Recommended Posts

+Audioboxer
In a rather interesting feature over at Eurogamer, the site has broken down where your £40 goes when you splash out full price on a videogame.

It's well worth reading the report, but the most revealing information concerns the actual financial breakdown of the individual aspects of that ticket price. £7 of the price of the game goes to the government for VAT (although it's slightly higher now, the report is based on December which is when the tax was 17.5%), £10.50 goes to the retailer and £12 goes to the publisher of the game.

Developers, believe it or not, get around £3 per sale assuming it's a third party, although it's worth mentioning that the publisher will often pay developers at key milestones – the platform holder (Sony, Microsoft etc) nets £8 per game, 65p goes on distribution, and £1.75 on marketing.

Naturally these figures all swap and change depending on the game, the publisher, the medium, but it's enlightening to know where your money is going to.

The article also suggests that sometimes that £3 doesn't go to the devs at all, rather there are bonuses paid by the publisher relating to"sales and an average review score" with one developer saying that Metacritic is used extensively in this regard.

"They will work out the budget for the next Call of Duty, $35 million, and they'll go to the project director and say, 'You better bring it in for less, and I'm going to bonus you on how much less, versus the Metacritic quality,'" says Philip Oliver of YooStar 2 creator Blitz.

"Metacritic is used as benchmarks for quality. It takes the guesswork out of answering the question, 'Did you do a good game or not?' They can use it to say, 'We'll go on that score. If you get above 85 per cent, we'll pay you a bonus of X.'

Source: http://www.thesixtha...the-developers/

no.gif

And you now also know why metacritic has turned into the beast it has.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ridlas

I miss the good old days when games were made because the developers loved making games. Now it's all about the money.

[COUGH]Call of Duty[/COUCH]

Link to post
Share on other sites
neoadorable

that's not so bad. so if let's say the rather mediocre Enslaved sold a million copies net, then Ninja Theory got paid approx three million pounds, or what like five million US? that's not bad at all. this is just from sales, so it's theoretical, the people that actually worked on the game got paid salaries while they were at it anyway. so this three million pounds is basically not such a disgrace. it's quite good.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kriz

Thats terrible, i would expect it to be lot more than that..

Link to post
Share on other sites
Elessar

My problem with Metacritic is there are some game sites that look quite...unprofessional. It's unfortunate that they are included in the rankings.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Singh400

I'm gonna take this with a pinch of salt...

Did they say what game they based it on? How did the accurately track down the financial information? Too many Ifs and Buts for me...

Link to post
Share on other sites
leesmithg

If the figures are true, then the developer should cut out all the middle men and go commando and sell them directly themselves.

Maybe move their business to Jersey, avoid v.a.t. and anything sold there for £20 or less avoids v.a.t.

Problem solved, plus create some jobs there too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hedon

And then add pathetic piracy on top of that, and developers get really screwed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nagisan

And then add pathetic piracy on top of that, and developers get really screwed.

They don't lose anything to pirates most of the time, a majority of pirates are unwilling to buy the game anyway, take away all piracy and there still not going to buy it. That doesn't make it right, but piracy != a lost sale.

Anyway, if this article is true, no wonder games are so expensive.......developers have to try to make some money after retailers, publishers, etc......maybe the ones who hardly do any work (retailers, publishers, etc) should get the ?3 fee, and the developers should get what ever is left over after that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hedon

They don't lose anything to pirates most of the time

Actually, they do all the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
gunny2k6

If the figures are true, then the developer should cut out all the middle men and go commando and sell them directly themselves.

Maybe move their business to Jersey, avoid v.a.t. and anything sold there for £20 or less avoids v.a.t.

Problem solved, plus create some jobs there too.

basicly like how Valve started Steam.... then converted it to more then just there games... and all be it some of the content servers steam doesnt actualy pay for .... they take donations semi-basicly ...u host the server in ur datacentre but give valve full remote admin to said server ;) ..there may be agreement where vavle do give some money back on some merit like how many users u serv etc ...but i havent got a clue on that

..on the piracy thats now why we have CD KEYS tied to Multiplayer Accounts ;) to get that sale .... of course unless some one manages to create unoffical servers which does happen most the time

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nagisan

Actually, they do all the time.

What exactly do they lose?

