Moon Studios developer Mark Coates previews indie gem Ori and the Blind Forest for Xbox One at the Microsoft Loft in San Francisco.
Thomas Mahler: "Since it's quite bananas that a lot of players still do not understand the economy behind game development, I thought it'd be best to just break down a real example of a really successful first-time developer who managed to make a deal with a publisher. "
I wouldnt call a game that costs 10 million to make and had over 30 people from different companies working on it an indie game.
Seriously, no.
its an independent studio that is not owned by any big studio or publisher. what else would you call them?
Indie means independant PLUS low budget.
Say I'm a billionnaire and decide to fund my own game with a $20M budget, is it an indie game just because I don't call a publisher? Dev costs increase yeah, but $10M is hardly indie
@TheCaptainKuchiki I mean there is a word, independent, now look up what independent means.
https://dictionary.cambridg...
If you are a billionaire and fund your own game your game your studio is definately an independent studio xD
Thats what the word means.
Game development expenditures have exploded since the old days, Terry. Office space, hiring computer techs, game development equipment and art direction all have insane costs now.
Regardless the expenses are still there. If every indie studio had a success like Stardew Valley, they wouldn't be begging big time publishers, crowdfunders and investors to cover development costs. Alas most don't.
I don't get it..
He starts with 10M cost for the game excluding marketing and continues to detract "other"costs...
Why are the costs of storefront, engine etc not included in the 10M?
CEO makes CEO noises.
If he takes a 1 million dollar bonus every year the game is being made and the game took 5 years to be made, the "cost" isn't 10 million, it should be 5 million.
It's just more magical accounting. This industry is replete with it.
@Santouryuu
Yeah, it's weird. On top of that, he subtracts engine, tax from HIS own money, but this should be put on the publisher (or at least be split, 50%/50% or how they agree), because they're benefitting from the sales as well. On top of that, he makes it look like he didn't get a cent, but he (and his team) was paid the salary the whole way through, with bonuses and stuff. Probably rent for the office was taken care of as well and licenses/devices too.
And also, he acts like his games' average price was $10 (by the way, if the game cost $10 million, who decided to sell it for $20?! Sounds idiotic), which is ridiculous, popular indie games don't do 50% discount right after release and the most of the sales are done a few months after release (according to the publishers). As an example, look at Rimworld, Dwarf Fortress, Factorio, Kenshi, they either didn't have 50% discount yet or had it years after the release.
Also, he acts like the game was only sold on Steam, but that's false. And Microsoft, i'm more than sure, didn't take 30% from them (because it's a game published by them on their platform).
The only thing this tells me is that someone is trying to manipulate us and you shouldn't work with Microsoft if you want to remain sane.
because thats what he has to HAVE RIGHT NOW to develop the next game (engine, tax andso on)
Yes xbox of course did not have the 30% tax but then again he is just making a hypothetical, I am pretty sure their game did not sell exactely 20millions ^^
Its not the cost of storefront. Your game made 20million but from those 20million the store takes 30%. Steam took 30% from the 20million you made. got it?
If you make 20million in sales Steam takes 6 million.
So you only get 14millions. Then you have to pay back what you owe the publisher, so 10millions in devcost and 2million in marketing.
So you are left with 2millions.
From the 2millions of pure profit 70% goes to the publisher and 30% to the developer (depending on your contract)
So you are left with 600k to pay for your next game, for now.
lots of numbers but very clearly put
Really enjoy the Ori games, but the studio head has always been an insufferable dickhead. Those costs aren't included cause he's miserable and full of shit.
Where did those $10 million go though? It’s a loan basically, but didn’t those pay through the development? Essentially the developer got paid $10 million upfront to make a game. If the game didn’t hit $12 million in sales-say $8 million. The publisher lost that money. The developer still got $10 million. Sure, maybe their next game may not be funded-but they wouldn’t have to come up with the $4 million missing. That’s a loss from the publisher.
absolutely correct.
He is pointing out the fact that even IF you have a hit game that sells 2million dollars. Does not mean you can pay for the next project.
Moon Studios announced significant updates for No Rest for the Wicked, including a major expansion and new features launching on April 30.
Its long overdue... its been on switch, PC and XB for a while now. No reason to leave PS out anymore now that they would be able to self publish.
Surely things have improved since the initial Early Access but I put about 2-3 hours into the first EA build.
What genuinely forgettable gameplay. The balance was weird, the character designs are weirder, and I felt absolutely no hook to go back.
The art style overall isn't bad but whatever they were thinking with the characters just doesn't agree with me. Don't go in thinking that this game has or remotely tries to capture the charm of Ori.
