Support NeoGAF

[Opiate]

I work for a game studio (which I will not name) and it's not as scary as you make it.

You mean about mid sized developers? My stance has been, repeatedly, that it's hard to tell. If that's me "making it scary," then you wouldn't want to see my position on the future of mid-sized developers on consoles.

If you're talking more generally -- and including the big boys -- I've provided strong evidence to the contrary. The Financial Reports of all the listed Publishers. If you have actual evidence to support your position, and not just "I'm at a game studio," I really would be eager to listen. I've certainly kept a very open ear to what Mario and Warm Machine have to say, for example, but that's because they provide actual information.


Edit: I see your edit, Digital.

I do have sources on the inside: they're called Financial Reports. Any publicly traded company has to provide them. All the big boys do, and the big boys, in general, aren't doing well.

 

[Grampa Simpson]

It's important to notice that it started ahead of last year, and then suddenly started falling behind at a pretty rapid pace.

I'm really very interested in how the Wii caps out the rest of the year.

It really only appears to have met pent-up demand, and is now setting into a normal sales curve. At least that's how I read it. It will be interesting to see.

 

[Road]

XXXX - 760k budget - ~20 million revenue

Fill in the blank.
Juno isn't the only example of a movie that has had that kind of success on the back of a low budget based on word of mouth or critical acclaim either.

Wii Sports? Nintendogs? New Super Mario Bros.? Wii Play?


You see where I'm going.

 

[Digital-Hero]

You mean about mid sized developers? My stance has been, repeatedly, that it's hard to tell. If that's me "making it scary," then you wouldn't want to see my position on the future of mid-sized developers on consoles.

If you're talking more generally -- and including the big boys -- I've provided strong evidence to the contrary. The Financial Reports of all the listed Publishers. If you have actual evidence to support your position, and not just "I'm at a game studio," I really would be eager to listen. I've certainly kept a very open ear to what Mario and Warm Machine have to say, for example, but that's because they provide actual information.


Edit: I see your edit, Digital.

I do have sources on the inside: they're called Financial Reports. Any publicly traded company has to provide them. All the big boys do, and the big boys, in general, aren't doing well.

Believe what you will. I cannot go into any detail further. Nice talking to you though.

 

[Boombloxer]

But the game industry and the video game industry don't work the same, there is no game equivalent of Juno
Juno - 7 million budget - 230 million box office (WW)
Dark Knight - 185 million budget - 1000 million box office (WW)
Lets just say that Halo:ODST had an overall budget of 20 million and is our gaming equivalent of Dark Knight
Halo:ODST - 20 million budget - ~90 million revenue (US)
XXXX - 760k budget - ~20 million revenue

Fill in the blank.
Juno isn't the only example of a movie that has had that kind of success on the back of a low budget based on word of mouth or critical acclaim either.

Actually, the two are fairly similar. I would also argue that Halo:ODST isn't the Dark Knight, that's Call of Duty: MW/WaW/MW2.

And on the flip side, you have games that are selling well based more on word of mouth than actual advertising, like Demon Souls, Super Stardust HD, Braid. Smaller budgets, but the profit line was higher. It's not that different from something like Saw, low budget, high gross, or the Tyler Perry films (front-loaded, low-budget).

The game equivalent of Juno are the smaller tiered budget games, most of which the figures are kept private. You can however, make an educated guess that the smaller tiered pubs are doing fine, because they don't sink 20 million into failed game.

I do have sources on the inside: they're called Financial Reports. Any publicly traded company has to provide them. All the big boys do, and the big boys, in general, aren't doing well.

Please remind me how many mid-tier developers are publicly traded? Hell, Insomniac's a big house, and they aren't.

Bottom line is that unless you work on the inside, you're only getting a smaller piece of the overall puzzle. And I can get why you'd have that perception if you just looked at Financial reports from the public companies, but honestly? It's not that bad.

 

[imtehman]

It's the obnoxious level of thread crapping they're willing to do. Even a good multiplatform game thread will get crapped in about how PS3 exclusive X does these things so much better but gamers are too stupid to recognize this, etc.. etc.. etc..

