To be fair to Girl Fight - the fighting game genre is somewhat underrepresented in terms of original games on the two marketplaces (not including Games on Demand). Deadliest Warrior sold pretty well enough to get DLC and a sequel and it's the same kind of stupid fun I'd expect from Girl Fight. It will probably sell really well just based on lack of competition.
0
Options
Brainiac 8Don't call me Shirley...Registered Userregular
To be fair to Girl Fight: I like bewbs!
Of course, I still have no interest in playing Girl Fight, but I do enjoy teh bewbiez! 8->
Gotta say, I'm definitely surprised that HTC signed on to get PlayStation certified, especially since by all indications Sony's own PlayStation certified devices aren't selling well.
I'd blame that more on them pairing with Verizon and their horribly priced plans. The Xperia line of phones, in general, are pretty nice.
Paying a good 50% more for a phone plan compared to pretty much every other provider? Fuck that.
I still love me a Vita, though, I need to get one.
Also, fishing way back here: as for the phone warz. I blame it on Jobs. He vocally hated Android (I think the idea of competition and anything not under his draconian control hurt his peepee.) and anything that man said pretty much turned to gospel for the rabid hordes of Apple fanboys.
Brainiac 8Don't call me Shirley...Registered Userregular
edited February 2012
I'll just post this here:
Gamasutra's most overlooked game of 2011 might not have been as ignored as we'd feared, as Ubisoft today revealed that Rayman: Origins has already proven to be a profitable game for the company.
While no specific sales figures were provided (nor was the budget), the company revealed the game's profitability to investors during a conference call Wednesday morning, saying that the title "has the capacity to become a long-term seller for the company."
The success may come as a surprise to some, as the game -- which resembles digital titles such as Castle Crashers or Braid more than the meaty 3D titles one might expect to see at retail -- was sold in a box at the same $60 price point as, say, Assassin's Creed or Call of Duty.
Now, this can mean anything. I wonder just what it needed to be profitable. I mean Ubisoft didn't spend nearly anything in advertising. By profitable they probably mean "we didn't lose money on it, but hell will freeze over before we make another non-rabbids Rayman game. And you can pretty much forget about BG&E2 ever seeing the light of day."
Gotta say, I'm definitely surprised that HTC signed on to get PlayStation certified, especially since by all indications Sony's own PlayStation certified devices aren't selling well.
To be fair though, HTC phones are fuckawesome and Sony phones are pretty meh in comparison.
0
Options
reVerseAttack and Dethrone GodRegistered Userregular
Profitable seems like a good place to be for a game like that. It boosted their cred among the "artsy" types and didn't end up costing them money. Win-win if that was their plan.
I'd like to give the Xperia Play a go as my next phone, but from what I understand the hardware is fairly behind the rest of the phone industry.
Fuck if I know.
I tried it for work, but while it wasn't crap it wasn't exactly top of the line either, yeah. At least it's cheap.
I don't know if there's been much added for the PlayStation Suite lately... other than Minecraft releases have been few and far between, which is why I'm shocked another company is bothering to sign on, much less that the service still exists.
Maybe they'll realize selling 20 dollar games at 60 dollars is a Bad Idea™ and start pricing accordingly, it seems to have shot Rayman sales to the moon.
Maybe they'll realize selling 20 dollar games at 60 dollars is a Bad Idea™ and start pricing accordingly, it seems to have shot Rayman sales to the moon.
Maybe they'll realize selling 20 dollar games at 60 dollars is a Bad Idea™ and start pricing accordingly, it seems to have shot Rayman sales to the moon.
What denotes Rayman Origins as a 20 dollar game?
Rayman's downfall was that Ubisoft *gasp!* mishandled the release. They didn't advertise and they ninja released it to the wild. It was a red-headed stepchild of a release.
Maybe they'll realize selling 20 dollar games at 60 dollars is a Bad Idea™ and start pricing accordingly, it seems to have shot Rayman sales to the moon.
