Aaaaah, San Francisco. Yeah let's set up shop in the most expensive part of the country outside of Manhattan.
They set up back in the 90s when it was less expensive. It was part of EA's headquarters.
Aaaaah, San Francisco. Yeah let's set up shop in the most expensive part of the country outside of Manhattan.
Aaaaah, San Francisco. Yeah let's set up shop in the most expensive part of the country outside of Manhattan.
Ive always wondered for an industry where people constantly complain about money they base it in such an expensive location.
I take it they get lots of tax breaks or something for being there?
Or they could just spend less money on their games without resorting to loot boxes in single player titles.
woah 60 mil. Is that essentailly the most expensive horror game ever made?
BotW was likely created with a fraction of the budget of many AAA titles
spend your marketing budgets smarter, gaming industry.
Thats not how it works. The development budget probably doesnt include marketing and post launch supportSo they made less than $15 per copy sold? Even allowing for a lot of copies being sold at a discount I thought it would be higher than that. Nevertheless, if this is a justification for trying to fleece consumers rather than address the industry's own bad practices it's a pretty weak one.
Two years of hundreds of people at San Francisco Bay Area salaries and benefits plus all the outsourcing needed to support it.
Not many AAA studios left in the Bay Area these days you'll notice. Crystal Dynamics outsources half their game development to Montreal as one of the few remaining ones.
How much does the average Nintendo game cost to make?
I have my doubts about that considering how long it was in development.
Yeah, I noticed that too.Am I misreading the OP? He says it wasn't enough, not that it wasn't profitable.
They set up back in the 90s when it was less expensive. It was part of EA's headquarters.
If only this was how it worked60 U.S. dollars * 4 million =
240 million U.S. dollars
it only cost 60 mil
I don't get it .
60 U.S. dollars * 4 million =
240 million U.S. dollars
it only cost 60 mil
I don't get it .
what?
Please write up what the average budget for "such a basic game" should be like, broken down into any sort of departmental make-up you want.
Dead Space 2 is honestly up there with Resident Evil 4 as two of the greatest survival horror games - a real shame it wasn't a bigger success.
So they made less than $15 per copy sold? Even allowing for a lot of copies being sold at a discount I thought it would be higher than that. Nevertheless, if this is a justification for trying to fleece consumers rather than address the industry's own bad practices it's a pretty weak one.
60 U.S. dollars * 4 million =
240 million U.S. dollars
it only cost 60 mil
I don't get it .
60 U.S. dollars * 4 million =
240 million U.S. dollars
it only cost 60 mil
I don't get it .
You do realize that theyre not getting $60 for every game sold, right?
60 U.S. dollars * 4 million =
240 million U.S. dollars
it only cost 60 mil
I don't get it .
Dead Space 2 is honestly up there with Resident Evil 4 as two of the greatest survival horror games - a real shame it wasn't a bigger success.
Apparently only needed around 2 million copies sold in order to be profitable. Nintendo also tends to work with pretty small teams for the modern AAA industry (still hundreds of people).
I mean, 2 million copies of a 1st party game sold at full price nets what, $70-80m in revenue? Certainly not cheap.
But yeah Breath of the Wild is going to be extremely profitable, no doubt about it.
That's not how it works. The development budget probably doesn't include marketing and post launch support
Plus after manufacturing costs and platform holders taking their cut and retailers taking their cut I wouldn't be surprised if they really were making less than $15 per copy
San Francisco has experienced the most real estate inflation of any metro area in the US over the last couple decades.Oh... San Francisco. Yeah, that explains a lot. Seems like a lot of the large development cities in the 90s are impossible to live in now.
Jason? Nirolak....is Jason?$60m to make, another $60m to market? You get...what, $45 from each copy sold? 4m copies sold...$180m? And that's pushing what they might've gotten from each copy. If they got say, $30m, well. They broke even, which means that game wasn't worth making in EA's eyes.
Yikes. Jason's right.
Yepyepyep. Would be thread of the year.@Nirolak How about a thread that has all known game budgets in one topic so we have a better view at this?
Smaller budget, re-using assets and shift in design philosophy from horror to co-op action probably had EA thinking it would make some dough.so if DS2 wasnt profitable, how was DS3 greenlit
Dead Space 2 is honestly up there with Resident Evil 4 as two of the greatest survival horror games - a real shame it wasn't a bigger success.
If only.60 U.S. dollars * 4 million =
240 million U.S. dollars
it only cost 60 mil
I don't get it .