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

Forums - Nintendo - Call Of Duty Wii get another adjustment bump. Now up to 870K

Viper1 on 09 February 2009
ph4nt said:
Disclaimer: these numbers are made up.

Say it costs you $100 to make a product and you can make $500 from it.

Say you can make another $50 product using the same resources and get $200 back.

Would you: A) Refuse to invest the extra $50
B) Make the second product as well.

I think if anyone chooses anything other than B their genes should be removed from the population. Profit is profit, it would be stupid for activision to want LESS profit.

It is this and nothing more.



The rEVOLution is not being televised

Around the Network
11ht11 on 09 February 2009

this game should hit the 900k mark once the software sales are added for this week



bigjon on 09 February 2009
Pristine20 said:
Demotruk said:
outlawauron said:
LordTheNightKnight said:

"You must be kidding. There is no absolute number for budgets or $ recieved from retailers."

The game would have to cost tens of millions to not have made a profit. Even the ads are not numerous enough to have exceeded that.

I don't think it has lost Activision money, but it's ludricrious to think that the Wii version has made more profit than the PS3 version.

@ averyblund

Not necessarily. Red Steel cost more than Gears of War to make.

 

 

Of course it didn't, but you're missing what's important: profit/investment. The investment in CoD on Wii was much lower than that on the HD consoles. So, it may have a similar ratio of profit to investment.

 

Take off the fanboy goggles for a second. Over 7 mil HD sales made similar profit to 0.87 mil wii sales only in a fanboy's dream.

what is is saying is not out of the realm of reality, but the only way to verify would be to... say right now PS2 + Wii version has sold about 20% of what HD version has. If the cost to port the Game to the PS2Wii is less than 20% (ballpark number of course) than for ever dollar spent the Wii version has returned more profit. This would be called the IRR. So it is very possible (depending on the cost to port it to the Wii) that the Wii's IRR is better than the HD version. I think by the time both these game stop selling it will be a bit higher (%'s can work wonder huh)

You see last week the Wii/PS2 sold 37% of what the HD versions did. That number will continue to grow.

 



End of 2009 Predictions (Set, January 1st 2009)

Wii- 72 million   3rd Year Peak, better slate of releases

360- 37 million   Should trend down slightly after 3rd year peak

PS3- 29 million  Sales should pick up next year, 3rd year peak and price cut

irstupid on 09 February 2009
ph4nt said:
Disclaimer: these numbers are made up.

Say it costs you $100 to make a product and you can make $500 from it.

Say you can make another $50 product using the same resources and get $200 back.

Would you: A) Refuse to invest the extra $50
B) Make the second product as well.

I think if anyone chooses anything other than B their genes should be removed from the population. Profit is profit, it would be stupid for activision to want LESS profit.

 

It's not that simple.  You are missing oppertunity costs in your numbers.



Viper1 on 09 February 2009

Opportunity costs?

What the hell are those?



The rEVOLution is not being televised

Around the Network
irstupid on 09 February 2009

the cost of doing something instead of something else.

say they decide to port a game to the PS3, or 360 whichever wasn't original developed on, or even to the Wii. The time spent doing that port could be spent doing something else.



LordTheNightKnight on 09 February 2009
irstupid said:
the cost of doing something instead of something else.

say they decide to port a game to the PS3, or 360 whichever wasn't original developed on, or even to the Wii. The time spent doing that port could be spent doing something else.

 

That's a pretty vague "something else". And it missed the point of the comment, which was about gaining extra profit. What the hell is this "something else" supposed do to mitigate that?



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

irstupid on 09 February 2009

yea buts that all short term. Its like going to college. You can make 20-30k right out of high school, or you can go to college and when you graduate make 50-60k a year.

So they may be making some extra profit on a port of a game, but are thus delaying a new game that could be making them a shit ton more than a little profit.



Procrastinato on 09 February 2009

As all adults who own Wiis grow up and become big adults, they will buy this game! Wii has legs, don't you know it? Also all new Wii buyers will want these games because they want to buy every shooting game ever, but new HD buyers will scoff at old stuff.

Also when Wii take over, no one wants to make stuff for HD things anyhow.



 

Viper1 on 09 February 2009
irstupid said:
yea buts that all short term. Its like going to college. You can make 20-30k right out of high school, or you can go to college and when you graduate make 50-60k a year.

So they may be making some extra profit on a port of a game, but are thus delaying a new game that could be making them a shit ton more than a little profit.

OK, you're talking resource allocation versus amortization.  In the example used by ph4nt, the $50 would still likely be best served as he suggested because any other use would result in what would have to be a low budget project since $100 is the standard.

However, if they do believe they can use the $50 and make more than the $200 possible from the amortized port/other console version, then it would be better spent there.

 

In the current CoD:WaWexample, if Activision felt their resources could be better served by making a different game than CoD:WaW on Wii, then they would have done that.

 

 



The rEVOLution is not being televised