Top
190°

'Less than 3 out of 10 games recover costs,' says EIF boss

Edinburgh Interactive Festival chairman Chris Deering has warned the games industry that it must look for new revenue sources as development costs rise and software sales fall.

In a speech opening this year's EIF, Deering said, "Traditional revenue sources will not be sufficient to fund games development. If you look at the very narrow definition of the gaming market, people are saying the software business will be down 20 per cent by 2011 versus this year.

"Something is going to have to be there to make up the difference and take us beyond that threshold," Deering continued. He observed that major games can now cost more than USD 10 million to develop - and up to USD 100 million in the case of titles such as Grand Theft Auto IV.

Read Full Story >>
gamesindustry.biz
The story is too old to be commented.
La Chance3328d ago (Edited 3328d ago )

why Square decided to go multiplat with FF13...

It doesnt surprise me too see 3rd party games like Bioshock go multiplat , Its 3rd party ! They dont HAVE to stay exclusive.With costs rising and stuff they have to go multiplat.

Maybe with in game ads they can make some extra revenue but dont know if its really significant.

Looks like 1st party games are going to be the deciding factor , 360 still doing good with their 3rd party and timed eclusive strategy but it might not last forever.Pretty sure next gen (720 and ps4) will be more than the end for 3rd party exclusives.

3/10 games only seems quite low to me , but its only his guesses and estimates, I bet its more in reality.Even if gta4 cost 100 million to develop Im sure within the first month alone they had already recovered the costs.

bumnut3328d ago (Edited 3328d ago )

most games are quite poor and and don't deserve to make money.

$100 million for gta4?!?!?!?

the game was poor, why did it cost so much?

i think they spent $10 million on the game and spent the rest on booze, drugs and hookers

i have played shareware games on pc that have kept me interested for longer than gta4

PistolPumptMonk3328d ago

Is there ANYONE else on N4g who likes GTA IV??? I honestly had alot of fun with the game, and while I won't say its the "best game ever," I'm quite tired of people bashing it.

What in the world would make you happy? It had everything you could want from a next-gen GTA...

Dark_Vendetta3328d ago

The game was overhyped and got way too many 10/10s. I didn't fall into the hype and so I liked the game. As you said it's not the GOTY 2008 but it was pretty good IMO (well worth my 60€)

shazam3328d ago

its pretty much a downgrade from san andreas with better graphics.

PistolPumptMonk3328d ago

I do agree that GTA IV was very similar to its prequels, but that is what you have to expect from a sequel.

But a downgrade from San Andreas? The story in GTA IV was EPIC compared to San Andreas, and felt interesting and real up until the end.

Plus the physics made the game a ton better, just seeing car damage and hitting pedestrians with cars and all of that, San Andreas couldn't even touch that. Plus the cover system added a ton of depth to the combat, something the older GTA's were severely lacking in. The city itself was much more BUSY, and the insane draw distance from in helicopter and such just made the scale seem much greater.

Playing multiplayer with a friend, even in free play, is insanely fun and I also feel like that is a huge upgrade from San Andreas. I also think the missions were just better quality than San Andreas as well.

I see where everyone is coming from saying its not enough of an upgrade, but I respectfully diagree.

kinggeoff3327d ago

gta4 was a step down from san andreas.

a lot of SA seemed broken and tacked on. There was so much clutter in that game (that barely made 12fps in a good number of areas) that it totally detracted from the game. There were some awesome ideas (turf wars, getting fat, etc) but they weren't very well implemented and would probably be better suited to another game. the devs realised this and remedied it for GTA4. A much cleaner, more concise experience that plays more like a story and less like a brainstorming session gone wrong

PistolPumptMonk3327d ago (Edited 3327d ago )

Thank you kinggeoff. I agree completely.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3327d ago
Relcom3328d ago

Well seeing as 70% of games blow, it sounds about right.

Does ninjabreadman really deserve money?

Evil Rant Monkey3328d ago

3rd party Wii developers have it down. Spend nothing on the game and charge 30-40 bucks for it.

BlackCountryBob3328d ago

I remember seeing that this 3 out of 10 ratio is much the same in the movie business too. The 2 or big hits like Dark Knight and Ironman that a studio gets per year pays for themselves and generate enough profit to fund the other 7 movies of which 3 or 4 break even give or take while 3 others lose money.

The problem in the game industry is not that games fail to make money, it is that the publishers fund every game like it is a blockbuster; the market needs high spend games that generate money like MGS4 and Halo but games like Army of two should not be funded similarly. I wonder if with lower budgets on some games like AO2 and Kane&Lynch if the devs would have made better games by focusing on story and characterisation rather than the conformist graphics and blood demographics.

Madden and the sort are essential to gaming because the profit they generate is needed to fund the boom blox of this world.

Show all comments (23)
The story is too old to be commented.