From the Horse's mouth
It does imo.Yeah, this kinda tells it all
Jason's article is probably on point
Hate him or not, the guy gets right more often than he gets wrong
Sony: Gets overwhelmingly popular with its PS4 in large due to their tight focus on big blockbuster single player experiences
Sony: continues this exact strategy with its PS5
Journalists:
Lol, what a damage control. His narrative was exaggerated. Cool.
From the Horse's mouth
I heard TLOU2 was close to 200 million to make.the fact that they rely on ps to deliver profits so much should also mean they should get the lion share of the budget no? tlou2 made like $240 million in the first three days. thats a $50 million game assuming costs have doubled since they used to make uncharted games for $20 million. they spend far far more on movies.
no one is saying they need to lose billions, but surely they can afford to invest some of those billions back into their most profitable division.
i also think strong sales of Miles post launch suggest that people were waiting to pick up the ps5 to buy it. no one wants to play games on ps4 anymore. the fact that it came back into the top ten after missing a couple of months means that these games will have legs. making them cross gen is not going to help with the sales.
Do I have this right?
Shrier says 2019.
Ross says 2020.
Is that the technicality?
I guess you haven't noticed the dozen other threads hating on Jim Ryan. This is just the latest.Uproar because Jason Schreier article? LOL
Yeah, because Jason's article.I guess you haven't noticed the dozen other threads hating on Jim Ryan. This is just the latest.
Yeah, because Jason's article.
Those numbers are way offSorta, but those figures are out a little. Looking at accessible figures to give some ballparks, the best general response I can find is from 2017, where you'll pull in $15m per 1 million copies sold on average. If you're a first party title, you'll make more per sale as there will be less platform cuts, and if you have a good digital attachment rate you'll have higher profit margins.
So, as digital out paces physical in 2021, let's just go ahead and bump that up to $20m per 1 million copies sold as our ballpark figure. By that metric, you'll need to shift 5 million copies for a $100 million dollar game just to break even. Assuming no additional revenue streams and all copies are sold at full price, game budgets of $100 million and more are pretty dangerous. If you're Call of Duty, where you'll move 30 million software units alone and have extensive micro-transaction support, or if you're GTA - V's budget was rumoured to exceed $200 million - you can bare the expenditure because your return is going to exceed 1:10. If you're TLOUII, whose last confirmed sales figures were 4 million units, and we know that a good portion of its sales since then were at discounted prices, $100 million dollar budgets are a luxury that you'll need a deep-pocketed publisher to back, and one who's prepared to accept a tiny return on investment.
If Sony are moving to a blockbuster focus, then I suspect indulgent six year development cycle's like TLOUII's won't be happening too often in the future, unless they're making their own GTA-sized micro-transaction behemoth. I'm not the biggest fan of that approach, but from a pure business perspective, it makes sense: if Jim Ryan wants big profits for PlayStation, Uncharted is more valuable than interesting titles like Shadow of the Colossus.
nah. games dont cost that much to make. their main cost is the amount of money it costs to run a studio. nd is roughly 300 people. thats 300 people working on a game for 3 years. that doesnt cost $200 million.I heard TLOU2 was close to 200 million to make.
I saw the chart. I'm surprised royalties are that much (20% of whatever the retail price is). I thought royalties were more like 5%.Those numbers are way off
Link via ubisoft https://www.resetera.com/threads/ub...y-ms-nintendo-take-12-in-cogs-per-game.22783/
Publisher gets 55% retail 70% digital.
First parties get 70% retail 95% digital.
Oregon-based Sony Bend, best known for the 2019 open-world action game Days Gone, tried unsuccessfully to pitch a sequel that year, according to people familiar with the proposal. Although the first game had been profitable, its development had been lengthy and critical reception was mixed, so a Days Gone 2 wasn’t seen as a viable option.
Instead, one team at the studio was assigned to help Naughty Dog with a multiplayer game while a second group was assigned to work on a new Uncharted game with supervision from Naughty Dog. Some staff, including top leads, were unhappy with this arrangement and left. Bend's developers feared they might be absorbed into Naughty Dog, and the studio’s leadership asked to be taken off the Uncharted project. They got their wish last month and are now working on a new game of their own that will be part of a brand new franchise.
Jeff was able to add more clarity to the situation.
(I'm only sharing this guy's tweet because it was being quoted in the comment section)
The problem with Jason's article is that it made it seem like Bend Studio was forced to help Naughty Dog work on other IPs.
Jeff Ross elaborates on the situation by saying there's not a lot to work going on during early days of development and working with Naughty Dog gave the developers something to do. Some people feared that they might be absorbed into Naughty Dog and that's obviously didn't happen.
"Approximately 2,100 people developed The Last of Us Part II over several years, led by the 350-person team at Naughty Dog. Sony Interactive Entertainment published the action-adventure game in June 2020 for the PlayStation 4."nah. games dont cost that much to make. their main cost is the amount of money it costs to run a studio. nd is roughly 300 people. thats 300 people working on a game for 3 years. that doesnt cost $200 million.
you can look up how much u2 and u3 cost. 150 people working 2 years cost $20 million. 300 people working 2 years would cost $40. an extra year would cost an extra $10 million which would bring it up to $50 million. add in a big marketing budget and you are looking at $75-100 million max.
Rockstar had all of their 7 studios and 3,000 employees make rdr2. thats a game that cost $200 million.