Maybe they'll realize selling 20 dollar games at 60 dollars is a Bad Idea™ and start pricing accordingly, it seems to have shot Rayman sales to the moon.
Maybe they'll realize selling 20 dollar games at 60 dollars is a Bad Idea™ and start pricing accordingly, it seems to have shot Rayman sales to the moon.
What denotes Rayman Origins as a 20 dollar game?
It's a 2D platformer.
So 2D platformers by default are "20 dollar games" these days?
Rayman hasn't quite hit $20 yet, I think. $30 and $40, yeah.
There have been multiple $20 sales, but officially it's $30.
Though I'd agree Ubi's to blame. Zero advertising, plus it came out the same day as the latest Assassin's Creed.
Just like I said, it is all Ubisoft's fault, and I think it was meant to tank. They even released a much higher profile game that cannibalized any sale Rayman may have had.
Rayman hasn't quite hit $20 yet, I think. $30 and $40, yeah.
There have been multiple $20 sales, but officially it's $30.
Though I'd agree Ubi's to blame. Zero advertising, plus it came out the same day as the latest Assassin's Creed.
Just like I said, it is all Ubisoft's fault, and I think it was meant to tank. They even released a much higher profile game that cannibalized any sale Rayman may have had.
I think they would have been better served waiting until the spring so they could release it on all platforms at once (360/PS3/PC/Wii/3DS/Vita)
Rayman hasn't quite hit $20 yet, I think. $30 and $40, yeah.
There have been multiple $20 sales, but officially it's $30.
Though I'd agree Ubi's to blame. Zero advertising, plus it came out the same day as the latest Assassin's Creed.
Just like I said, it is all Ubisoft's fault, and I think it was meant to tank. They even released a much higher profile game that cannibalized any sale Rayman may have had.
I think they would have been better served waiting until the spring so they could release it on all platforms at once (360/PS3/PC/Wii/3DS/Vita)
That would assume they wanted the game to succeed. (protip: They didn't)
Maybe they'll realize selling 20 dollar games at 60 dollars is a Bad Idea™ and start pricing accordingly, it seems to have shot Rayman sales to the moon.
What denotes Rayman Origins as a 20 dollar game?
It's a 2D platformer.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
It's not bad, but people who know about making games know that making a 3D game is significantly more resource intensive. You don't see a lot of fully animated, high end, 3D games done by two or three people....you see that with 2D all the time.
That doesn't mean 2D is "easy", but for the most part, a 2D game is going to cost an order of magnitude (or more) less to make than it's 3D equivalent. Not only is the programming aspect significantly harder for 3D, the actual art assets are quite a bit more time and budget consuming to make. That's why people tend to get the idea that a 2D game really shouldn't cost 60 bucks, and for the most part, they aren't completely wrong.
Maybe they'll realize selling 20 dollar games at 60 dollars is a Bad Idea™ and start pricing accordingly, it seems to have shot Rayman sales to the moon.
What denotes Rayman Origins as a 20 dollar game?
It's a 2D platformer.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
It's not bad, but people who know about making games know that making a 3D game is significantly more resource intensive. You don't see a lot of fully animated, high end, 3D games done by two or three people....you see that with 2D all the time.
That doesn't mean 2D is "easy", but for the most part, a 2D game is going to cost an order of magnitude (or more) less to make than it's 3D equivalent. Not only is the programming aspect significantly harder for 3D, the actual art assets are quite a bit more time and budget consuming to make. That's why people tend to get the idea that a 2D game really shouldn't cost 60 bucks, and for the most part, they aren't completely wrong.
So are we going on how many people it takes to make a game, then?
Way to not even read what I said. I said that 3D art assets are much more expensive to produce, are you disputing this? With a credit roll video?
But this isn't some pixel-art game that looks like it could be done on the commodore 64. It's something more comparable to a Disney Animated film in terms of art produced.
Way to not even read what I said. I said that 3D art assets are much more expensive to produce, are you disputing this? With a credit roll video?
But this isn't some pixel-art game that looks like it could be done on the commodore 64. It's something more comparable to a Disney Animated film in terms of art produced.