I love Uncharted 2 but I have 0 intention of going in there to post my impressions. God forbid I have the nerve to critique anything about the game. A long time ago I learned to simply ignore fanatics in all walks of life. In this hobby, most of these fanatics seem to be tied to Sony and I see no reason to conversate with them. I will admit, it's amusing to watch them turn on eachother on occassion.


As for the numbers: Great PS3 numbers. Surprised to see 360 up yoy since the price of entry hasn't changed. Wii numbers still great despite "musings." ODST owning like it's expected and 360 continuing to sell software while the PS3 software also sold good with new buyers.

Someone posted on the UC2 thread about how UC2 had 15k users and i responded that the number seem pretty low and people in there accused me of stealth trolling =(

But i do believe that UC2 will be #1, Wii game #2, and Forza 3 at 3rd next month

 

[Tiktaalik]

On the topic of which large games publishers are doing good and bad, I'm pretty bullish on EA even though they've been in the red for a long time. The reason I think that EA is a bit different than THQ or Take2 is that for the last several years EA has been in a complete reformation of their business model, whereas it's business as usual at many other struggling companies. Starting in 2004 with the bombs of Goldeneye Rogue Agent and Catwoman, EA swore off licensed games and decided to move to the model of developing and owning their own IP, like Capcom and Nintendo. Only really in the last year have we seen the fruits of this, with Dead Space and Mirror's Edge. Those titles didn't go multi-platinum but they're a base to build on. Early next year we'll see another new IP, Dante's Inferno. Anyone who followed NPD this summer must have noticed that aside from Nintendo the top 10 was dominated by EA, with titles like EA Sports Active.

I expect that next quarter we'll see EA finally start to post profits again. I think they're just ending their slow reformation from a licensed game studio to a self owned IP studio with significant expanded audience focus. If I'm wrong and two quarters from now they're still in the red then I think we can lump them in with every other failing publisher.

 

[Rush2thestart]

Any TMNT Smash Up numbers?

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

And this is where you enter speculation, simply because you don't know the recoup cost for the mid-level games, because they vary by dev house.

While you're correct, that goes both ways though. Just as it's speculation to say they're doing poorly, it is also such to hand wave them as doing well because we haven't heard anything. In that case, it becomes a case of what you see more, success of the mid tier making mid tier games, or failure.

Your assumption that the DD model isn't large enough to sustain is something that you can't say either, because you don't know the former.

What I also know is that we're not seeing the output from them on these services. Tell me, if their budgets were reasonable enough, why aren't we seeing more titles from them via DD?

I'd argue that the quality of the games those Dev Houses were making simply weren't good enough to keep them in business, Factor 5, Brash and Silicon Knights in particular.

If your development life depends intrinsically on the success of 1 game, then your business model is a shambles.

I'm not on the doom-and-gloom side, the industry as a whole is fine, just going through a transition period. I actually expect a shift towards different business models for both console and PC.

I somewhat I agree. I, however, expect a shift away from multi million dollar projects from all but those who can truly afford it, and even then, only spread across multiple platforms to maximize profit.

 

[daycru]

I love Uncharted 2 but I have 0 intention of going in there to post my impressions. God forbid I have the nerve to critique anything about the game. A long time ago I learned to simply ignore fanatics in all walks of life. In this hobby, most of these fanatics seem to be tied to Sony and I see no reason to conversate with them. I will admit, it's amusing to watch them turn on eachother on occassion.

I hear ya. Anything other than (literally?) masturbating over every aspect of the game will be immediately shouted down by the hive.

 

[poppabk]

Wii Sports? Nintendogs? New Super Mario Bros.? Wii Play?


You see where I'm going.

I actually edited out a line where I said that some Nintendo games might fit the bill, but not if you add the independent developer portion of the analogy. Partly because although something like Wii Sports looks like it might be made for a million, I would imagine that it had one of the largest budgets of any game this gen as it's development involved all the R&D for the motion controls.

 

[Evlar]

I hear ya. Anything other than (literally?) masturbating over every aspect of the game will be immediately shouted down by the hive.

Odd. The last page and a half of the Uncharted 2 thread has featured rather strong criticism of the multiplayer design.

 

[Boombloxer]

While you're correct, that goes both ways though. Just as it's speculation to say they're doing poorly, it is also such to hand wave them as doing well because we haven't heard anything. In that case, it becomes a case of what you see more, success of the mid tier making mid tier games, or failure.



