Here is the Paul Gale letter

#51-TheFranchise-Posted 10/10/2012 4:49:03 PM(edited)
DLC possibilities
-Dart
-Spyro
-Ico
-Ryu or Chun Li
-Ezio Altair or Conner

if Dart and Cloud both make it i will be in shock.

still... this game makes me sad. all the Woulda Coulda Shoulda characters that superbot is overlooking.
---
Pyramidhead, Vile, Gex & RocketKnight for PSASBR
#52rumbalumbaPosted 10/10/2012 4:45:01 PM
taoxadasa posted...
rumbalumba posted...
still, no.

this is the Smash Bros. that every Playstatation gamer has been asking about, since god-knows-when.

FINALLY, we get it...yet it doesn't have the Playstation's most-requested characters. who cares if they release them all at once or little by little.


the FACT is, they just withheld content from the fans that will be buying their first game. not only withheld, but they're gonna charge us more, on top of that $60?


I get that, yeah it sucks but if it happens we have to deal with it and be happy that we even get those characters at all.




that's the thing.

before, there were only 3-4 people working on a game, and they'd ship it at $60. look at Mortal Kombat, they made a TON of money on those. cheap to make, but sold millions.

God Of War 1 only had 50 people. more expensive to make, but it still sold millions. BIG PROFITS.


suddenly, we get 100-200 people on a team, and the price is still the same $60.

the problem is, these greedy companies still wants to make the same profit margin as they did long ago, so they charge us $100 for the complete package.


which is ****** up. they still make profits. the only thing about now is that they're making LOWER profits, and these bastards want the same (if not, more) profits as they did years back. they can still break even, and even be very profitable as long as their game is actually good and not some crap. instead of us consumers getting in on the times, these companies should face the fact that profit margins won't be as big as before. they'll still have profits, just not as much.


besides, the highest-tier of game profits Call Of Duty still makes BILLIONS of dollars, and the game costs what, $10-$20 million to make? that's still a large profit margin. and i mean even if the costs were upwards of $40 million (which is highly unlikely), that numbers are FAR from being unprofitable.
#53bartz90Posted 10/10/2012 4:53:53 PM
rumbalumba posted...
taoxadasa posted...
rumbalumba posted...
still, no.

this is the Smash Bros. that every Playstatation gamer has been asking about, since god-knows-when.

FINALLY, we get it...yet it doesn't have the Playstation's most-requested characters. who cares if they release them all at once or little by little.


the FACT is, they just withheld content from the fans that will be buying their first game. not only withheld, but they're gonna charge us more, on top of that $60?


I get that, yeah it sucks but if it happens we have to deal with it and be happy that we even get those characters at all.




that's the thing.

before, there were only 3-4 people working on a game, and they'd ship it at $60. look at Mortal Kombat, they made a TON of money on those. cheap to make, but sold millions.

God Of War 1 only had 50 people. more expensive to make, but it still sold millions. BIG PROFITS.


suddenly, we get 100-200 people on a team, and the price is still the same $60.

the problem is, these greedy companies still wants to make the same profit margin as they did long ago, so they charge us $100 for the complete package.


which is ****** up. they still make profits. the only thing about now is that they're making LOWER profits, and these bastards want the same (if not, more) profits as they did years back. they can still break even, and even be very profitable as long as their game is actually good and not some crap. instead of us consumers getting in on the times, these companies should face the fact that profit margins won't be as big as before. they'll still have profits, just not as much.


besides, the highest-tier of game profits Call Of Duty still makes BILLIONS of dollars, and the game costs what, $10-$20 million to make? that's still a large profit margin. and i mean even if the costs were upwards of $40 million (which is highly unlikely), that numbers are FAR from being unprofitable.


No, that's the problem.

That's not how it is anymore. You had right to a point. Games now need 100s of person teams. What did RE6 have? 600 people? It costs more to make a game than ever and it is only going up. In order to even turn a profit games have to sell more than they ever have before and many games do not reach those goals.

Look at Kingdoms of Amalur. It was a well received game by the media and the gaming public and the devs still failed and had to shutter. Why? Because they couldn't sell the millions they needed. Same thing happened to Homefront and Kaos studios. Why do you think so many studios have closed this generation? The risk is higher than ever, costs are spiraling upward and the profit is in fact not there.

You're right that the publishers wish they had profit margins like in the old days, but that's just wishing. Even Call of Duty is not as well off as you think. All told I remember reading that it took something like 3 or 400 million dollars to make, the budget of Hollywood blockbuster. Call of Duty is not even technically demanding. How are smaller companies supposed to deal with that.This is a major reason the games industry is in trouble.

