• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Darksiders 2 cost $50 million to make

That has to include marketing. 2 year development cycle X 100 employees X 90,000 USD salary (pretty close to accurate). That's 18 million. I suppose if the team actually had 200 employees you could double that to 36 million but I really don't think that many people worked on Darksiders 2.

I could see THQ spending about 20 million on the game and 30 million on marketing though. Which would then mean they were likely hoping for it to sell about 2 million copies for the 360/ps3 and then the PC and eventual wii U ports would have been a tidy profit.

It only sold like half that though right ?

Your math is way off.

The cost of employing someone doesn't stop at their salary. You have to pay taxes, insurance, buy equipment and software, keep the lights and ac on... You can more than double the cost of the base pre tax salary per person to calculate how much a games development cost. A team of 100 people will have a burn rate of 20 million plus per year easily with an average salary less than 90,000 dollars per person.

It's almost never advantageous for a developer or publisher to be honest publicly about the real cost of developing a game. Often times when you hear a developer or publisher talking about their production budget they are talking about that 12 month period before ship where the game project is officially in "production", not including the months and years of development on the game that lead to production. $50 million is pretty conservative I think for DS2, and on the low end of AAA development. When people talk about Destiny... That game easily cost well over 250 million dollars in total development. Bungie probably spent about that in just the last two years just keeping their doors open and developers in seats.
 

Card Boy

Banned
What really makes the game terrible is the loot, it used to be about clearing a dungeon to get that sword or heart piece but the loot really cheapens the whole experience. Although its a different genre I feel the same way about Destiny.
 

JaseC

gave away the keys to the kingdom.
Including marketing or no? That's absurd for production.

Total cost -- development (pre and post-release), marketing and distribution -- was almost $79m:

thqpredictions6bu8g.jpg


The bracketed figure means THQ lost $0.5m despite the game generating $78.2m.

Edit: The data above is from THQ's bankruptcy filing, by the way.
 

Dahbomb

Member
2.4 million copies sold for a game in that genre is very respectable.

It's kinda ridiculous that a game can gross $80 million and still not make its money back. The budgeting for this game was completely out of wack.
 
Wow. That's a lot of money.

I liked the first game better, because Darksiders II was too dungeon-heavy and got repetitive. However, I still liked it quite a bit.

Would love to see a Darksiders III, because it's a great series.
 

Card Boy

Banned
I would say this $50 million is better well spent than Titanfall though. At least you can play the game when everyone has fucked off.
 
And if it had sold 10 million copies, that would seem like a bargain. Of course, anyone could have told them it wouldn't sell 10 million copies, and if they had made it for 20 million instead, the sales it got would have been a solid success. The thing that killed THQ is exactly what is killing countless studios, an inability to see anything other than microprojects and mega-blockbusters.

It really is a prime example of a game that wasn't budgeted with the fanbase and true sales potential in mind. It's a shame too cause I liked both Darksiders games and would want the franchise to continue, but damn is that budget out of line.
 

Dahbomb

Member
I don't understand who would sign off on that much money on a 3rd person action game these days.

You wouldn't even put in that much money on a DMC5 game and that game is pretty much guaranteed to sell 3 million copies.
 
I think what throws people off about this is the lackluster presentation. The music's great, and there a lot of large scale environments and artistry on display, but it never really feels slick and well presented, the errand boy missions leave a bad taste, and the latter parts of the game fall off hard. Looking at the team size and amount of stuff within the game though, I can see the $50m budget.

Yup.

In terms of actual content, Darksiders 2 is definitely a big budget game. Think for a moment how many different weapons there are alone. Each one had to be designed and made seperately. That must of cost the earth, even if most if themmm shared the same movesets with differing stats.


The problem with the game is that 50% of the content is fluff and should of never been in the game in the first place.

If they had removed the loot aspect of the game, nothing of value would of been lost. It was padding for paddings sake.

They could of easily kept the weapon types (gauntlet, hammer,hand blades, scythe) and just had a basic XP/leveling system. Would of done the exact same job and would of been hella cheaper in asset creation.