What I also know is that we're not seeing the output from them on these services. Tell me, if their budgets were reasonable enough, why aren't we seeing more titles from them via DD?



If your development life depends intrinsically on the success of 1 game, then your business model is a shambles.




I somewhat I agree. I, however, expect a shift away from multi million dollar projects from all but those who can truly afford it, and even then, only spread across multiple platforms to maximize profit.

The output from one mid-tier dev house typically isn't more than 1 game at a time. That's not a flawed business model, it's basics. SSD: HD has sold a few hundred thousand alone.

Same thing with publishing frequency. HouseMarque has put together three stellar games, and are working on a fourth, with all but one on the PSN/XBL. There are others, the reason why you don't see a title every month is just basic development cycle.

 

[chubigans]

Odd. The last page and a half of the Uncharted 2 thread has featured rather strong criticism of the multiplayer design.

Yup. I've posted in the thread that Uncharted 2 isn't quite good enough to be GOTY and a few agree.

Some of you (daycru) need to take off your blinders and actually, I dunno, read the thread and participate in it instead of making wild fantasies of what's supposedly happening in the thread.

 

[daycru]

Odd. The last page and a half of the Uncharted 2 thread has featured rather strong criticism of the multiplayer design.

I haven't checked it out since I completed the campaign, Friday or so. From what I saw, if it wasn't a tear filled sonnet about the texture quality, it wasn't fit for the thread.

 

[RSTEIN]

read the thread and participate in it instead of making wild fantasies of what's supposedly happening in the thread.

I heard wild rape fantasies.

 

[Kenka]

Has this been posted ?

1. Halo 3: ODST (360) – Microsoft
2. Wii Sports Resort (Wii) – Nintendo
3. Madden NFL 10 (360) – EA
4. Mario & Luigi: Bowser’s Inside Story (DS) – Nintendo
5. The Beatles: Rock Band (360) – MTV Games/EA
6. Madden NFL 10 (PS3) – EA
7. Marvel: Ultimate Alliance 2 (360) – Activision Blizzard
8. Batman: Arkham Asylum (PS3) – Square Enix
9. Guitar Hero 5 (360) – Activision Blizzard
10. The Beatles: Rock Band (Wii) – MTV Games/EA
11. Batman: Arkham Asylum (360) – Square Enix
12. Kingdom Hearts 358/2 Days (DS) – Square Enix
13. Scribblenauts (DS) – Warner Bros.
14. NHL 10 (360) – EA
15. Need for Speed: Shift (360) – EA
16. Need for Speed: Shift (PS3) – EA
17. Marvel: Ultimate Alliance 2 (PS3) – Activision Blizzard
18. Professor Layton and the Diabolical Box (DS) – Nintendo
19. Wii Fit (Wii) – Nintendo
20. The Beatles: Rock Band (PS3) – MTV Games/EA

No source aside of nintendoeverything.com sorry...

 

[CiSTM]

Has this been posted ?

1. Halo 3: ODST (360) – Microsoft
2. Wii Sports Resort (Wii) – Nintendo
3. Madden NFL 10 (360) – EA
4. Mario & Luigi: Bowser’s Inside Story (DS) – Nintendo
5. The Beatles: Rock Band (360) – MTV Games/EA
6. Madden NFL 10 (PS3) – EA
7. Marvel: Ultimate Alliance 2 (360) – Activision Blizzard
8. Batman: Arkham Asylum (PS3) – Square Enix
9. Guitar Hero 5 (360) – Activision Blizzard
10. The Beatles: Rock Band (Wii) – MTV Games/EA
11. Batman: Arkham Asylum (360) – Square Enix
12. Kingdom Hearts 358/2 Days (DS) – Square Enix
13. Scribblenauts (DS) – Warner Bros.
14. NHL 10 (360) – EA
15. Need for Speed: Shift (360) – EA
16. Need for Speed: Shift (PS3) – EA
17. Marvel: Ultimate Alliance 2 (PS3) – Activision Blizzard
18. Professor Layton and the Diabolical Box (DS) – Nintendo
19. Wii Fit (Wii) – Nintendo
20. The Beatles: Rock Band (PS3) – MTV Games/EA

No source aside of nintendoeverything.com sorry...

Yup, posted already.

