10 Million sales is BioWares goal

Just thought this was interesting (wasn't sure where to post it so this seemed the best bet I could find):

http://www.videogamer.com/news/10_mi…ew_target.html

In a marketplace where one game can sell 25 million copies 10 million sales is BioWare's new target

10 million is the sales target BioWare is aiming to achieve with its future releases, studio co-founder Dr. Greg Zeschuk has told VideoGamer.com.

At the Develop conference in Brighton earlier this month Zeschuk spoke about BioWare's fortune to have had a few "minor" hits. But if the likes of Mass Effect and Dragon Age are considered minor, what's needed to be classed as a major one?

"Well, we need to sell 10 million units," said Zeschuk. "That's actually the new target, right? We do Top 10 games, our stuff is quite successful. I know Mass [Effect 2] is number eight so far this year, in North America.

"Sometimes I'm facetious when I say some of those things, knowing that we can sell a few million but seeing that someone else can sell 25 [million]. You're kinda like, 'Well, that's a hit!' We always joke that if we only do half as well as Blizzard on Star Wars: The Old Republic, we'll be quite satisfied…..

Interesting find.

They already know how to sell 5M, so 10M is the next logical step.

The only word that comes to my mind when I read this is this : Delusions of grandeur.
Or simplier : Megalomania.

Just sounds like routine materialism and capitalism to me. All about the money.

Originally Posted by Anderson
Just sounds like routine materialism and capitalism to me. All about the money.

Right you are, my friend

Yes, but at one point the question arises :

What for ?

To me, it is like accumulating sand. More and more, more and more.

t one point it's so much sand that you actually cannot "use" it anymore. Build children's playgrounds ? Check. Actually, check x 100.

Build giant sand dunes ? Check. At one point the sheer amount of sand ist just enough for dunes like at Arcachon, France.

At one point it's SO MUCh that it becomes kind of useless again. What would a single individual do ith a wealth of let's say 10 Billions of Money ?

Buy the whole world ?

Buying more and more and even more ?

Where is the end ?

Originally Posted by Alrik Fassbauer
Yes, but at one point the question arises :

What for ?

To me, it is like accumulating sand. More and more, more and more.

t one point it's so much sand that you actually cannot "use" it anymore. Build children's playgrounds ? Check. Actually, check x 100.

Build giant sand dunes ? Check. At one point the sheer amount of sand ist just enough for dunes like at Arcachon, France.

At one point it's SO MUCh that it becomes kind of useless again. What would a single individual do ith a wealth of let's say 10 Billions of Money ?

Buy the whole world ?

Buying more and more and even more ?

Where is the end ?

That assumes that the Bioware "entity" hasn't changed from the beginning to the end. That is not the case. There are a lot more people working at Bioware now than in the days of Baldur's Gate. They also have a whole new MMO department that have made a total of 0 income in the 2 or so years they've existed.

At my job I do work that is either billable on a daily basis or at least billable on a monthly basis. When game developers make games they produce a billable product once every 2-3 years … but there is still a truckload of employees that need to get paid every month so unless you're sitting on a gold mine like Blizzard then you really need to sell a lot of copies when you finally release a game (or at least you do if you want to have some kind of leverage when the next meeting with the publisher comes along since they'll be the ones funding you if you can't make a game that sells).

10 million copies X $50 = $500 million

employee cost $200 000 / year (including office space software etc ) * 500 = $100 million

3 years development cycle ? $300 million…….

conclusion = making AAA games is too expensive in this modern age.

Okay, then we define AAAA games.

And no-one can beat us there. Then.

Originally Posted by GothicGothicness
10 million copies X $50 = $500 million

employee cost $200 000 / year (including office space software etc ) * 500 = $100 million

3 years development cycle ? $300 million…….

conclusion = making AAA games is too expensive in this modern age.

An AAA title is still quite profitable since most titles cost arround 30-50million to be made. There are exceptions, like GTA 4 and Starcraft 2 (+100million), but most of the time it's significantly lower than your rough estimations.

But I don't know if that's a good thing or not.

Originally Posted by Alrik Fassbauer
Yes, but at one point the question arises :

What for ?

To me, it is like accumulating sand. More and more, more and more.

t one point it's so much sand that you actually cannot "use" it anymore. Build children's playgrounds ? Check. Actually, check x 100.

Build giant sand dunes ? Check. At one point the sheer amount of sand ist just enough for dunes like at Arcachon, France.

At one point it's SO MUCh that it becomes kind of useless again. What would a single individual do ith a wealth of let's say 10 Billions of Money ?