Moon Studios CEO Thomas Mahler recently commented on console exclusivity, saying that he would be surprised if PlayStation won't abandon it in the future.
I hope not, what would be the point? Microsoft I get because it's part of their bigger vision, they haven't been doing the best with Xbox console sales in a long time and then bought two publishers. The company is changing course especially thanks to Gamepass but with Sony, they don't really have any need to do it.
If that happens then it really would feel pointless having a console and you'd be best sticking with a Nintendo console and PC.
The way I see it if Nintendo are doing alright keeping their exclusives to themselves and you have a good share of the market then there's no real point.
It wouldn't be pointless, people still enjoy having console and don't wanna mess with PC. Wouldnt be much of a difference of what it is now honestly. I doubt Sony would do that and I wouldn't listen to anyone that doesnt work at Sony.
Once again people are putting what they want/hope will happen vs what actually makes sense in reality.
It doesn't make sense for Sony to go this route unless they don't view themselves as running a successful business currently.
The only reason why Microsoft went third party is because they purcachased giant third party publishers.
The reason MS is going third party is because the opportunity cost of exclusives outweighs the conversion potential. I didn't think that was the situation when it was a closer race.
Moon studios CEO - maker of Ori... I smell indirect PR by MS.
How would it help Sony to port their games on dying platform? They would sell 5 copies more. Logic missing.
If anything MS has made that route impossible for sony. They own the mid end console market. There currently isn't really a high end market (which i believe could be an avenue for xbox if they still want to make hardware and be competitive in their own niche). If there is nothing to sell it's own console how would their business model cope? Xbox no longer needs console sales; being multiplatform is a better business model for them now because of the sheer volume of studios they have.
Playstation had no incentive to launch day and date on pc as long as they want to have consoles. The only way around it would be console features that are not anywhere else, like dualsense...but even that can be adapted to pc.
Its already happening. Ports of MLB on XB may not be published by sony but they are still developed by their studio. And Lego horizon is also on switch and was developed by a sony studio.
@darthv72, Its a shame the Show is not on PC. I remember when the PC was the best place for baseball.
No darth, Lego is a lego game and MLB was contractional due to the license but god loves a tryer
They will because of investors. Same as Microsoft and any other company. We are our own worst enemies.
Wow spring cleaning time came early this year that they are recycling 10+ years old articles.
This may happen given the skyrocketing costs of making these games and the time it takes to make them, as the current model doesn't seem sustainable to anyone except Nintendo, so I expect Sony at some point will follow MS. This just seems like basic reality math to me. This seems to be a matter of when not if. Nintendo will probably continue as they are.
Joke article. There is no evidence PS will release games on PC and Nintendo or other competitor's HW day and date as a rule of thumb. At least none yet.
I remember awhile ago I can't remember if it was an article or what but they said this gen will be less about platform wars and more about IP wars. Having your IP on everything and software on other platforms. The race to see who's software will come out on top.
As for Sony, maybe I don't see Yotei, Intergalactic, Wolverine etc going over any time soon. I can see their LS games doing it. In fact, prediction time I think Fair Games will be on PS5 (of course) PC and Series X|S. I think the few LS games they have now, they want to reach as many platforms they can. SP stuff as I said no. Dont I think it'll happen ever? That's the thing in this industry, never say never.
Of course, you are ignoring the fact that Xbox gamers have been conditioned to not buy games and rely on Gamepass.
This does introduce the question of whether is financialy worth supporting Xbox, especially when they have to make a version of a game which will run on the Series S. All that effort for not much return?
Ignoring? They show up to the 1st party I just listed and those games don't stay on the charts(because GP). On average yes they much rather play through GP most of the time but they seem to show up for the most anticipated games, for the most part.
With Ubisoft not doing well and EA starting to suffer MS is trying to position themselves to be a major third party publisher and release games to everyone. So financially they'll be OK.
What would Sony have to gain from putting their games on Xbox consoles, where software sells poorly as everyone waits for gamepass? PS5 continues to shift magnitudes more consoles, they don't need the dwindling xbox userbase. The most I could see is eventual day and date with PC, I don't think that's out of the realm of possibility. Otherwise I don't think Sony is in a rush to gut their console and software sales by throwing everything on a sub service day 1 and porting games to their direct competitor.
Anyway judging by the guys tweet and replies he's an obvious xbox stooge, considering MS bankrolls his games, hardly unbiased.
Let's just say if something like that were to happen those Sony games on Xbox would definitely not be in gamepass. Sony doesn't believe in the subscription model the way Xbox does not by a long shot. Boxed physical sales is the core of Sony's buissness and Xbox crowd would have to buy it.
