -- Steam ID: theRepublic

Now Playing
Switch - Super Mario Maker 2 (2019)
Switch - The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening (2019)
Switch - Bastion (2011/2018)
3DS - Star Fox 64 3D (2011)
3DS - Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney (Trilogy) (2005/2014)
Wii U - Darksiders: Warmastered Edition (2010/2017)
Mobile - The Simpson's Tapped Out and Yugioh Duel Links
PC - Deep Rock Galactic (2020)

Look... we have the disk based formats for these massive games, but everyone seems to be forgetting that small studios are making money on Xbox Live Arcade and WiiWare to. Microsoft, and to a smaller extent Nintendo, have given tools out that allow these small devs to come out and make a game that sells 200k. You can innovate on these platforms with games like Braid that you'd never take a chance with on disk. Also Microsoft's XNA Community games have done more to revitalize the lone wolf than anything in the past twenty years. I feel positive that in the next generation all three developers will have a system much like XNA to keep inovation going and allow people like us to make a game and a few bucks at the same time.



Around the Network
theRepublic said:
jammy2211 said:
theRepublic said:
NJ5 said:

Thanks celine. This part is almost scary to read considering the time it was written at:

The answer has to do with a concept called "market share". The basic strategy is to "buy market share". That is, you spend a lot of money to make a product that will sell very well. You still lose money on the product, but the huge sales you make put you in an excellent position to make money with a followup product.



The concept is sound and has been proven to work in many markets with different products. Unfortunately, there's an unintended side effect of such products in our industry: they raise the expectations of the consumers to levels that simply cannot be sustained. Once a customer has been dazzled by a money-losing yet fabulous product, he'll turn up his nose at a normal product delivered on a normal budget. And this is precisely what is happening to our customers. Nowadays, if you don't spend a half-million-plus on your product, it won't sell.

 

This is prety much what I have been saying about projects on the 360 and PS3.

 It's a trend that has been happening for 15 years+ and is elusive in gaming on all platforms.

As I said above Wii developement budgets (or at least marketing) is only going to get bigger and bigger, causing the smaller budget stuff to be ignored and thus the trend illustrated will continue. Just in a less tradional sense of the money being focused not on making a (subjectively?) better game, but on making the most marketable project with the widest mainstream appeal.

 

This is much less of a problem on the Wii.  There are plenty of smaller budget, innovative projects on the Wii.  I don't see many of those on the 360 or PS3.

As it currently stands, the technology in the 360 and PS3 has outpaced the business model of the industry.  The people who own these systems demand amazing, realistic graphics for every game.  That doesn't make sense.  Not every game can be a multi-million dollar production.  There needs to be middle and lower end games for every console.

 You're totally missing the whole point of everything the OP's article cites and anything I said. It's 2am here and I have to get up early so I'm going to bed but I'll try leave you with the simplest way of explaining what the article is saying.

 In short, companies will always strive to have more and more successful projects, it's an evident trend in gaming for all it's exsistance. Traditionally this involved better graphics, more impressive tech etc. Wii has changed the focus somewhat, instead to have a huge behemoth seller the money needs to be pumped into market research and actual marketing. IT's still huge amounts of money and as the industry always does, it's inevitable that soon Wii projects will be huge $20 million+ total budget 'gambles' as the likes of EA and Activision use the same strategies that got them to the global gaming companies they've always used.

 The money Nintendo spend marketing their games is probably far above an 'average' PS360 games total budget for marketing and dev costs etc, I've got no real source on figures aside from Wii Fit's $40 million advertising in just the USA though. Nintendo can afford it though, cause every advert sells them consoles, and they don't have to pay royalties leading to bigger profits etc.

The only reason it's not so evident yet is the market is new territory and EA and Activision and any of the big players don't know how to make these investments successful. They'll figure it out though, and then budgets will increase, lesser known software will be ignored and gaming costs go up just as they always do.

 To be honest I'd imagine that post was a bit of a mish-mash as I was trying to make brief something which needs a long explanation (Which the OP provided but seemed to go over your head somewhat 0_o). I'll get back to this tommorow if it's not too long for me to give up reading, definitely a great article though.



Fantastic finds, fellas.

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
- George Santayana


Our industry must be short on RAM.



The rEVOLution is not being televised

jammy2211 said:
theRepublic said:
jammy2211 said:
theRepublic said:
NJ5 said:

Thanks celine. This part is almost scary to read considering the time it was written at:

The answer has to do with a concept called "market share". The basic strategy is to "buy market share". That is, you spend a lot of money to make a product that will sell very well. You still lose money on the product, but the huge sales you make put you in an excellent position to make money with a followup product.



