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

Forums - Nintendo - To all of those that think SEGA's both hardcore games bombed.

psrock said:

My idea of it bombing has always been on sales since that's really the only aspect we got some decent info on. The developers don't tell us how much these games cost them. I have only seen this making a profit excuse this generation because it's the pefect way to cover bad sales of a game we expect some good volumes from.

That seems quite unwise, seeing as how it ignores a very vital part of the picture. If raw sales were all that mattered, EA would still be profitable and Phoenix Games would have gone belly-up long ago, so we know that we can't go by that metric. I'll freely grant that we rarely get full figures for the development+marketing cost of any given game, but to take that fact and thus ignore that entire factor is doing yourself a big disservice.



Around the Network
mowe said:
I don't think those two games bombed, but no one can say they sold really well.

These two games were supposed to be proof that mature games do have a place on Wii, but the sales numbers aren't exactly encouraging to new developers.

And I know the most common argument as to why mature Wii games don't sell as much as HD is that they don't get enough advertisement, but I saw ads on TV for both HotD, and MadWorld. And if I see an ad for a Wii game here in Canada, I know that the publisher has a decent amount of advertising.

And TC, you have no idea how much the budgets were, or the price retailers paid (I really think it would be less than $30).

This is what I don't get. We were told these things by gaming websites like IGN, but I don't buy it. Because what this means is we'll have to eliminate games like CoD 3/W@W, Red Steel, RE4 Wii Edition, and HOTD 2/3.

Just one of these things that boggles my mind, disregard the games that disprove something in favor of two games that prove nothing.

EDIT: HappySquirrel beat me to it.



Bet between Slimbeast and Arius Dion about Wii sales 2009:


If the Wii sells less than 20 million in 2009 (as defined by VGC sales between week ending 3d Jan 2009 to week ending 4th Jan 2010) Slimebeast wins and get to control Arius Dion's sig for 1 month.

If the Wii sells more than 20 million in 2009 (as defined above) Arius Dion wins and gets to control Slimebeast's sig for 1 month.

noname2200 said:
psrock said:

My idea of it bombing has always been on sales since that's really the only aspect we got some decent info on. The developers don't tell us how much these games cost them. I have only seen this making a profit excuse this generation because it's the pefect way to cover bad sales of a game we expect some good volumes from.

That seems quite unwise, seeing as how it ignores a very vital part of the picture. If raw sales were all that mattered, EA would still be profitable and Phoenix Games would have gone belly-up long ago, so we know that we can't go by that metric. I'll freely grant that we rarely get full figures for the development+marketing cost of any given game, but to take that fact and thus ignore that entire factor is doing yourself a big disservice.

EA had major bombs as well, they had a terrible holiday period. thus contributing to their losses. But most of you underestimate the cost to make games for the Wii as well. It's smaller, but as the game gets bigger so does the cost.



 Next Gen 

11/20/09 04:25 makingmusic476 Warning Other (Your avatar is borderline NSFW. Please keep it for as long as possible.)
Soriku said:

I don't think that many people expected really good sales for MW. (Overkill devs said the game sold well and they wanted to make a sequel so that made some good profit for them and it's still selling.) It's a game by devs that have had crappy sales in the past and is black and white and gory, there's not a big enough audience for that type of game anyway. Plus I don't think the game pushed any big graphical boundaries to make it cost too much.

At the same time though, Clover has a long history of either underestimating development costs and/or overestimating sales potential. I'm fairly confident that they thought Madworld would do better, even if it was foolish of them to think so.

psrock said:

EA had major bombs as well, they had a terrible holiday period. thus contributing to their losses. But most of you underestimate the cost to make games for the Wii as well. It's smaller, but as the game gets bigger so does the cost.

 Yes, but this only reinforces my point, as their major bombs are titles like Dead Space and Mirror's Edge...i.e. games that had tremendous raw sales, but from what they've told us not enough so to make those games profitable. You're correct about the second part, I think, hence my comments about Madworld needing to do more (from what we've heard Overkill's doing well enough).



Currently, both games are at 35 bux at amazon.com so there is a price drop.