Here is the orginal source with some numbers if you are interested:

 

[John Dunbar]

professor layton fuck yeah

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

Wii Sports? Nintendogs? New Super Mario Bros.? Wii Play?


You see where I'm going.

:lol The amount of wrong in this post is just amazing.

Starting in 2004 with the bombs of Goldeneye Rogue Agent and Catwoman, EA swore off licensed games and decided to move to the model of developing and owning their own IP, like Capcom and Nintendo. Only really in the last year have we seen the fruits of this, with Dead Space and Mirror's Edge. Those titles didn't go multi-platinum but they're a base to build on. Early next year we'll see another new IP, Dante's Inferno.

But Mirror's Edge and Dead Space did very poorly, so poorly that I doubt they achieved anywhere near the fanbase EA wanted.

And Dantae's Inferno is a licensed title.

 

[bistromathics]

And Dantae's Inferno is a licensed title.

not really

 

[Thomper]

But Mirror's Edge and Dead Space did very poorly, so poorly that I doubt they achieved anywhere near the fanbase EA wanted.

And Dantae's Inferno is a licensed title.

Mirror's Edge and Dead Space both did over a million:
http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/57075

Which, to me, sounds really quite exceptional for a brand new game that hasn't been able to establish itself as well. I don't think I can recall any other games this 'unknown' that went on to sell over a million copies.

And seriously now - Dante's Inferno a licensed game? If you're looking it purely from a technical standpoint, there's no license involved as Dante's Inferno no longer needs to be licensed. But even if you were to say it's a 'known quantity', is it really? Ask random people/gamers if they know Dante's Inferno, the book, and I think only a very small percentage of them will recognize it. Plus, the game itself seems pretty far removed from the book's story.

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

The output from one mid-tier dev house typically isn't more than 1 game at a time. That's not a flawed business model, it's basics. SSD: HD has sold a few hundred thousand alone.

That's not what I said. By development life, I didn't mean output, I meant existence. Silicon Knights betting the farm on the success of one title is terrible business sense. (Though I don't believe they did that.) GRIN overextending themselves to create 3 HD titles that all bombed (with a 4th contracted) was terrible business sense, not because they bombed, but because GRIN was not at all prepared for what would happen if they did. Not every game can be a success. Every successful corporation builds strategy on the bedrock than not every idea is a golden one. For a mid tier developer to bank on it is like playing Russian Roullete with 5 bullets in the chamber.

Same thing with publishing frequency. HouseMarque has put together three stellar games, and are working on a fourth, with all but one on the PSN/XBL. There are others, the reason why you don't see a title every month is just basic development cycle.

Basic development cycle for a developer that's not overextending themselves, for which I have no qualms. That's much different than what we're talking about above.

 

[Boombloxer]

:lol The amount of wrong in this post is just amazing.



But Mirror's Edge and Dead Space did very poorly, so poorly that I doubt they achieved anywhere near the fanbase EA wanted.

And Dantae's Inferno is a licensed title.

:lol

Dead Space sold upwards of 1.4 million.

Mirror's Edge sold upwards of a 1 million as well.

They did not do poorly. Poorly is 9k.

And Dante's Inferno is not licensed, its an original IP, based on the Divine Comedy. No different from God of War and Greek mythology.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

not really

Nvm, let's just say I thought something that wasn't true.

Mirror's Edge and Dead Space both did over a million:
http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/57075

Which, to me, sounds really quite exceptional for a brand new game that hasn't been able to establish itself as well. I don't think I can recall any other games this 'unknown' that went on to sell over a million copies.

I could have sworn I saw sources that stated they sold far less. Did the games receive huge sales spikes after their holiday release?

 

[bistromathics]

Is arkham asylum charting for a 2nd month in a row a big deal? Seems like it could be, but I dont follow the numbers very closely. Heck, releasing the next 10 with select data seems like a big deal. Why are they even doing that? Who's agenda in NPD does it serve to present data showing that Scribblenauts did well? Or that Wii fit is still hanging in there? Or the cross-platform Beatles numbers? Seems weird to me.

edit: OP should be updated with the 20, yeah? I only knew about it from the gamasutra article, then went to double-check the GAF thread

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

I could have sworn I saw sources that stated they sold far less. Did the games receive huge sales spikes after their holiday release?

They did, until their prices were slashed.