Great, so it's good 2D art...it still took hundreds of hours less time and probably tends of thousands less dollars to make one animated 2D character for Rayman than it does for the average 3D game. A single, high end, high poly, well textured, 3D model, with an equivalent low poly version with generated bump maps, with both high poly and low poly animations and physics rigging is a tens of thousands of dollars affair, generally requiring work from multiple people, to complete one model.
e: I didn't even count the cost it took to mo-cap and then digitize the basics for those skeletal animations, and then the time required for an artist to turn that basic skeleton in to actual IK key frames with appropriate rotations and bone attachments.
Way to not even read what I said. I said that 3D art assets are much more expensive to produce, are you disputing this? With a credit roll video?
But this isn't some pixel-art game that looks like it could be done on the commodore 64. It's something more comparable to a Disney Animated film in terms of art produced.
Great, so it's good 2D art...it still took hundreds of hours less time and probably tends of thousands less dollars to make one animated 2D character for Rayman than it does for the average 3D game. A single, high end, high poly, well textured, 3D model, with an equivalent low poly version with generated bump maps, with both high poly and low poly animations and physics rigging is a tens of thousands of dollars affair, generally requiring work from multiple people, to complete one model.
e: I didn't even count the cost it took to mo-cap and then digitize the basics for those skeletal animations, and then the time required for an artist to turn that basic skeleton in to actual IK key frames with appropriate rotations and bone attachments.
And it would probably cost even more to pour that level of detail into a 2D sprite. Sprites only seem cheaper because artists can do much less with them without people complaining.
Are there any official comparisons between how much it costs to make a 2D vs 3D game? Because I dunno, my gut says the 2D game is probably more expensive. Or at the very least more labor intensive. You've got to create every single frame of animation your object will ever do. Which is going to rise dramatically depending on how fluid you want the movement to be. And then multiplied even more for each different character. Whereas with 3D, you just create the model, then you create the animations. Then you tidy up any glitches. If you're lazy economical, you're using similarly designed models all working off the same animation routines. Otherwise it's the same process for each character.
I could be wrong. I'm no artist or programmer. And I'm not saying 3D animation is any less easy. It just seems logical that 2D would be harder than 3D.
"The sausage of Green Earth explodes with flavor like the cannon of culinary delight."
I'm pretty sure they've got engines in place, animations and rigs that they can tweak, a full physics modeling suite, etc. You only have to draw a character's textures once or twice, but a high quality 2D game can have thousands of animation frames.
Isn't that why Disney doesn't like to do 2D animated movies anymore? They're far more expensive and time consuming to make?
Posts
Switch (JeffConser): SW-3353-5433-5137 Wii U: Skeldare - 3DS: 1848-1663-9345
PM Me if you add me!
Of course, I still have no interest in playing Girl Fight, but I do enjoy teh bewbiez! 8->
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
That is going to be another gunshot to the chest for the Vita.
(speaking of Vita, I wonder if I do break and buy one, if my wife will notice the new huge charge on our Best Buy card....decisions decisions.) :P
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
Tax returns.
Paying a good 50% more for a phone plan compared to pretty much every other provider? Fuck that.
I still love me a Vita, though, I need to get one.
Also, fishing way back here: as for the phone warz. I blame it on Jobs. He vocally hated Android (I think the idea of competition and anything not under his draconian control hurt his peepee.) and anything that man said pretty much turned to gospel for the rabid hordes of Apple fanboys.
"Catch the disease!"
Now, this can mean anything. I wonder just what it needed to be profitable. I mean Ubisoft didn't spend nearly anything in advertising. By profitable they probably mean "we didn't lose money on it, but hell will freeze over before we make another non-rabbids Rayman game. And you can pretty much forget about BG&E2 ever seeing the light of day."
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/40327/2D_throwback_Rayman_Origins_proves_profitable_for_Ubisoft.php
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
To be fair though, HTC phones are fuckawesome and Sony phones are pretty meh in comparison.
