Microsoft backtracks on DRM and used games

HeyCori

Mod Emeritus
Mar 1, 2011
6,865
68
48
Visit site
6 million to split between developers?

You do realize that most of these high-end AAA games have up to 500-1,000 developers right? These games also take 1-2 years to make. Most of these developers are getting paid around 100,000 a year. That means it can cost up to $100,000,000 for a AAA title just for development costs alone....

While I think it's rare to get to 100 million from just salaries alone, there's other factors like licensing the game engine, marketing, the graphics arts department, distribution deals, hardware/office stationary (yes, even paper costs), and lets not forget paying off the publishers. In order for Bungie to make games like Destiny it has to sell like Call of Duty. 3-4 million copies doesn't cut it when budgets are that high.
 
Nov 7, 2012
540
0
0
Visit site
While I think it's rare to get to 100 million from just salaries alone, there's other factors like licensing the game engine, marketing, the graphics arts department, distribution deals, hardware/office stationary (yes, even paper costs), and lets not forget paying off the publishers. In order for Bungie to make games like Destiny it has to sell like Call of Duty. 3-4 million copies doesn't cut it when budgets are that high.

Exactly. Which is why everything is multi-platform unless Microsoft or Sony pays them or funds them for it. A platform exclusive AAA title is hard to pull off without those funds. Add to that fact that a lot of gamers are scared of trying out new IP, it really hurts the industry because of how low the success rate can be.
 

ncxcstud

New member
Dec 16, 2010
1,147
0
0
Visit site
Uncharted 2 had 85 people working, while also using independent contractors for who knows what. Same time, Ubisoft had 500 people work on AC2. So it does depend on the business model and you're approach so to speak. Also, mind you, I did use some extreme conservative numbers. We all know GameStop doesn't make much of anything off of new games, and their main revenue comes from used games. Best Buy's cost per game is 50 dollars, and then make a profit by selling it for 60 dollars. So once again, assuming a game company makes 10 dollars per game sold is some really conservative numbers.

It all comes down to your business model, and like I said...some of these companies expect stupidly high expectations. Sometimes because they put a lot of money in development, marketing, or something else entirely. You don't need a AAA game to sell millions. There are plenty of indie or "B" games that can attest to that.

Which is why I see a lot of games adding in more DLC, multiplayer, or going strictly free 2 play this generation.

Take Tomb Raider for example - Its awesome. Seriously, if you haven't played it you should. It was amazing. And it sold pretty well (IMO). I think around 6 million copies. That's a lot (an estimated) and Square STILL thought that it didn't hit their intended projections to cover everything.

Now, even though there was multiplayer in it (it wasn't very good) so a lot of people sold the game back to gamestop and picked up another game (maybe Bioshock Infinite). So, Gamestop is right that by selling back Tomb Raider it 'helped the industry' by giving a consumer enough scratch to get B:I - but each subsequent sale of your old copy of Tomb Raider doesn't help Square at all - thus their saying that the game didn't 'sell to their expectations.'

Now, I hope we get more games of Tomb Raiders caliber. It looks great, it plays great, and it tells a wonderful story. It's obviously what the 'people' want too since it sold a lot of copies (not a crazy 20 million that CoD does, but 6 million isn't something to sneeze at).

But, we're in an industry that thinks 6 million new copies of a game isn't considered 'good.' I'd love to know how many additional sales it received through pre-own sales...

Cliff Blezinski already stated that the unique individuals playing games far exceed total sales. I'd love to know what the ratio is...

Video games don't have the luxury of reaping licensing deals like movies, tv, and the songs do. And it is hurting them...
 

MikeyMike01

New member
Jun 9, 2013
8
0
0
Visit site
I agree, but I still buy this. Hopefully you can buy all games digitally on launch day (with good download speed) and that way have the online game library still. Also that you could play your games at any xbox with your login.

I'm still buying it too. Sony and Nintendo's offerings are pitiful.


Sent from my iPhone
 

NaNoo123

New member
Jun 7, 2013
112
0
0
Visit site
That's not really a problem, cos it's easy to implement an option for "DRM free" or "online use"-kind of options. If you buy the the game digitally, you will be connected to the internet. There is no scenario where you could buy and install a digital game without being online, so before/during/upon downloading a digital game you could be allowed to choose whether you want to be able to share etc or be able to play the game offline. If you choose offline, you can do just that, if you choose to share, you can't play offline.

Although, I'm not sure if there is any risk whatsoever to allowing playing digital games offline baseline, cos there is no disc to give around to all of yours friends that could be exploited in the first place.. but the thing still is that the split between digital and disc based games is not a problem cos there is no scenario of installing a digital game without internet.
you really think they could do that prior to launch?
Your underestimating how much work, qa, testing is involved in all that.
As i said hopefully in the near future after the release they can implement some form of hybrid to please most people on both sides.
 

