High end graphics are killing the games industry

[Mamoulian War]

 

I said a GOOD programmer

That gets recruited to the FSB or crime syndicates.

 

And how is that contradicting with what I wrote?

 

Believe me, you would be surprised how much is good programmer worth in East Europe, and how big they paychecks are

[Hassat Hunter]

Of course it's all about expectations.

 

A MMORPG can do super-well, but somehow they all expect to make WoW-money. If not, it's a failure, even when not.

Same happens here. Some companies just have insane expectations. Fail them, even if nigh impossible, it could mean the end of your company.

 

(EDIT: Think making a sequel in a year... *cough* KOTOR2 *cough*)

 

And that usually all to please some stockholders. A rotten core indeed. But that's how the financial world goes.

No wonder we have an international recession going on, economies of the US and EU are to smithereens. And we all suffer.

Fortunately the malaise in gamersworld is easy to avoid by just going to indie-developers or the odd good AAA-game coming out.

Edited April 16, 2013 by Hassat Hunter

[Elerond]

Next Battlefield comes even more spectacular looking graphics than BF3, but was it waste of effort or will it pay back in the end. Any guesses?

http://www.battlefield.com/battlefield-4/videos/single-player-gameplay

[Bokishi]

BF3 sold 16 million copies, I'm sure the sequel will be profitable, but they and a few others are the exception, and it's getting way too expensive to be that exception 

Edited April 16, 2013 by Bokishi

[Keyrock]

As mentioned already, it's just not a sustainable model.  Yeah, there will be games that hit the jackpot and make back those mammoth budgets and make profit in troves on top of that, but the vast majority won't, even if they are good games and are well received, as Deus Ex: HR, Sleeping Dogs, and Tomb Raider all apparently were (I can speak of Deus Ex and Sleeping Dogs from personal experience, Tomb Raider I will admit I'm going off hearsay).  It's like filling a baseball team lineup with all sluggers.  Sure, they hit home runs, they also strike out a lot.  You need contact hitters on your team too.

[Bokishi]

Hmmm found another related article that blames the publishers for some of the bankruptcies 

 

http://kotaku.com/we-need-better-video-game-publishers-472880781

[Fighter]

People are jumping to conclusions on the Square Enix stuff imo. All of those games might be profitable, especially Tomb Raider. But the company is in trouble and they need big money makers, not just moderate money makers. They needed to show they had a plan to make up for all that and hence their expectations may look bloated. But no one really knows the reasoning behind their expectations numbers, yet so many people have assumed it means the games aren't even breaking even. 

[Meshugger]

I remember when one of the Ultimas was considered a smashing success when it sold over 250 000. 

[Zoraptor]

People are jumping to conclusions on the Square Enix stuff imo. All of those games might be profitable, especially Tomb Raider. But the company is in trouble and they need big money makers, not just moderate money makers. They needed to show they had a plan to make up for all that and hence their expectations may look bloated. But no one really knows the reasoning behind their expectations numbers, yet so many people have assumed it means the games aren't even breaking even. 

Yeah, there are two issues: Did TR make money in an isolated sense? and Did TR make the money it needed to make? We know the answer to the second question, the first would be conjecture. The first is to an extent irrelevant though- despite me bemoaning it being a 'failure' despite 3.4 million sales- as TR is part of Squenidos and has to exist that way until sold off or the company fails. If they need it to sell 7 million copies, even with the proviso that that is a silly number based on a 'value' for TR that has been gone for years, then half of that is a 'failure' even if in isolation it made money.

[Fighter]

It matters because a profitable project is much less likely to get shelved. In fact it would be pretty stupid not try and build on that. Something like Arkham Asylum sold less (about 2 million) in the same time frame and not only was a success but spawned a much faster selling sequel. Something has to be off with that 7 million figure they expected in one month. No one with half a brain can realistically expect that. I don't think Final fantasy XIII sold nearly that in a month and I doubt it was less expensive to make. It is also so beyond their expectations for Sleeping Dogs and Hitman. Was Tomb Raider so much more expensive than those games to have to sell in a month more than those games in a year? It's hard to believe. IMO there is some politicking going on that may have little to do with reality.