The concept is sound and has been proven to work in many markets with different products. Unfortunately, there's an unintended side effect of such products in our industry: they raise the expectations of the consumers to levels that simply cannot be sustained. Once a customer has been dazzled by a money-losing yet fabulous product, he'll turn up his nose at a normal product delivered on a normal budget. And this is precisely what is happening to our customers. Nowadays, if you don't spend a half-million-plus on your product, it won't sell.

 

This is prety much what I have been saying about projects on the 360 and PS3.

 It's a trend that has been happening for 15 years+ and is elusive in gaming on all platforms.

As I said above Wii developement budgets (or at least marketing) is only going to get bigger and bigger, causing the smaller budget stuff to be ignored and thus the trend illustrated will continue. Just in a less tradional sense of the money being focused not on making a (subjectively?) better game, but on making the most marketable project with the widest mainstream appeal.

 

This is much less of a problem on the Wii.  There are plenty of smaller budget, innovative projects on the Wii.  I don't see many of those on the 360 or PS3.

As it currently stands, the technology in the 360 and PS3 has outpaced the business model of the industry.  The people who own these systems demand amazing, realistic graphics for every game.  That doesn't make sense.  Not every game can be a multi-million dollar production.  There needs to be middle and lower end games for every console.

 You're totally missing the whole point of everything the OP's article cites and anything I said. It's 2am here and I have to get up early so I'm going to bed but I'll try leave you with the simplest way of explaining what the article is saying.

 In short, companies will always strive to have more and more successful projects, it's an evident trend in gaming for all it's exsistance. Traditionally this involved better graphics, more impressive tech etc. Wii has changed the focus somewhat, instead to have a huge behemoth seller the money needs to be pumped into market research and actual marketing. IT's still huge amounts of money and as the industry always does, it's inevitable that soon Wii projects will be huge $20 million+ total budget 'gambles' as the likes of EA and Activision use the same strategies that got them to the global gaming companies they've always used.

 The money Nintendo spend marketing their games is probably far above an 'average' PS360 games total budget for marketing and dev costs etc, I've got no real source on figures aside from Wii Fit's $40 million advertising in just the USA though. Nintendo can afford it though, cause every advert sells them consoles, and they don't have to pay royalties leading to bigger profits etc.

The only reason it's not so evident yet is the market is new territory and EA and Activision and any of the big players don't know how to make these investments successful. They'll figure it out though, and then budgets will increase, lesser known software will be ignored and gaming costs go up just as they always do.

 To be honest I'd imagine that post was a bit of a mish-mash as I was trying to make brief something which needs a long explanation (Which the OP provided but seemed to go over your head somewhat 0_o). I'll get back to this tommorow if it's not too long for me to give up reading, definitely a great article though.

So you think that Nintendo is spending more and making more profit than any other developer?

No.

Developers are struggling because costs have risen so high.  Nintendo avoided the tech race this gen, and it paid off for them in a big way.



Switch Code: SW-7377-9189-3397 -- Nintendo Network ID: theRepublic -- Steam ID: theRepublic

Now Playing
Switch - Super Mario Maker 2 (2019)
Switch - The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening (2019)
Switch - Bastion (2011/2018)
3DS - Star Fox 64 3D (2011)
3DS - Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney (Trilogy) (2005/2014)
Wii U - Darksiders: Warmastered Edition (2010/2017)
Mobile - The Simpson's Tapped Out and Yugioh Duel Links
PC - Deep Rock Galactic (2020)

If anything, Nintendo has been the best at controlling costs. No other company has made more with less. Heck, no other company has made more with more either, in the game industry I mean.



I won't quote the multiply quoted posts, but with regards to EA etc increasing marketing budgets for Wii;

Electronic Arts tries Wii, women, Oprah’s coach to halt losses

Monday, 26 January 2009 23:24

ELECTRONIC Arts Inc., the videogame maker that hasn’t made a profit for seven quarters and is shedding 10 percent of its work force, is looking to women and Nintendo Co.’s Wii to reverse its fortunes.

The fitness game “EA Sports Active,” set for a May release exclusively for the Wii, will be marketed to women with a blitz “at least” as large as the annual campaign for bestseller “Madden NFL,” EA Sports president Peter Moore said.