Mystictrust

New member
May 26, 2011
976
0
0
Visit site
Minecraft FTW!!!! No really I don't get the hysteria over this game which looks worse than some 1980s games I played.
Graphics hardly mean anything in a video game if it is fun. I played some old school Total Annihilation and System Shock 2 the other day. Thinking of busting out Thief: The Dark Project... Fun times :)

I still prefer 8 and 16 bit Mario over all the 3D stuff
 

Polychrome

New member
May 15, 2011
405
0
0
Visit site
Exactly. Which is why everything is multi-platform unless Microsoft or Sony pays them or funds them for it. A platform exclusive AAA title is hard to pull off without those funds. Add to that fact that a lot of gamers are scared of trying out new IP, it really hurts the industry because of how low the success rate can be.

What's interesting though is this cloud setup, if it is nearly as appealing to devs as I've heard it is, stands to break that cycle. And possibly bring a lot of these console-multiplatform games to the PC world where it would be easy for Microsoft to allow them to naturally migrate.

Would Sony be willing to devote an entire CDN to offloading processes from the ps4? I'm not sure at this point, but I do know Sony has a distinctive case of MeTooism. Sony's answer to everything so far has been to copy everyone else, then see how much hardware they can cram into a box and declare themselves the winner. They've done this to everyone from Nintendo to LG. They've never struck me as particularly innovative in their own right.
 

Keith Wallace

New member
Nov 8, 2012
3,179
0
0
Visit site
Graphics hardly mean anything in a video game if it is fun. I played some old school Total Annihilation and System Shock 2 the other day. Thinking of busting out Thief: The Dark Project... Fun times :)

I still prefer 8 and 16 bit Mario over all the 3D stuff

World of Warcraft
: Single largest game ever, and it's got rather run-of-the-mill graphics, in terms of quality. Mario games have never been graphically impressive, **** they sell like crazy. When the artwork allows graphics to take a backseat, in favor of a good game with more kid-friendly, colorful visuals, the GPU strain isn't as big of a deal.
 

theeboredone

New member
Oct 7, 2012
325
0
0
Visit site
Which is why I see a lot of games adding in more DLC, multiplayer, or going strictly free 2 play this generation.

Take Tomb Raider for example - Its awesome. Seriously, if you haven't played it you should. It was amazing. And it sold pretty well (IMO). I think around 6 million copies. That's a lot (an estimated) and Square STILL thought that it didn't hit their intended projections to cover everything.

Now, even though there was multiplayer in it (it wasn't very good) so a lot of people sold the game back to gamestop and picked up another game (maybe Bioshock Infinite). So, Gamestop is right that by selling back Tomb Raider it 'helped the industry' by giving a consumer enough scratch to get B:I - but each subsequent sale of your old copy of Tomb Raider doesn't help Square at all - thus their saying that the game didn't 'sell to their expectations.'

Now, I hope we get more games of Tomb Raiders caliber. It looks great, it plays great, and it tells a wonderful story. It's obviously what the 'people' want too since it sold a lot of copies (not a crazy 20 million that CoD does, but 6 million isn't something to sneeze at).

But, we're in an industry that thinks 6 million new copies of a game isn't considered 'good.' I'd love to know how many additional sales it received through pre-own sales...

Cliff Blezinski already stated that the unique individuals playing games far exceed total sales. I'd love to know what the ratio is...

Video games don't have the luxury of reaping licensing deals like movies, tv, and the songs do. And it is hurting them...

I will admit. I was a victim of GameFlying Tomb Raider (solid game). Why? Because out of all the AAA games, that is the one I chose I would rent rather than spending money on. Hence why, sometimes you gotta take a back seat and rethink your business model.
 

Keith Wallace

New member
Nov 8, 2012
3,179
0
0
Visit site
Something I've been thinking: Why is it that WE need punished because game companies cannot keep their spending in check? I mean, if they're the ones who cannot work within a reasonable budget, that is on them.
 

MerlotC

New member
Sep 19, 2011
168
0
0
Visit site
Was just reading this Heartbroken MS employee - Pastebin.com Looks like the family share wasn't going to be as awesome as I originally thought, though still pretty cool. I'm kinda thinking that this is going to end up being a better approach. Slowly show gamers, and the journalists why these changes are good... We will get there

Looks like the pastebin post was a fake and Family Share was going to be (and may still in the future be) awesome.
https://twitter.com/aarongreenberg/status/348125219019436033
 
Last edited:

MikeyMike01

New member
Jun 9, 2013
8
0
0
Visit site
At the very least, it's not worse than the current system the 360 has.

If Microsoft went this route from the get go, I wouldn't have batted an eye. So in this regard I can't say I'm upset about it anymore.


Sent from my iPhone
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
324,237
Messages
2,245,218
Members
428,180
Latest member
crystalrestoreoffer