[Zoraptor]

I certainly won't dispute that the 7 million figure was laughable, there was a time when TR was a genuinely AAA+ property and might realistically have got those numbers but those days are long gone. Their expectations seem to be all over the place though, both SD and Hitman 'failed' as well, DXHR (which had 4+ years development, a new studio etc etc) supposedly did OK without actually selling that well, and DS3 met expectations on a lower budget.

 

For TR specifically there might be some baggage wrt to it being originally a part of Eidos, though that would be true for DXHR as well- and the problems with the bread and butter FF franchise can hardly help so there may be some wishful thinking involved in finding a replacement/ backup.

Edited April 17, 2013 by Zoraptor

[Drowsy Emperor]

From what I recall overall the ex Eidos part of Square Enix has had more duds than successes recently. During the 90's and early 00' Eidos was a company that published a lot of innovative and popular titles. After that it devolved to recycling of old material - and what new material there was, like "Kane & Lynch" - was generally abysmal.

 

After so many years of mismanagement its hardly surprising that they're not that well off.

 

And I'm not going to weep over their fate, there are only so many incarnations of TR, Hitman, Thief, Deus Ex etc. I can play without wondering when they're going to makes something new and worthwhile.

 

For my opinion of Square, just replace Eidos with it in the text above.

[Drowsy Emperor]

Of course, what they might actually be doing in between all the tears is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting

 

 Expenditures can be inflated to reduce or eliminate the reportedprofit of the project thereby reducing the amount which the corporation must pay in royalties or other profit-sharing agreements, as these are based on the net profit.

Edited April 19, 2013 by Drowsy Emperor

[Orogun01]

Oh that's evil.

Can it be proved without access to their books?

[alanschu]

They are starting to lose more and more lawsuits, I am finding.

[Oerwinde]

Oh that's evil.

 

Can it be proved without access to their books?

Its a little more sinister than just cooking the books. The studios own various companies under their umbrella that can be used. For instance, if they own their own marketing and distribution companies, they can jack up the prices charged by either, reducing the net profits due to expenditures on marketing and distribution, but that money is paid to themselves, so they aren't in fact losing anything. The production loses money, but the studio itself does not.

 

Its why actors ask for % of the gross rather than % of the profit, because if a movie made for 100 million and makes 400 million cost 300 million to distribute, it made no profit.

[Orogun01]

Is this sort of thing legal?

[Zoraptor]

Depends on how it is done and what the laws of the country are. Peter Jackson sued (successfully) New Line for profit shares of the LotR movies that they tried to obfuscate, for example, but there are multiple examples of people not having the money to dispute such things- often precisely because they've been stiffed by Hollywood Accounting.

[Drowsy Emperor]

Its not legal, buy you can try suing them.

 

But only if you're sitting on Uncle Scrooge's money.

Edited April 20, 2013 by Drowsy Emperor

[Orogun01]

So why hasn't there been any attempt to bring a case all the way up to the Supreme Court in order to ban this sort of thing? 

[Drowsy Emperor]

So why hasn't there been any attempt to bring a case all the way up to the Supreme Court in order to ban this sort of thing? 

 

Because the movie industry has been around since forever and is a small clique of very wealthy and influential people that make a lot of money. A lot in this case means more than you can possibly imagine. Obviously they're tied to every other US elite.

No one is going to dare to really prosecute them.

 

If they weren't safe there wouldn't be a wikipedia article describing what they've been doing for decades.

Its obviously acceptable on some level.

Edited April 20, 2013 by Drowsy Emperor

[Orogun01]

I'm really beginning to hate this ****ing country

[Amentep]

The thing is, you have to pretty much win a lawsuit just to open the books of a movie company. Because they do this type of accounting across the board it is much more preferable for them to settle a lawsuit for an undisclosed sum rather than risk multiple film productions having proof handed to them on a silver platter.

 

In that sense, the courts hands are tied. Unless a defendant is willing to eschew a large settlement, spend a lot of money to win a trial the actual profits of the movie companies are going to remain hidden.

[babaganoosh13]

I wonder if a proper defense for a movie company would be:

 

"Your honour, everybody in the business knows by now that no movie has ever made profit ever, including Star Wars and Titanic."

[Mamoulian War]

Another funny/maybe not remark by Jim Sterling about what we do talk here as well...

 

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/7161-Perfect-Pasta-Sauce