But then that only shows that the sales will show massive legs.

Instead of earning $30 for 1 copy, they will earn $30 for 2 copies. So, Sega will end up getting profit for both games approximately by the end of the summer for sure even if the development costs were very high.

I would say combined Lifetime sales of 750k is a great number to consider them not a fail.



______________________________________________________

 

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare: Reflex Edition FC 0025-4434-1221

MSG ME AS YOU ADD.

 

Around the Network

According to my math, they both needed to sell 750,000 copies in order to bring true profit to their publisher, and I don't think either one has reached 750,000 yet.

(games and movies have to earn twice what they cost to make in order to earn satisfactory profit, so if both games cost $30.00 in the store and they took ten million to make. They would have to earn back 20 million dollars (24 million counting advertising), so if they sold a million that would be 3 times what they cost to make and more than enough to justify sequels. If they sold 500,000 copies, they would only be earning 1.5 what they cost to make which isn't enough. So, they both needed to sell 750,000 to earn back twice what they cost to make.)



txrattlesnake said:
According to my math, they both needed to sell 750,000 copies in order to bring true profit to their publisher, and I don't think either one has reached 750,000 yet.

(games and movies have to earn twice what they cost to make in order to earn satisfactory profit, so if both games cost $30.00 in the store and they took ten million to make. They would have to earn back 20 million dollars (24 million counting advertising), so if they sold a million that would be 3 times what they cost to make and more than enough to justify sequels. If they sold 500,000 copies, they would only be earning 1.5 what they cost to make which isn't enough. So, they both needed to sell 750,000 to earn back twice what they cost to make.)

So, I guess we can conclude by your math that Metal Gear Solid 4 and Killzone 2 didn't bring a true profit to their publisher ...



I'd like to add that Sony or MS would be lucky to get $30 off of their first party fully priced titles.

Let alone a third party title.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

psrock said:
This is the saddest thread i have ever read, give it up folks, stop looking for excuses. Many games bomb all the times in all consoles. Why is it so hard to accept, it's not that serious.

Listen to Captain Picard.



HappySqurriel said:
txrattlesnake said:
According to my math, they both needed to sell 750,000 copies in order to bring true profit to their publisher, and I don't think either one has reached 750,000 yet.

(games and movies have to earn twice what they cost to make in order to earn satisfactory profit, so if both games cost $30.00 in the store and they took ten million to make. They would have to earn back 20 million dollars (24 million counting advertising), so if they sold a million that would be 3 times what they cost to make and more than enough to justify sequels. If they sold 500,000 copies, they would only be earning 1.5 what they cost to make which isn't enough. So, they both needed to sell 750,000 to earn back twice what they cost to make.)

So, I guess we can conclude by your math that Metal Gear Solid 4 and Killzone 2 didn't bring a true profit to their publisher ...


      Well, they're working on it.  MGS 4 will be selling more copies as a greatest hits game when the PS3's audience goes over 5 million in Japan probably by the end of March 2010 following the releases of GT5 and FFXIII as PS3 exclusives in Japan later this year.

      And, Killzone 2 might not appeal so much to Japanese gamers for it to get a real boost in sales as the PS3's Japanese sales numbers continue to grow.  However the strengthened support from Japanese devleopers for the PS3 which will be coming the PS3's way in the wake of the sales growth I mentioned previously that will cause definite distinction between the PS3 and 360 libraries later in this gen may lead more people to pick up Killzone 2 later in the gen.

    Of course, I don't know how much it cost to make either MGS4 or KZ2.  If it cost 60 million to make both MGS4 and KZ2.  Then priced at $60.00 at launch, if they sold 1 million copies each they would be breaking even at one million sales, but to get the satisfactory profit I wrote about before, then MGS 4 would have to sell 2 million copies and KZ2 would have to sell 2 million copies.  MGS 4 has already sold 4 million copies, so it is probably making a profit and it looks to me to be fairly likely that KZ2 will sell more than 2 million copies.

 

     Basically any game or blockbuster movie needs to make back twice what it cost to make to make a profit for its creator and to have money for them to make a sequel.