 

[Thomper]

Is arkham asylum charting for a 2nd month in a row a big deal? Seems like it could be, but I dont follow the numbers very closely. Heck, releasing the next 10 with select data seems like a big deal. Why are they even doing that? Who's agenda in NPD does it serve to present data showing that Scribblenauts did well? Or that Wii fit is still hanging in there? Or the cross-platform Beatles numbers? Seems weird to me.

edit: OP should be updated with the 20, yeah? I only knew about it from the gamasutra article, then went to double-check the GAF thread

Batman released at the very end of last August. The game got a lot of positive word of mouth/buzz after it was released, which doesn't make it all that strange to see it selling beyond its first five days.

Not sure about the data beyond the top 10; it's probably game-publishers that leaked that data out themselves, or data that was requested specifically from the NPD and released that way. NPD's not pushing an agenda, no.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

They did, until their prices were slashed.

So technically I'm wrong, but not totally in a perspective sense (I.E. the games didn't do as well as originally expected).

 

[Dan]

I actually edited out a line where I said that some Nintendo games might fit the bill, but not if you add the independent developer portion of the analogy. Partly because although something like Wii Sports looks like it might be made for a million, I would imagine that it had one of the largest budgets of any game this gen as it's development involved all the R&D for the motion controls.

If you add the independent portion, then Juno drops out too. There was absolutely nothing about that movie that was independent. It was fully funded and marketed by a News Corp subsidiary. Just saying.

 

[bistromathics]

NPD's not pushing an agenda, no.

That's what I thought, which is why I'm raising an eyebrow.

How come NPD PC sales arent posted on GAF?

 

[markatisu]

Dead Space sold upwards of 1.4 million.

Mirror's Edge sold upwards of a 1 million as well.

They did not do poorly. Poorly is 9k.

Not out of the gate they did not, I think EA would be having a party if Dead Space and Mirros Edge sold 1m in the first month or two.

Not saying that 9k is even acceptable, but that view that DS and ME were monster hits is far fetched without context (price drop)

They did, until their prices were slashed.

Whenever DSE price is slashed it will see a spike in sales as well

SEGA has said multiple times that HoTD Overkill moved very well once it was cut down to $19-29 range. It seems there is a price threshhold for light gun games

The only ones that are able to sell at full price on any system (because Time Crisis 4 on the PS3 also sold like shit) are in the $19-29 range or come with hardware (Links Crossbow, NERF)

RE is the only exception, and its because its RE

 

[Diatribe1974]

The PS3 price drop was in August.

And everyone immediately jumped "Day 1" on the chance to buy a PS3 when the price dropped? If you check history, you'll see that each time the PS3 has had a price drop, it's sales surged forward (thus luring in people who'd been saying "I'll wait till the price drops...") then returned to sub-optimal sales levels. It's easy to say "Well, the PS3 is now 299$, it'll do better now than ever before...." Which is completely true. But the economy is also in the toilet here in the US. I know a lot of folks who've said they're cutting back this year in the purchases for Xmas, they simply can't afford to spend like they used to. What does this mean for PS3 (and 360 sales for that matter)? It's means that I can see the Wii selling like gangbusters in November/December, the 360 selling next best and the PS3 trailing behind somewhere. Could I be wrong? Sure. Will I be? Probably not. We'll see though.

 

[Sadist]

But didn't EA expect more from Dead Space and Mirror's Edge?

1.4 million combined for Dead Space isn't bad, but it's not a runaway succes either.

 

[Bricfa]

Remember when Beatles beat Guitar Hero?

That was awesome!

 

[Accident]

Not out of the gate they did not, I think EA would be having a party if Dead Space and Mirros Edge sold 1m in the first month or two.

Dead Space sold 550k in the US by January, EA propably shipped the first million worldwide at full price.

 

[Thomper]

But didn't EA expect more from Dead Space and Mirror's Edge?

1.4 million combined for Dead Space isn't bad, but it's not a runaway succes either.

I'd say it is. Can you really name a lot of games that were total unknowns before release and went on to sell over a million? Not based on a license, not part of a franchise, no spin-off, and even though they were released by EA, they were released by studios within EA that hadn't really done these kinds of games before. Nobody would expect the guys who did Battlefield to make a game like Mirror's Edge, and the Dead Space people made the appreciated, but vastly different Simpsons Game before, and The Godfather: The Game, also recieved not all that positively. I feel like I may be repeating myself too much here, but: I can't really recall any games in a similar situation that did as well as these.