Same applys to the clothing and armor. It was all unnecessary.
 

fader

Member
rushhour_18.jpg


and where is the Publisher that funded this is at now? Exactly. Whatever happened to making games on a budget and doing the best with what you have?
 

Soul_Pie

Member
When you're dealing with such a large amount of money your vision for the game has to be absolutely airtight. Unfortunately in the case of Darksiders 2 it's a game that feels like it was badly mismanaged and lacking in coherency.

I also wonder whether THQ's financial woes at the time played into the final product, with so much riding on the game was there too much directive or input from those not involved in the creative process trying to steer the game in different directions? In some ways it did seem like a very confused game, trying to be a lot of things at once. Stuff like the earth mission and the last few worlds seem completely disconnected.

Bit of a shame that it ended up this way. The combat in Darksiders 2 was super tight and really fun, and I really enjoyed many of the areas of the presentation. Hopefully the series still has a future.
 

Dahbomb

Member
I would actually say that Darksiders 2 was rushed, it clearly needed an extra year in the oven to add content to the later zones, improve mission structure a bit and maybe fine tune the story beats a bit.

In terms of actual content, Darksiders 2 is definitely a big budget game. Think for a moment how many different weapons there are alone. Each one had to be designed and made seperately. That must of cost the earth, even if most if themmm shared the same movesets with differing stats.
There aren't that many weapons and even then there aren't that many moves per weapon. It's vastly fewer options than something like Ninja Gaiden 2. Unless you are talking about the Legendary in which case they are basically palette swaps with different stats, they use identical animations which is where the brunt of work on a weapon is. Other loot based games have far, far more Legendary/unique items to get.

The budget went into the scale of the worlds especially the first two along with the presentation (visuals, soundtrack, VA etc).
 

Pachinko

Member
Mikeofthelivingdead - I was basing that 90K figure on the total average cost of employing 1 person for 1 year. I'm basing that on EGM a few years back though, when they used to run a monthly feature on various jobs in the industry, they always had an average salary listed. 90,000 per year was actually at the high end, if I recall correctly most of the jobs they covered in that series made closer to 50,000 a year. As well, a very large portion of the final staff for any bigger game, again, especially one that was made this quickly is going to be testing. Testers don't make much in a year and are mostly temporary contract workers, hired for a 2 or 3 month stint to get a game as polished as possible before it has to go gold. It's not like they're free but they're making perhaps 6000$ each in those 3 months they get a job. Even if you hired 100 of them you'd only be paying a million dollars or so WITH accounting for any extra insurance or taxes and what have you.

Now, any big game , especially one rushed out in just a couple years like DS2 was , is going to have substantial crunch time costs. So who knows, maybe more people worked on it than I assume ? perhaps THQ just blew money left right and center on it because they knew they'd be going bankrupt anyway so who cares :p

That bankruptcy listing someone else posted here , seems to indicate that the game actually cost about 79 million dollars to make yet it managed 2.4 million in sales and ended up losing 500,000$ for THQ. I'm guessing a large portion of those sales were from discounts and retailers sending back excess copies. Plus, it was developed for 4 platforms in the end. I guess if it cost 20 million to make the game and then an additional 5 million to port it each time then it could have conceivably cost 35 million by the time the wii U version went gold. Not unheard of to think they spent 45 million marketing it , advertisements are expensive if you want to bombard every form of media for more then just a few days or a couple ads.

I think it's quite simply a case of THQ not having many eggs left in their basket- they HAD to spend a ton of money and hope that promotion and marketing would lead to a large return on investment or they were finished. As it turns out they made some money on their last few games overall but not enough to pay off their debts as quickly as they needed to. Darksiders was just one game that they desperately needed to sell 5 million copies at full price. They would then have doubled their investment but going by what I recall their massive debt was , they needed like 12 games to do that just to keep the creditors at bay for a year or 2. They only ended up with 3 or 4.
 