Thanks for providing more concrete figures. Ok, so at USD$60.00 per title sold, 1 million retail sales generate USD$60m in revenue. With the above split, USD$33m in revenue take home for retail. Presuming a corporate tax rate of 20% - the nominal from 2018 for USA - they'll enjoy roughly USD$26.4m. So, my initial figure of $20m take home was rather conservative, and would be out by around a quarter based on Ubisoft's projections. So, if I projected 5 million sales to cover a USD$100m game, then you'd need roughly 3.75m sales to break even on that cost. That'll go up once you factor in the usual marketing campaign and so forth. So, call it 4 million to be safe. So, I was over by about a million units, and StreetsofBeige was under by about 600k units - so, they win with the smaller deficitThose numbers are way off
Link via ubisoft https://www.resetera.com/threads/ub...y-ms-nintendo-take-12-in-cogs-per-game.22783/
Publisher gets 55% retail 70% digital.
First parties get 70% retail 95% digital.
You dont apply 20% corporate tax against net revenue. You apply the tax rate to final profit.Thanks for providing more concrete figures. Ok, so at USD$60.00 per title sold, 1 million retail sales generate USD$60m in revenue. With the above split, USD$33m in revenue take home for retail. Presuming a corporate tax rate of 20% - the nominal from 2018 for USA - they'll enjoy roughly USD$26.4m. So, my initial figure of $20m take home was rather conservative, and would be out by around a quarter based on Ubisoft's projections. So, if I projected 5 million sales to cover a USD$100m game, then you'd need roughly 3.75m sales to break even on that cost. That'll go up once you factor in the usual marketing campaign and so forth. So, call it 4 million to be safe. So, I was over by about a million units, and StreetsofBeige was under by about 600k units - so, they win with the smaller deficit
those are outsourced studios in third world countries like india that cost pennies compared to western studios. every studio uses them. witcher 3 also outsourced to over 1500 people and the total cost of the game was around $81 million more than half of which was the marketing budget."Approximately 2,100 people developed The Last of Us Part II over several years, led by the 350-person team at Naughty Dog. Sony Interactive Entertainment published the action-adventure game in June 2020 for the PlayStation 4."
"A sequel to the 2013 game The Last of Us, core development on Part II began after the 2014 release of The Last of Us Remastered."
No? They literally don’t seem to be a mess at all? Their studios seem to be working incredibly efficiently, firing on all cylinders pumping out AAA games. Sony are still giving full creative control to their devs according to Jeff, and he said Jim Ryan and Herman Hulst are excellent at their jobs.Things seems to be a mess over at Sony.
No? They literally don’t seem to be a mess at all? Their studios seem to be working incredibly efficiently, firing on all cylinders pumping out AAA games. Sony are still giving full creative control to their devs according to Jeff, and he said Jim Ryan and Herman Hulst are excellent at their jobs.
What is with all this doom posting?
Not really and yes. They are still pumping out amazing first party games and we have horizon zero sequel , ratchet and clank, and god of war coming out within a year so they seem to be doing something right. They mostly just have a pr and marketing problem.Things seems to be a mess over at Sony.
You have a dirty room.Please no more paid remasters ...if your gonna recycle your old ips go back to the ps1/ps2 years...give us socom/syphon filter.....otherwise I’m pretty sure most people’s ps5s are gonna look like mine
Jeff was able to add more clarity to the situation.
(I'm only sharing this guy's tweet because it was being quoted in the comment section)
The problem with Jason's article is that it made it seem like Bend Studio was forced to help Naughty Dog work on other IPs.
Jeff Ross elaborates on the situation by saying there's not a lot to work going on during early days of development and working with Naughty Dog gave the developers something to do. Some people feared that they might be absorbed into Naughty Dog and that's obviously didn't happen.
So Bend got their game cancelled or it didn't get cancelled ?
They might have been helping ND with new Uncharted or not ?
Honestly why is this such a big deal either way ?
What exactly is the outrage here ? Am I missing something ?
Yup, but Jason mixed poison with honey here. The report itself is true but not as he painted it in an extremely negative way for clicks. Also he's disrespectful and a snowflake that bashes and insults everyone but can't man-up an take criticism.
So Bend got their game cancelled or it didn't get cancelled ?
They might have been helping ND with new Uncharted or not ?
Honestly why is this such a big deal either way ?
What exactly is the outrage here ? Am I missing something ?
So Bend got their game cancelled or it didn't get cancelled ?
They might have been helping ND with new Uncharted or not ?
Honestly why is this such a big deal either way ?
What exactly is the outrage here ? Am I missing something ?
Oh you know... "DRAMA". Sony/Playstation "mismanagement" is a hot clickbaity subject right now.
This is such a non-issue that it's blowing my mind it's getting this much traction. So a sequel got canceled - big deal, that shit happens ALL THE TIME.
Jeff said that Sony is being smart for not responding for this BS as whatever you say will only add penalty. Meaning you'll give trolls more attention that they don't deserve.
Timestamped:
I expect nothing less from the shitbag. He made a living creating hit pieces on companies that don't tow the line with his ideologies. He went out of his way to leak news on games that hadn't been officially announced. Was one of the most prolific writers on one of the most "woke" trash gaming websites on the internet. He has repeatedly shown his inability to gracefully speak with anyone that doesn't agree with him. Unfortunately, unlike Anita Sarkeesian, he's still around as a shit stain on the underwear of the industry.What an insufferable little shit of a human being. Imagine actually getting up in the morning and thinking it's a good idea to make this post on a public forum.
What an insufferable little shit of a human being. Imagine actually getting up in the morning and thinking it's a good idea to make this post on a public forum.