Deadly Cyclone
Pride of Iowa State
This is a joke right? Someone tell me this is a joke.
-
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.
BioShock Infinite among most expensive games of all time?
- Thread starter Sn4ke_911
- Start date
This is a joke right? Someone tell me this is a joke.
Technosteve
Banned
10 million copies to break even?
funkystudent
Member
Wonder what will happen to Ken Levine and Irrational after this game ships.
No way in hell its making that kind of money back.
No way in hell its making that kind of money back.
I don't think we can even estimate how many units it will take to break even. They may have spent $200 million but that may not be even close to what they actually lost given taxes. Some expenses like employee salaries are immediately deductible and you can depreciate (meaning deduct over time) the money you spend on equipment and buildings. Plus there are many federal and state law tax breaks for the industry. Some of the advertising expenses are deductible. Irrational is owned by Take Two so Take Two may be able to use some of these deductions depending on a ton of factors. Now this is a very simplistic and potentially erroneous analysis of the situation. But just because you spent 200 million to make a game does not mean you are actually out 200 million.
I'm not so sure that it matters what we think is too much - how much money the product generates is drastically more important.
With such large, obtuse numbers like these which tend to fall way on the south side of the cost efficiency chart, there's really no possible way all that spending was ideal. Some of it becomes a waste because it doesn't take into consideration profit yield. Or put simply: they went way over budget.
It's one thing to not understand why a Skullgirls character costs $350k to implement. It's another to throw around a quarter of a billion dollars on a video game which probably won't make that back. I have this sneaking suspicion that Infinite will have to be absorbed into 2K's balance sheet by stronger-selling titles. But I don't think it'll be a complete bomba.
With such large, obtuse numbers like these which tend to fall way on the south side of the cost efficiency chart, there's really no possible way all that spending was ideal. Some of it becomes a waste because it doesn't take into consideration profit yield. Or put simply: they went way over budget.
It's one thing to not understand why a Skullgirls character costs $350k to implement. It's another to throw around a quarter of a billion dollars on a video game which probably won't make that back. I have this sneaking suspicion that Infinite will have to be absorbed into 2K's balance sheet by stronger-selling titles. But I don't think it'll be a complete bomba.
CoffeeJanitor
Member
The game is going to be like 15-20 hours long. Seems a bit excessive.
SneakyStephan
Banned
100 million and all of that money comes from the consumer (gamer).
I support game development not shouting match advertising wars.
vv yes exactly (I never preorder).
That's the point of not supporting this AAA bloat, they piss so much money away on advertising.
100m budget is ridiculous and a red flag for it being a low risk appeal to the everyman focus tested into oblivion 'experience'.
frankie_baby
Member
the publisher does not get 60 per sale, as has been pointed out several times its around $36
Monocle
Member
I read that recent big article about Bioshock Infinite's development (don't remember where), and it seemed extremely wasteful. Tons of assets created and polished for months only to be overhauled or cut completely. You'd think the budget could have been substantially reduced if the devs had spent a lot more time prototyping.
No way the publisher gets $36. They have to pay license fees to Sony/Microsoft, then manufacturing fees, and retailers probably pay ~$35. It's more like $25 profit per unit.
The problem with this line of thinking is that if this game doesn't take off like they want it to it will probably go down in the books as a huge flop and compromise future ambitious games. It's just unhealthy.
TheGreyHulk
Member
Bioshock Infinite Bomba confirmed
It's been ages since the original was released. I have my doubts about this game selling
It's been ages since the original was released. I have my doubts about this game selling
Heart Attack
Member
what's up with all the crazy expectations for this game. At most it will sell 2-2.5 million.
Dorito Pope
Banned
This is great, bigger budgets mean gaming is evolving as a medium. Just look at movies.