Oprah Winfrey’s personal trainer is a spokesman, and the company may buy infomercials or advertising on cable channels geared toward women such as Oxygen, Moore said in an interview.


The promotional efforts tied to “Active” are aimed at countering Electronic Arts’ macho image and delivering its first hit on the world’s top-selling console. The company is courting female users as part of a broader effort to develop games for the Wii and make up ground on Activision Blizzard Inc., the world’s largest game maker.

“When you look at the impact that the Wii platform is having on our business, we better be relevant,” Moore said in an interview at the company’s Redwood City, California, headquarters. He declined to say what the marketing effort will cost.

Last month, the company lowered its revenue and profit forecast and expanded planned job cuts to 1,000 as sales of games built for Microsoft Corp.’s Xbox and Sony Corp.’s PlayStation 3 lost steam.

“They need a hit,” said Colin Sebastian, a San Francisco-based analyst with Lazard Capital Markets. “If they have a big hit on the Wii in 2009, that would go a long way in terms of helping them.”

Electronic Arts lost $310 million in the period ended September 30 on increased marketing and research costs. The company reports third-quarter results on February 3.

The push to sell Wii games to women follows the company’s failed effort last year to acquire Take-Two Interactive Software Inc. for $2 billion. Take-Two, the New York-based publisher of the “Grand Theft Auto” games, rejected the offer.

Promoting “Madden NFL,” the only Electronic Arts game in the top 10 for all of 2008, costs the company about $10 million a year, according to Evan Wilson, senior analyst with Pacific Crest Securities in Portland. The title didn’t make the bestseller list in December.

“Active” is a “late entry” into the Wii market, Wilson said in an interview. “With a marketing budget of that size, they intend for it to be a multimillion-unit seller. If it’s not then it would be a disappointment.”


Moore, a former gym teacher who was hired by chief executive officer John Riccitiello in July 2007 from Microsoft, says Electronic Arts was caught “out of position” by the Wii.

The promotional effort is necessary to persuade women to use Wii for a workout, he said.

“Women know all about our brand and think it’s not for them,” said Moore, 53. “We’re putting up a very large marketing spend because we have to, to break through.”

The Wii, released in November 2006, sold 10.2 million copies in the US last year, or 55 percent of home new-console sales, according to Port Washington, New York-based NPD Group Inc., which tracks industry sales. Five of the 10 best-selling games in December were for Wii.

Electronic Arts’ initial attempts to adapt games designed for Redmond, Washington-based Microsoft’s Xbox and Sony Corp.’s PlayStation 3 to the Wii were like “trying to fit square pegs into round holes,” Moore said. The company is now devoting teams to work exclusively on Wii titles.

“Our growth is really going to be if we can really nail the Wii,” Moore said.

“Active,” which will cost $60, will use the Wii’s motion-sensing controllers to track players’ movements as they follow along with the virtual trainer. Players will be able to make custom workouts from more than 20 exercises and log how many calories they burned.

Electronic Arts is trying to differentiate the game from Kyoto, Japan-based Nintendo’s popular workout game, “Wii Fit,” by calling it a “Western fitness circuit.” While “Active” is compatible with the “Wii Fit” balance board, the exercises focus on building muscles through use of elastic resistance bands.

The Nintendo fitness game was third in December game sales, after “Call of Duty: World at War,” from Santa Monica, California-based Activision, and Nintendo’s “Wii Play,” NPD said.

To hone the appeal to women, Moore enlisted television host Winfrey’s personal trainer, Bob Greene, to help develop exercises for the game and serve as a spokesman. He also hired a former marketing director for Paris-based L’Oreal SA, the world’s largest cosmetics maker, and is negotiating deals with sporting goods stores to sell the game.

“I think we’ve done well to catch up, but there’s still some catching up to do,” Moore said.


Link

So EA plan to spend at least as much as Madden's $10m annual marketing budget on this fitness title.

Ubisoft commenting on casual marketing budgets:

Ubisoft's Laurent Detoc talks casual games, industry trends

Casual games are attractive not only to gamers but also Ubisoft, which can develop many of those titles for cheaper. But Detoc said the casual games are not complete cash cows because Ubisoft's is using a certain amount of those profits for marketing, which he said is necessary to draw in new casual users, who are not as hooked in to games as hardcore gamers.

"The margins on these games are good when you look at development, but it takes a lot of marketing dollars," he said. "It's like packaged goods. You have to think about marketing, retail space, branding."


Link

This is definitely a trend we'll be seeing more of on the casual side of the market, lower development costs offset by higher marketing costs.