The industry is dire straits because the consumer cannot afford for games to become more expensive and the devs are struggling to cover sky rocketing development costs. It's crazy and unsustainable and something will have to give sooner or later. A way for dev costs to miraculously go down, the collapse of the industry, more cheap made games, etc.
---
-
#54LuminescentRulePosted 10/10/2012 5:03:39 PM
SuperBot has 60 people. Truth is that if they did a better job marketing the game, they wouldn't have had to rely on DLC to make even more money.
---
Sent from my iPhone via PowerFAQs 1.10
#55SpacePirateKhanPosted 10/10/2012 5:04:18 PM
^Less focus on teh shiny grafficks, more focus on fun gameplay?
>_>
<_<

I'm not sure what % of the masses only buy games for teh shiny grafficks, though.
---
"Card Sagas Wars is one of the greatest fighting games of all time. Of all time!"
~Captain Khan
#56Capitan_KidPosted 10/10/2012 5:07:32 PM
bartz90 posted...
rumbalumba posted...
taoxadasa posted...
rumbalumba posted...
still, no.

this is the Smash Bros. that every Playstatation gamer has been asking about, since god-knows-when.

FINALLY, we get it...yet it doesn't have the Playstation's most-requested characters. who cares if they release them all at once or little by little.


the FACT is, they just withheld content from the fans that will be buying their first game. not only withheld, but they're gonna charge us more, on top of that $60?


I get that, yeah it sucks but if it happens we have to deal with it and be happy that we even get those characters at all.




that's the thing.

before, there were only 3-4 people working on a game, and they'd ship it at $60. look at Mortal Kombat, they made a TON of money on those. cheap to make, but sold millions.

God Of War 1 only had 50 people. more expensive to make, but it still sold millions. BIG PROFITS.


suddenly, we get 100-200 people on a team, and the price is still the same $60.

the problem is, these greedy companies still wants to make the same profit margin as they did long ago, so they charge us $100 for the complete package.


which is ****** up. they still make profits. the only thing about now is that they're making LOWER profits, and these bastards want the same (if not, more) profits as they did years back. they can still break even, and even be very profitable as long as their game is actually good and not some crap. instead of us consumers getting in on the times, these companies should face the fact that profit margins won't be as big as before. they'll still have profits, just not as much.


besides, the highest-tier of game profits Call Of Duty still makes BILLIONS of dollars, and the game costs what, $10-$20 million to make? that's still a large profit margin. and i mean even if the costs were upwards of $40 million (which is highly unlikely), that numbers are FAR from being unprofitable.


No, that's the problem.

That's not how it is anymore. You had right to a point. Games now need 100s of person teams. What did RE6 have? 600 people? It costs more to make a game than ever and it is only going up. In order to even turn a profit games have to sell more than they ever have before and many games do not reach those goals.

Look at Kingdoms of Amalur. It was a well received game by the media and the gaming public and the devs still failed and had to shutter. Why? Because they couldn't sell the millions they needed. Same thing happened to Homefront and Kaos studios. Why do you think so many studios have closed this generation? The risk is higher than ever, costs are spiraling upward and the profit is in fact not there.

You're right that the publishers wish they had profit margins like in the old days, but that's just wishing. Even Call of Duty is not as well off as you think. All told I remember reading that it took something like 3 or 400 million dollars to make, the budget of Hollywood blockbuster. Call of Duty is not even technically demanding. How are smaller companies supposed to deal with that.This is a major reason the games industry is in trouble.

The industry is dire straits because the consumer cannot afford for games to become more expensive and the devs are struggling to cover sky rocketing development costs. It's crazy and unsustainable and something will have to give sooner or later. A way for dev costs to miraculously go down, the collapse of the industry, more cheap made games, etc.

Kingdom of Amalur devs got shut down because Curt Shilling was a dumbass. I dont remember the specifics but he used all the money they got for stupid ****.
---
D-O-G-A-R-S DOGARS!!
#57bartz90Posted 10/10/2012 5:08:13 PM
LuminescentRule posted...
SuperBot has 60 people. Truth is that if they did a better job marketing the game, they wouldn't have had to rely on DLC to make even more money.


Good marketing costs money. A large portion of CoDs costs go just towards that, and we know Sony just actually laid off some PR people.

But I agree, a well known game can thrive on popularity on alone, like Halo or Gears.

If it really is the case that they had and then removed these characters because they want to add DLC though, I don't think it would matter how popular the game is. They still would've added it, why turn down extra profit.
---
-
#583D3Posted 10/10/2012 5:08:42 PM
LuminescentRule posted...
SuperBot has 60 people. Truth is that if they did a better job marketing the game, they wouldn't have had to rely on DLC to make even more money.


Where'd you get that? The latest article said they had about 100.
---
Because Naughty Dog
Joel+Ellie=Jelly...You Jelly?
#59LuminescentRulePosted 10/10/2012 5:10:21 PM
3D3 posted...
LuminescentRule posted...
SuperBot has 60 people. Truth is that if they did a better job marketing the game, they wouldn't have had to rely on DLC to make even more money.


Where'd you get that? The latest article said they had about 100.


100 people and they still can't get it right?!
---
Sent from my iPhone via PowerFAQs 1.10
#603D3Posted 10/10/2012 5:11:30 PM
LuminescentRule posted...
3D3 posted...
LuminescentRule posted...
SuperBot has 60 people. Truth is that if they did a better job marketing the game, they wouldn't have had to rely on DLC to make even more money.


Where'd you get that? The latest article said they had about 100.


100 people and they still can't get it right?!


nope
---
Because Naughty Dog
Joel+Ellie=Jelly...You Jelly?