First, there was my earlier sniping at the New York Times.
But now there's this article that just popped up BusinessWeek.com: "Console Makers: Move It or Lose It".
The story alleges companies are preparing for
"...what could be one of the bloodiest holiday seasons in video game history. The epic battles will play out on TV screens around the globe, but could do real-world damage to the bottom lines of console makers"First, though a little hyperbolic, credit where credit is due. The story is pretty solid, and has a little more meat than the NY Times piece. And it was written by an intern, who in one article probably got more eyeballs than I've gotten on my column all month. (OK, that's probably not true; my numbers for this part of the site have been through the roof for a long time.)
But good for him anyway.
Now, to the issues.
First, there is no sense of history. Microsoft and the Xbox were never even supposed to be contenders in the console wars. But they took second last generation. They're currently first. That's huge, and I don't think they're getting business props for it.
Secondly, the holiday picture's not broad enough, as it's just about the Nintendo Wii, Xbox 360, and PS3. Unless you factor in the Nintendo DS (and the Sony PSP, if for no other reason than fairness), and the PS2 (because it dominates the PS3, 360, and Wii), you're not telling the whole story.
And as far as omissions go, not including the previously Sony-exclusive Grand Theft Auto franchise, its move to the 360, and its slip to 2008 in the impact to holiday sales is pretty glaring.
But my biggest issue is in unattributed allegations and inaccuracies.
Going back to GTAIV, the article says,
"Microsoft recently spent $50 million on additional exclusive content for Grand Theft Auto IV, ..."This is a rumor that came out of a Take-Two financial call, but hasn't been confirmed by Microsoft. Also, why some people have cried foul at Microsoft "buying" exclusivity (if they did, so what?), the truth is likely closer to traditional publisher / developer business dealings: Publishers pay a cash advance for development work up front, and that money (or a portion thereof) is given back to the publisher out of initial royalties. And it's not $50M up front -- it's $25M a piece for two separate, large episodic extensions of the GTAIV game.
But wait, let's look at part 2 of the quote:
"... five times as much money as was spent developing the Xbox 360's current best-selling game, Gears of War, according to statements made by Epic Games Vice-President Mark Rein."I've been wanting to write a big article about this for some time, but here's the short version.
I don't know Mark Rein. He's the one guy at Epic who never writes back to me. But he's tough, ballsy, and could probably tear me a new a$$. That said, his "We spent less than $10 million to make Gears of War" Wired interview statement really pisses me off.
Why?
Epic makes the Unreal Engine 3 -- what was the Gears of War development cost for that portion of the engine (sure, it's amortized across titles and licensees, but Gears was the first, and so far only, from Epic). And since developers don't work only 40 hours a week, I'd like to know the "actual cost" if you take the Gears developers' hourly salaried rate, and the 20-80 hours more they worked per week (over 40), to find the "real" development cost.
And the biggest deal? That's development cost. That doesn't include the marketing and advertising costs. It does not include the cost for things like theatrical movie trailers or Monday Night Football TV ads or licensing "Mad World". I would like to know that budget for the game.
Anyway, details like that should be in the article. Or you can just look to this post as a cautionary tale for all of us to be critical readers. Or something.
(And they don't seem to be posting an abbreviated version of this post that I left on their comments page.)
Man, I'm grumpy. Gonna go write some happy crap or something now.
No comments:
Post a Comment