Also Halo Infinite, Forza Horizon, Starfield and Indy all charted. The Xbox Crowd buy games, they dont stay long on the charts but they show up. Depends if the games are advertised most importantly if they're good. Still the normal metric for games success.
See that is the problem, the "magnitudes" of consoles constantly remain the same 120-160 mill, it's not growing or going up...but game development cost and time is skyrocketing.
The only ways around this situation is to offset the cost to consumers, by increasing the cost of games and consoles, at this rate, games will cost $90-$100, and consoles pushing $800-1k.
So it's either the cost is offloaded to consumers or, they get the games to more people by going multiplatform with certain games, they already started with PC, but that won't be enough if the game development cost don't stabilize or is reduced somehow.
10 mill copies sold just to make a profit on some games is not a rack to hang your hat on for to long.
But again, how does theoretically releasing games on Xbox solve that problem? If I'm not mistaken Sony said the PS5 is their most profitable generation yet.
So why would Sony release games on Xbox? We've seen the damage of over a decade of a lack of exclusives outside of halo and Forza, day 1 PC and going all in on gamepass has done to the Xbox brand, why would Sony do the same and damage their brand? Not even having CoD on gamepass has moved the needle for Xbox, in fact console sales dropped even more.
It makes no sense, maybe day and date with PC eventually, but PS games on Xbox? There's nothing to gain there and it would damage the brand. This whole narrative of 'Sony too11!!!' just because Xbox has been floundering for years is just silly.
Thats what releasing games on PC is for. That's already the biggest market. Wtf are they going to gain from releasing on Xbox?! The system that requires TWO versions and no one buys games even? Ton of work for little payoff. Would be better to release games on the Switch 2 if anything. Xbox is a dead console
'The only ways around this situation is to offset the cost to consumers, by increasing the cost of games and consoles.'.
You forgot increasing the cost of subscriptions.
What would sony have to gain? That would be money. Even if they put more games on xbox and they end up in gamepass. They still get paid. Sony push for GAAS is all about extending revenue for games.
Crash,
Money is what Sony would gain, as mediocre as it sounds in comparison to PS sales, 30-40 million users is a base that can spend money, be it on game sales, or MT. Look at Square, they are ditching the exclusive deals and pledging more for Xbox/multiplatform releases.
I am not suggesting Sony will put all of its exclusives on Xbox, but they should, and probably will start to port smaller(Lego: Horizon) games, and more than likely Live service games. When you say "hurt the brand," I think you overestimate internet jargon for reality in how people spend money and time, hardly to no one would have skipped Helldivers 2 on PC or PS if it had been released on Xbox, I would argue that the game would have a larger base at this point.
Even in a hypothetical situation, let us say they released Helldivers 2 on Xbox right now. Would people jump ship from PS? Or would X number of Xbox-only fans be added, and would they spend money on MTX for a simple port job? It could potentially add an additional million or more users, again, for a port job.
We often get what we want mixed up with actuals, many people said PS games on PC wouldn't happen and it would make having a PS console obsolete(that was a big dig at MS as well)...well here we are, and while not day and date with PC, nothing has changed except Sony are making more money. The whole "Hurt the brand" and console bragging is a hyperbole view from internet die-hards that usually have on rose-tinted sunglasses.
My brother and most of the people I play games with are not on gaming websites and threads like we are, and they could care less if one game is also on another system or vice versa.
"Not even having CoD on gamepass has moved the needle for Xbox, in fact console sales dropped even more."
MS themselves in court said they didn't expect to move Xbox sales. Why would would they if the game is multiplat? Nobody's gonna switch ecosystems for one game. Leaving their friends, trophy's etc for a yearly game? Not happening again MS even called it themselves. With Xbox it's about growing the ecosystem more than anything.
what would any console maker have to gain from making a console when the industry is finally far enough for streaming games to be relevant? I don't see it happening in 20 years, but eventually it will happen.
People are speaking into the ether what Microsoft wants to happen, not what Sony has said. One indie dev isn't going to capture Sony's business plan with his opinion of what he hopes they will do.
Why would Sony ever give up their market share and money that comes with it? Why would they compete in a market where they are not #1 versus a market where they are? Why can't they maintain a console market and put their games out on other markets?
Totally agree, it wouldn't make sense to back down from exclusives, especially since the cost of making a game exclusive goes down the more dominant you are. How much does Sony need to pay a publisher to not put a game out on a platform with dwindling users that don't buy the game anyway, compared to how much MS would have to pay to keep the game off of PS. Xbox has probably passed the point of no return and it's in Sony's interest to finish the play.
I'd expect them to set their sights on PC next, because what else is left?
seems cools
This game is a solid indie.