They do not lose money most of the time because piracy does not mean they lost a sale. They do not lose a copy of the game because piracy is done by making a copy of the game. Maybe you know something I don't but I can't think of what they lose 100% of the time when someone pirates a game, feel free to try to come up with things though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Miuku

Actually, they do all the time.

Because people have unlimited funds to use to buy every game and on top of that support their local stores / facilities?

Unlikely.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Rudy

Maybe the whole industry needs a shift in a different direction (it's a shame really that the developers sees so little of the profit :()

Link to post
Share on other sites
Richard Hammond

If the figures are true, then the developer should cut out all the middle men and go commando and sell them directly themselves.

Maybe move their business to Jersey, avoid v.a.t. and anything sold there for £20 or less avoids v.a.t.

Problem solved, plus create some jobs there too.

Not every company can afford to do that.

A lot of developers dont have millions and millions in the bank sat there waiting for the next blockbuster game thats why there are things called publishers who finance it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hedon
What exactly do they lose?

They lose money on a sale. The person that pirated (stole) the game should be paying the developer for their hard work, intellectual rights, materials and put food on those employee's table. Do you think if a developer made a game for 40 million dollars would make any money if they released the game and gave it away to everybody for free?

If you honestly can sit here with a serious face and say that developers are not losing money from pirates, then you need an education on the economy my friend.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Richard Hammond

They lose money on a sale. The person that pirated (stole) the game should be paying the developer for their hard work, intellectual rights, materials and put food on those employee's table. Do you think if a developer made a game for 40 million dollars would make any money if they released the game and gave it away to everybody for free?

If you honestly can sit here with a serious face and say that developers are not losing money from pirates, then you need an education on the economy my friend.

Thats the common misconception, if it wasnt available to pirate for free there is no guarantee the person would have paid for the game in the first place, but lets not turn this into a piracy discussion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nagisan

They lose money on a sale. The person that pirated (stole) the game should be paying the developer for their hard work, intellectual rights, materials and put food on those employee's table. Do you think if a developer made a game for 40 million dollars would make any money if they released the game and gave it away to everybody for free?

If you honestly can sit here with a serious face and say that developers are not losing money from pirates, then you need an education on the economy my friend.

They lose money on a sale? Who says the person who pirated would have bought it in the first place?

If you honestly can sit here with a serious face and say that everyone who pirated a game would have bought it if piracy did not exist, then YOU need an education period, not just one on economy.

Sure, piracy leads to the loss of some sales, but to say every case of piracy = a loss of sales, is just stupid.

And no, piracy is not the same as stealing. Stealing means you take something away from the original owner without permission. With piracy, you are making an unauthorized copy.

piracy-is-not-theft-handy-guide.jpg

Therefore no, the developers are not losing anything except a potential sale, and even then they do not always lose a potential sale (look at how many people admit to pirating Minecraft before buying it, in such a case, Notch did not lose a potential sale to those people, only those who pirated it and have not bought it yet).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Brad.

Thats the common misconception, if it wasnt available to pirate for free there is no guarantee the person would have paid for the game in the first place, but lets not turn this into a piracy discussion.

The way I've always seen it is that if you want to play it, you pay to or get a free demo if there is one. The phrase "I pirated it to see if it was worth it" is BS most of the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
+Audioboxer

They lose money on a sale? Who says the person who pirated would have bought it in the first place?

If you honestly can sit here with a serious face and say that everyone who pirated a game would have bought it if piracy did not exist, then YOU need an education period, not just one on economy.

Up until recently you couldn't pirate on the PS3 at all and it's now clear people who were buying PS3 games because they had no choice are about to stop doing so.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Richard Hammond

The way I've always seen it is that if you want to play it, you pay to or get a free demo if there is one. The phrase "I pirated it to see if it was worth it" is BS most of the time.

PC demos are few and far between thesedays. Hypothetically i wouldnt pay ?30 on a game i hadnt played because then i couldnt return it because most if not all shops dont allow the return of PC software.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Nagisan

Up until recently you couldn't pirate on the PS3 at all and it's now clear people who were buying PS3 games because they had no choice are about to stop doing so.

So everyone who buys PS3 games is going to stop and pirate them now?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Brad.

PC demos are few and far between thesedays. Hypothetically i wouldnt pay ?30 on a game i hadnt played because then i couldnt return it because most if not all shops dont allow the return of PC software.

I understand the issue with trying PC software. But if you're unsure about console games - rent it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.