 

[Johann]

But didn't EA expect more from Dead Space and Mirror's Edge?

1.4 million combined for Dead Space isn't bad, but it's not a runaway succes either.

DICE's marketing director provided 3 million worldwide sales as a conservative target for Mirror's Edge. It's likely Dead Space had similar expectations (if not more so due to its unique marketing campaign). I assume EA wanted Dead Space, in particular, IP to be a huge multimedia hit. EARS/Visceral Games's new direction was in response to their past licensed games and the potential for them to have a multi-media hit of their own. EA also referred to Assassin's Creed and Bioshock as break out new IP hits when discussing these two games.

This seems like optimistic goal for a pair of new IPs arriving past the launch period. Considering that EA lost a billion dollars and underwent heavy downsizing that fiscal year, it's likely they counted on these games to sell 3 million+ copies each at full price (and Rock Band 2 to sell more and Warhammer Online to keep its subscriber count and Need of Speed to stop declining and for the Dark Knight game to come out and for their last Lord of the Ring licensed game to go out with a bang). At least, some good came out in the form of Pogo Puppies.

 

[poppabk]

I'd say it is. Can you really name a lot of games that were total unknowns before release and went on to sell over a million? Not based on a license, not part of a franchise, no spin-off, and even though they were released by EA, they were released by studios within EA that hadn't really done these kinds of games before. Nobody would expect the guys who did Battlefield to make a game like Mirror's Edge, and the Dead Space people made the appreciated, but vastly different Simpsons Game before, and The Godfather: The Game, also recieved not all that positively. I feel like I may be repeating myself too much here, but: I can't really recall any games in a similar situation that did as well as these.

Lost Planet and Dead Rising did it on a single platform. EA sports active did it on a single platform also, and is no doubt above 2 million and still climbing by now.
Assassin's Creed is I think the type of performance EA were looking for from Dead Space and ME and I don't think they got close.

 

[lordoftherink]

Here is the orginal source with some numbers if you are interested:

Wii Play fucking bombed

 

[Opiate]

Look, we don't know exactly how many copies of Dead Space were sold (vs shipped). We don't know how many were sold at 20 dollars instead of 60. We don't know what their initial expectations were: were the expectations around Turok level? Or were they Assassin's Creed level? We don't know the answers to any of these questions.

But here's what I can tell you: in the last 18 months, EA has lost nearly 1.3 billion dollars. That's 1,300,000,000 dollars, for those who need the figure emphasized. I'm not sure how much Dead Space and Mirror's Edge were supposed to sell, but clearly something EA is doing is going disastrously wrong, and we can confidently say it isn't Madden or Fifa.

 

[markatisu]

I'd say it is. Can you really name a lot of games that were total unknowns before release and went on to sell over a million?

Gears of War
Assassins Creed
Dead Rising
EA Active
Left 4 Dead

I can go on if you really want to play this game, your qualifer for total unknowns is very open to interpretation

 

[manueldelalas]

I'd say it is. Can you really name a lot of games that were total unknowns before release and went on to sell over a million? Not based on a license, not part of a franchise, no spin-off, and even though they were released by EA, they were released by studios within EA that hadn't really done these kinds of games before. Nobody would expect the guys who did Battlefield to make a game like Mirror's Edge, and the Dead Space people made the appreciated, but vastly different Simpsons Game before, and The Godfather: The Game, also recieved not all that positively. I feel like I may be repeating myself too much here, but: I can't really recall any games in a similar situation that did as well as these.

There are quite a few games that fit your description.

Pokemon and Nintendogs may be the best examples, but counting out Nintendo games (I know, those are non-games, Nintendo games don't count, etc), there's the original Starcraft, Half Life 1, Assasin's Creed, Fable, L4D, Dead Rising, Uncharted, etc etc...

The only reasons EA's new franchises are not selling is that they have:
- Poor marketing
- Poor market knowledge (I mean, come on!, if you produce anything in the world, it should be something people want, but EA seems to be shooting to the dark hoping to get a lucky hit)

Most of the million+ selling franchises started with an unknown game selling 1 million or more.