Buy the whole world ?

Buying more and more and even more ?

Where is the end ?

You're asking about the nature of greed, and I haven't had enough coffee to give that one a shot.

To me, this doesn't sound like obsessive greed, it just sounds like standard CEO blather (I'm assuming there is a difference between the two). It's the kind of talk that appeals to shareholders and EA, although he may be stressing some of his employees with that expectation … if they are taking if him seriously, that is. But you never take these sort of remarks seriously -- at least I don't. It's just a CEO yammering about how successful they might be in the future.

The only thing that bothers me is that he didn't mention other goals, such as "Telling the best videogame stories in the world." At least in this quote, it's all about the money.

An AAA title is still quite profitable since most titles cost arround 30-50million to be made. There are exceptions, like GTA 4 and Starcraft 2 (+100million), but most of the time it's significantly lower than your rough estimations.

Yes you are right about that now but in my calculation I took sevaral things into account:

Well, bioware do have 500+ employes…. and as someone else mentioned they are working on an MMO which didn't bring in any money yet ( This is a realistic scenario + all new franchies cannot be huge hits ). On top of that if they want to more than double their sales of the game, it is probably going to take a bigger investment to develop it…. I acctually think they signed with EA because they needed money. On top of the numbers I mentioned there… EA will get part of the profit.. and part of the profit will go to digital download services, steam… the stores selling it……

It is all or nothing.

If their new mmo (or any other future tittle) flops, its the end of bioware. The silly thing is that bioware games are getting smaller and smaller by each tittle. And a lot simpler too. Yet the developing cost are constantly rising. This isn't a good thing for us gamers.

Originally Posted by Dez
It is all or nothing.

If their new mmo (or any other future tittle) flops, its the end of bioware. The silly thing is that bioware games are getting smaller and smaller by each tittle. And a lot simpler too. Yet the developing cost are constantly rising. This isn't a good thing for us gamers.

I am speaking out of ignorance here so keep that in mind. But it makes me wonder why go the MMO route, since that seems a very deadly path. Of course it has high rewards if it works … but often spells death otherwise.

I guess I just wonder if Bioware had not gone after the MMO bait, not joined EA, and kept making games - tweaking innovation and style as they went - would they have survived?

Bethseda hasn't made an MMO (yet) and seem to still be making money. There seems to be other companies making good games (Witcher as one example) who make money and survive.

Bioware seemed to be doing very well … or were they losing money by spreading themselves to wide (to many platforms, to many game genres, etc.). Does every game have to have expensive star powered VO? Is it possible to produce a good selling game otherwise?

Is this "our" fault as gamers demanding to much or the companies?

Is it not enough to just take pride in your profession without always having to seek more money and fame? I guess I am rather unambitious myself as I just want to make enough money to do the things I like without excess.

No way of knowing of course … but I ponder what great games they could have made if they had not gone after the MMO and joined with EA and some of the other decisions. Then again maybe they had no choice.

Originally Posted by wolfgrimdark
I guess I just wonder if Bioware had not gone after the MMO bait, not joined EA, and kept making games - tweaking innovation and style as they went - would they have survived?

Bioware was sold to Elevation partners first and only a year later bought by EA.

Bethseda hasn't made an MMO (yet) and seem to still be making money. There seems to be other companies making good games (Witcher as one example) who make money and survive.

Bethesda is working on an MMO.

MMOs (a) are the (risky) path to the big money and (b) have neither a piracy nor used sales problem. Successful MMOs print money.

Is it not enough to just take pride in your profession without always having to seek more money and fame? I guess I am rather unambitious myself as I just want to make enough money to do the things I like without excess.

Normal business behavior. The bosses are paid to make as much money as possible for the shareholders. So if they have a choice they choose the things they believe will make them most money. In case of Bioware this means two RPG franchises with different focus and an MMO based on one of the world's most valuable brands.

Well, we need to sell 10 million units

We aim/want would be more appropriate…

as seen in the thread… need IS probably the right word

@Gorath: Thanks for the updates. I didn't know that about Bethseda.

As I said I am not really that good at business so I was just ruminating :-)

If you are not expanding, you are slowly dying. That is the capitalistic world we live in. Whether or not it's a good system is a completely different discussion.

Originally Posted by wolfgrimdark
@Gorath: Thanks for the updates. I didn't know that about Bethseda.

As I said I am not really that good at business so I was just ruminating :-)

You're welcome.

It was just a short post with few details. I have no time to post more ATM.