I doubt most of the sales came from discounts. According to bankruptcy numbers they sold 2.4 million copies, bringing into THQ 78.2 million dollars (which represented a loss of 500k). Which means they made on average $32.58. Which by the time you factor in the stores cut (which is small), physical production, shipping, other cuts off the 60 dollar price tag, that's probably MOST copies of the game selling for close to full retail price. Unless I'm reading that chart wrong.
 

Carlius

Banned
too much for a game that didnt use top of the line tech or anything new. marketting maybe, but not the game. crysis 3 was 60 right? but that makes sense being the grpahical powerhouse it is
 

Zarx

Member
too much for a game that didnt use top of the line tech or anything new. marketting maybe, but not the game. crysis 3 was 60 right? but that makes sense being the grpahical powerhouse it is

Tech is cheap, content is expensive
 
I can tell most of the budget ended up creating the 3 hub worlds. Completely pointless considering it was design around collect-3 mechanic. It's stupid, monotonous and the ending was the opposite of it's predecessor: anti-climatic, abrupt, meaningless and without context.

Oh, and the stupid loot mechanic. If the wanted to pursue that, they should've created an isometric game with 4-player co-op Diablo style.
 
Why is everyone so surprised
Who here has 100% the game?

Because I did it took 44 hours, that is pretty long game.

Its AAA games dev cost almost all games are around or above this budget.

That is why every publisher needs games to sell high nr of millions to start making back their money.
 

DieH@rd

Banned
That most certainly includes marketing.

Heavy Rain costed $52mil, 22 for the game and 30mil for marketing. Darksides 2 was a big game, with several large gameplay areas, metric tons of great unique gothic art, large campaign, tons of voice acting. I can see it costing 20-35mil to be produced, and marketing was handled pretty OK [live action trailer, CGI trailer, etc].


edit-
I was told $25M by a highly placed source involved with the game's development. This was April 2013: http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/...n-and-other-ips-acquired-by-nordic-games.aspx

That sounds right. It had pretty high production values, complicated design and it was a big game.
 

ugoo18

Member
That most certainly includes marketing.

Heavy Rain costed $52mil, 22 for the game and 30mil for marketing. Darksides 2 was a big game, with several large gameplay areas, metric tons of great unique gothic art, large campaign, tons of voice acting. I can see it costing 20-35mil to be produced, and marketing was handled pretty OK [live action trailer, CGI trailer, etc].


edit-


That sounds right. It had pretty high production values, complicated design and it was a big game.

It did?

I don't remember its visuals being overly impressive when i played it and that was the PC version.
 

HK-47

Oh, bitch bitch bitch.
I haven't played Destiny, but I have an honest, totally serious question:

Has there ever been a game with a multiplayer co-op focus, raids, drop in, drop out, etc. gameplay that has ever had a good story?

Diablo doesn't. Borderlands doesn't. Halo, honestly doesn't. WoW really doesn't.

Really, all of those games have decent-to-good lore, but the actual stories are bleh. Maybe it's the nature of the macro system structure that kills the chance at a compelling narrative.

A few MMOs (FFXI, LotRO, Secret World) and the first Halo game though it really just pretended the other player wasnt there and the reason the story is good is cause its simple and effective.
 
I almost wonder if some point in development THQ saw the writing on the wall and stopped caring about money so all budgets spiralled into crazy numbers.
 

DieH@rd

Banned
It did?

I don't remember its visuals being overly impressive when i played it and that was the PC version.

It was impressive to me, with tons of great assets that made great battlechasers-styled world.

b3f3fcj.jpg

c3ydiao.jpg

d32uev4.jpg



Darksiders2PC_2012-07-27_04-26-22-60.jpg

darksiders2-pc_02.jpg

darksiders-2-arguls-tomb-dlc-release-date.jpg

darksiders2-2012-10-06-20-54-47-79.jpg

Darksiders-II-Screenshots.jpg

n_thq-vigil-games-darksiders-2-screenshot-02_1353023926.jpg

ikxzosOg9smex.jpg

iMtghSRO0vpSW.jpg

iLViFoykjOTuL.jpg

iiksFDDsnwmK3.jpg

Darksiders2.exe_DX9_20130801_035109.jpg

Darksiders2.exe_DX9_20130731_205313.jpg

c167e3l.jpg

Darksiders2_1.jpg



Plus, game had metric shitton of bossess in varying sizes, tons of dungeons, unique locations and phenomenal "statue-work".
 