To be an unknown franchise is not an excuse for anything. If you want to take risks making something new, then do it seriously; market it like hell, do something different for free publicity (see: Wii Fit), etc. Especially when you are a company like EA, that has a fuck-ton of money. EA seems to take risks at development but they try to cut costs by getting cheap on marketing the games. They are digging their own grave.

 

[ksamedi]

Look, we don't know exactly how many copies of Dead Space were sold (vs shipped). We don't know how many were sold at 20 dollars instead of 60. We don't know what their initial expectations were: were the expectations around Turok level? Or were they Assassin's Creed level? We don't know the answers to any of these questions.

But here's what I can tell you: in the last 18 months, EA has lost nearly 1.3 billion dollars. That's 1,300,000,000 dollars, for those who need the figure emphasized. I'm not sure how much Dead Space and Mirror's Edge were supposed to sell, but clearly something EA is doing is going disastrously wrong, and we can confidently say it isn't Madden or Fifa.

I'm really curious what these guys spend their money on. The games they produce seem to do decent at retail. They must be a horribly inefficient company to lose money on those sales.

 

[[Nintex]]

I'm really curious what these guys spend their money on. The games they produce seem to do decent at retail. They must be a horribly inefficient company to lose money on those sales.

These companies are way too bloated, multiple studios, PR and marketing in 20(?) or so different countries, multiple distributors on the payroll and god knows what else. According to Wikipedia they had like 8000 employees in 2007. I'd say their headcount could still be in the same ballpark. They're like twice the size of Nintendo and not only is the company itself inefficient, the development process of the games has the same problem. Just look at the credits roll of lets say Mirror's Edge to see how many people worked on an 8 hour game. Another problem is that the EA franchises ran out of steam. Need for Speed was hot shit last generation and didn't cost as much to make back then. The userbase they're selling these games too hasn't grown that much outside of casual and non-gamers. So they're selling games to the same audience at twice the cost. For the last few years or so the gaming industry in general hasn't pushed the boundaries of gameplay, graphics or even sound the only thing they managed to keep moving up were the costs. They just kept spending millions, flushed down all the last-gen profits and no one bothered to ask why.

 

[boiled goose]

:lol

Dead Space sold upwards of 1.4 million.

Mirror's Edge sold upwards of a 1 million as well.

They did not do poorly. Poorly is 9k.

And Dante's Inferno is not licensed, its an original IP, based on the Divine Comedy. No different from God of War and Greek mythology.

for the quality (and most likely budgets) of those games and EA's expectations, 1 million across 3 platforms is not great.
especially when both games dropped to 20 bucks really quickly.

 

[Massa]

Look, we don't know exactly how many copies of Dead Space were sold (vs shipped). We don't know how many were sold at 20 dollars instead of 60. We don't know what their initial expectations were: were the expectations around Turok level? Or were they Assassin's Creed level? We don't know the answers to any of these questions.

But here's what I can tell you: in the last 18 months, EA has lost nearly 1.3 billion dollars. That's 1,300,000,000 dollars, for those who need the figure emphasized. I'm not sure how much Dead Space and Mirror's Edge were supposed to sell, but clearly something EA is doing is going disastrously wrong, and we can confidently say it isn't Madden or Fifa.

Actually they could be doing a lot better on Madden and FIFA, specially on the Wii.

 

[grandjedi6]

for the quality (and most likely budgets) of those games and EA's expectations, 1 million across 3 platforms is not great.
especially when both games dropped to 20 bucks really quickly.

That's because EA overshipped more than anything.

 

[Sadist]

Actually they could be doing a lot better on Madden and FIFA, specially on the Wii.

I thought the Wii version of FIFA did pretty well? They fudged it up this year with the release of the '10 versions with sylized graphics. I mean, Madden '10 underperformed when compared to last year. They always do something weird with their sports titles. But when you look at Tiger Woods on the other hand (normal approach, Wii Motion Plus support) that performed pretty well.

Heh, even Konami showed us that Pro Evo Wii can sell.

 

[Basileus777]

Actually they could be doing a lot better on Madden and FIFA, specially on the Wii.

It's not just the Wii, Madden's sales have been declining YOY for some time now. I doubt that EA is not pleased at how Madden is selling.