Best movie of all time: Transformers: Dark of the Moon - $270,000,000
Worst movie of all time: The Godfather - $6.2 million
There is a direct correlation between budget and quality. If you do the math, it's clear that Bioshock Infinite's quality index is somewhere between utter shit (The Godfather) and pure quality (Dark of The Moon). Games will reach the pinnacle of quality once the average budget is about $270 million or more as evident by Michael Bay's masterpiece.
Best movie of all time: Transformers: Dark of the Moon - $270,000,000
Worst movie of all time: The Godfather - $6.2 million
There is a direct correlation between budget and quality. If you do the math, it's clear that Bioshock Infinite's quality index is somewhere between utter shit (The Godfather) and pure quality (Dark of The Moon). Games will reach the pinnacle of quality once the average budget is about $270 million or more as evident by Michael Bay's masterpiece.
bodyofanamerican
Member
Get the fuck outta here dorito pope your logic is FLAWED
CambriaRising
Member
Coming out of my short lived drunken self-thread ban to pledge my support for this masterfully crafted sarcasm.
QuantumBro
Banned
How many copies did the original Bioshock sell?
frankie_baby
Member
if thats the case then take 2 are even more fucked, 8 million copies to break even, no way will that happen
bodyofanamerican
Member
~5MM across all platforms.
The Crimson Kid
what are you waiting for
Keep in mind that this is not 100% confirmed officially. It is believable though, so I'll assume it is true for this thread.
Anyways, Ken Levine has said several times that they've made enough raw content for this game to fill four or five games with how much they have cut from the game over the five years of development. Considering that and the fact that they've spent nearly 5 years in full development, it's actually surprising that the pricetag for development wasn't much higher than $100 million.
Aside from so much content being thrown out or redone, the development of this game actually seems to have been pretty well-managed financially. The big issue seems to be that so much content was replaced or trashed, which is extremely costly.
Plus, on a purely audiovisual level, it looks and sounds amazing from what I've seen. Compared to Dead Space 3 (which is another long SP-only game with a massive budget), Bioshock Infinite looks and sounds better.
I have no idea how marketing budgets have gotten so massive so quickly this generation. I honestly have no idea how you spend $100 million on marketing a game unless you buy tons of TV ads and billboards and buy a bunch of tie-in sponsorships alongside the internet marketing and posters that accompany most games these days. It seems to me that they want to get the Bioshock name on the same level as GTA, Halo, or CoD, because that's the only way I could see justifying such a huge ad budget.
If making bets of this magnitude are required for AAA success (which I doubt for several reasons, but that's another topic), then the industry is well and truly messed up in some massive ways. If the industry does crash in some way, I hope that we still get deep and intense SP-only games. System Shock 2 still holds up in a lot of ways today, and making an equivalent game today couldn't cost much more than $10 million. Publishers need to stop spending hundreds of millions to aim their games at everyone (which is a self-perpetuating cycle: game budget is too big so we have to make the game appeal to as many people as possible and then spend more on marketing to reach them) and instead budget appropriately for a known audience.
Part of it is ensuring a huge launch, but part of it is raising awareness for future 2K products. XCOM is being given away free to many Infinite preorders, and Bioshock is a bigger brand than XCOM is. 2K is clearly hoping that offering XCOM to hundreds of thousands that don't know much about XCOM will make them more likely to buy the XCOM shooter whenever it comes out. That game has probably racked up a pretty big development cost by now too!
Anyways, Ken Levine has said several times that they've made enough raw content for this game to fill four or five games with how much they have cut from the game over the five years of development. Considering that and the fact that they've spent nearly 5 years in full development, it's actually surprising that the pricetag for development wasn't much higher than $100 million.
Aside from so much content being thrown out or redone, the development of this game actually seems to have been pretty well-managed financially. The big issue seems to be that so much content was replaced or trashed, which is extremely costly.
Plus, on a purely audiovisual level, it looks and sounds amazing from what I've seen. Compared to Dead Space 3 (which is another long SP-only game with a massive budget), Bioshock Infinite looks and sounds better.