Fuck if I know.
Switch: 6200-8149-0919 / Wii U: maximumzero / 3DS: 0860-3352-3335 / eBay Shop
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
I tried it for work, but while it wasn't crap it wasn't exactly top of the line either, yeah. At least it's cheap.
I don't know if there's been much added for the PlayStation Suite lately... other than Minecraft releases have been few and far between, which is why I'm shocked another company is bothering to sign on, much less that the service still exists.
What denotes Rayman Origins as a 20 dollar game?
Switch: 6200-8149-0919 / Wii U: maximumzero / 3DS: 0860-3352-3335 / eBay Shop
Rayman's downfall was that Ubisoft *gasp!* mishandled the release. They didn't advertise and they ninja released it to the wild. It was a red-headed stepchild of a release.
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
It's a 2D platformer.
There have been multiple $20 sales, but officially it's $30.
Though I'd agree Ubi's to blame. Zero advertising, plus it came out the same day as the latest Assassin's Creed.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
So 2D platformers by default are "20 dollar games" these days?
Switch: 6200-8149-0919 / Wii U: maximumzero / 3DS: 0860-3352-3335 / eBay Shop
There's a lot of six and seven-dimensional games out there, then.
You should see how many dimensions you get in Skylanders.
Switch: 6200-8149-0919 / Wii U: maximumzero / 3DS: 0860-3352-3335 / eBay Shop
Just like I said, it is all Ubisoft's fault, and I think it was meant to tank. They even released a much higher profile game that cannibalized any sale Rayman may have had.
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
I think they would have been better served waiting until the spring so they could release it on all platforms at once (360/PS3/PC/Wii/3DS/Vita)
Switch: 6200-8149-0919 / Wii U: maximumzero / 3DS: 0860-3352-3335 / eBay Shop
That would assume they wanted the game to succeed. (protip: They didn't)
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
It's not bad, but people who know about making games know that making a 3D game is significantly more resource intensive. You don't see a lot of fully animated, high end, 3D games done by two or three people....you see that with 2D all the time.
That doesn't mean 2D is "easy", but for the most part, a 2D game is going to cost an order of magnitude (or more) less to make than it's 3D equivalent. Not only is the programming aspect significantly harder for 3D, the actual art assets are quite a bit more time and budget consuming to make. That's why people tend to get the idea that a 2D game really shouldn't cost 60 bucks, and for the most part, they aren't completely wrong.
So are we going on how many people it takes to make a game, then?
Are almost 18 minutes worth of credits not enough for you?
Switch: 6200-8149-0919 / Wii U: maximumzero / 3DS: 0860-3352-3335 / eBay Shop
LoL EU West nickname: Irridan
Way to not even read what I said. I said that 3D art assets are much more expensive to produce, are you disputing this? With a credit roll video?
But this isn't some pixel-art game that looks like it could be done on the commodore 64. It's something more comparable to a Disney Animated film in terms of art produced.
Switch: 6200-8149-0919 / Wii U: maximumzero / 3DS: 0860-3352-3335 / eBay Shop
Great, so it's good 2D art...it still took hundreds of hours less time and probably tends of thousands less dollars to make one animated 2D character for Rayman than it does for the average 3D game. A single, high end, high poly, well textured, 3D model, with an equivalent low poly version with generated bump maps, with both high poly and low poly animations and physics rigging is a tens of thousands of dollars affair, generally requiring work from multiple people, to complete one model.
e: I didn't even count the cost it took to mo-cap and then digitize the basics for those skeletal animations, and then the time required for an artist to turn that basic skeleton in to actual IK key frames with appropriate rotations and bone attachments.
And it would probably cost even more to pour that level of detail into a 2D sprite. Sprites only seem cheaper because artists can do much less with them without people complaining.
I could be wrong. I'm no artist or programmer. And I'm not saying 3D animation is any less easy. It just seems logical that 2D would be harder than 3D.
Isn't that why Disney doesn't like to do 2D animated movies anymore? They're far more expensive and time consuming to make?