No wonder it's so regarded as a flop and killed the franchise if it cost that much to make. I can't believe it's that high. It's not even that expensive looking a production, so where did all the money go?!

Mismanagement up the wazoo there.
 

Labadal

Member
I don't know if the quoted number is real but I remember that ads for the game were everywhere on the net for quite a while. They also made several live action clips before release.
 

KHlover

Banned
Development + marketing included surely.

That's actually not that high.
No, as the financial statement from their bankruptcy posted on one of the last pages shows Development+Marketing actually is $80 Mil. $50 Mil actually seems to be development only.
 

tweaker

Banned
It was impressive to me, with tons of great assets that for making battlechasers-style world.

Plus, game had metric shitton of bossess in varying sizes, tons of dungeons, unique locations and phenomenal "statue-work".

The game always felt like a mixed bag of different games, but just didn't had anything that would made it stand out on its own or equal the quality of those different games.

The visuals where outdated already from day one, the art was maybe interesting and covered up large parts of the outdated visuals, but still it was a eyesore at times.

Story wise, not really that great. Your standard god of war story basically.

Dungeon wise, not really up to par with zelda as i would compare the game towards.

The game just felt like a good snack, but had really nothing going for it for me personally. I completed the game but i never really bothered to boot it up again.

The game also was riddled with game breaking bugs, which also made the journey a tad more difficult to like.

Marketing for the game was everywhere tho, so i think that's where the money went into.

No, as the financial statement from their bankruptcy posted on one of the last pages shows Development+Marketing actually is $80 Mil. $50 Mil actually seems to be development only.

Oh if that's the case, something really did go wrong probably with higher up salary's. Wouldn't be shocked if somebody earned a lot of money doing nothing.
 
Weird. There is nothing in the game that would cost that much, aside from the number of unique areas and dungeons.

From what I read about budget distribution and cost charts of video game development, design and marketing cost the most. The game obviously had crappy playtesting (not a large part of most budgets though), a lot of reused assets, generic designs, unoptimized LOD--and other technical stuff, limited number of NPCs/intricate character models and repetitive areas. Most importantly, it wasn't heavily advertised.

If it had unique equipment (them reused armors/weapons) and intricate character models, then yes it looks like a game that costs a lot. Looking again at it, it does have a lot of areas and dungeons (contributes heavily to design), but why the huge marketing budget? I remember reading something about BF3 costing 10million $ just for marketing, but did Darksiders II have the same scale of marketing and exposure that Bf3 had?


ANYWAY. The game had amazing textures, Antialiasing and character models......
 

Thomper

Member
I remember reading something about BF3 costing 10million $ just for marketing, but did Darksiders II have the same scale of marketing and exposure that Bf3 had?
Marketing for Battlefield 3 was actually $100 million: http://www.thesixthaxis.com/2011/04/07/battlefield-3-marketing-budget-to-be-100-million/

10 million dollars of marketing for a big budget game is nothing, really. It sounds expensive, but pretty much every AAA-game releasing this fall will have a bigger marketing budget.
 

BibiMaghoo

Member
Or larger unique movesets for weapons. How about a better physics engine and juggle mechanics?

I have no problem with either of those things, but that ending...

I was angry. It ruined what could have been a great narrative continuation, instead making it a side-by-side of no relevance. Very disappointing.
 

nOoblet16

Member
$50 million is not high for a last gen AAA, especially for a game of this scale, art, music and production values. Yes the engine it runs on is not technically as advanced as other AAA but that is only one part of what constitutes towards the budget.

I don't know why people are surprised when it's probably on the lower end of AAA games with large areas. Uncharted games with their closed areas and small campaign cost $20 million or so so it should come as no surprise that Darksiders 2 costs this much.
 
Top Bottom