I have no idea how marketing budgets have gotten so massive so quickly this generation. I honestly have no idea how you spend $100 million on marketing a game unless you buy tons of TV ads and billboards and buy a bunch of tie-in sponsorships alongside the internet marketing and posters that accompany most games these days. It seems to me that they want to get the Bioshock name on the same level as GTA, Halo, or CoD, because that's the only way I could see justifying such a huge ad budget.
If making bets of this magnitude are required for AAA success (which I doubt for several reasons, but that's another topic), then the industry is well and truly messed up in some massive ways. If the industry does crash in some way, I hope that we still get deep and intense SP-only games. System Shock 2 still holds up in a lot of ways today, and making an equivalent game today couldn't cost much more than $10 million. Publishers need to stop spending hundreds of millions to aim their games at everyone (which is a self-perpetuating cycle: game budget is too big so we have to make the game appeal to as many people as possible and then spend more on marketing to reach them) and instead budget appropriately for a known audience.
Part of it is ensuring a huge launch, but part of it is raising awareness for future 2K products. XCOM is being given away free to many Infinite preorders, and Bioshock is a bigger brand than XCOM is. 2K is clearly hoping that offering XCOM to hundreds of thousands that don't know much about XCOM will make them more likely to buy the XCOM shooter whenever it comes out. That game has probably racked up a pretty big development cost by now too!
Huevos de Oro
Member
$100M in advertising is ridiculous.
Poimandres
Member
I know right? Fuck them for offering fantastic value deals for this game. They almost had me with that slimy tactic of throwing great games at me for a good price.
I know I'M not going to support their marketing campaign by getting three-games-for-less-than-the-price-of-one! And don't even get me started on the dozens of bought reviews for this game! I mean, I know they are bought even though not even a single review has been released yet.
It's the principal of the thing, you know?
CoffeeJanitor
Member
Have you actually played it?
The hype behind this reminds me of, oh, like every AAA release in the past 6 years. I wouldn't be surprised if there was a huge backlash after release.
Jesus
Lord Error
Insane For Sony
I doubt those numbers are correct. 100M for a 6 year of development would translate to 1.5M per month burn. I thought their team is 100 people or so, which would make it practically impossible to spend that much a month.
Also, 100M for marketing is probably just that analyst's guess, and I can't see it being close to correct with how little the game is advertised.
Also, 100M for marketing is probably just that analyst's guess, and I can't see it being close to correct with how little the game is advertised.
Hey man, did I not already cop to being drunk? Lay off me, and let me be hyped for this game with a giant robotic bird. How many giant robotic bird games come out every year? Just let me have this, dude. :*(
p.s. Robot Joust 2016. Let's do this.
ThaiGrocer
Member
Ken is the lamb of 2K. EA is the false prophet that will lead all those in the industry astray.
Is the review posting at 12 eastern or pacific?
bodyofanamerican
Member
I don't buy the $100MM marketing budget, personally. I've worked on the launches a few pretty high profile mobile CE products and even those budgets counting digital/TV/print/OOH (Out Of Home, all the bus/subway ads) didn't hit $100MM total. I don't know what Infinite's budget would be closer to, but I'm dubious of $100MM.
PsychoSoldier
Banned
There's no way to know for sure, but my gut tells me they are unlikely to make much, if any money, back in the long run.
I mean, given the way things are going, needing to sell more than the original Bioshock is going to be extraordinarily difficult, if for no other reason than the fact that the last Bioshock game was mediocre.
I mean, given the way things are going, needing to sell more than the original Bioshock is going to be extraordinarily difficult, if for no other reason than the fact that the last Bioshock game was mediocre.
If it doesn't fly IT WILL be a huge flop.
The point is that ambitious projects (in terms of budget) have flopped before, T2 and Levine decided they wanted to go this route regardless.
It sounds like circular logic: Don't do ambitious projects, because their failure, could impact the chance of having future ambitious projects.
I hope IGN doesn't ask this much for a 10.
They give them out like candy.