GT6 Sales Discussion
- Thread starter fassbendersbum
- 1,905 comments
- 149,956 views
- 13,861
- Adelaide
- Neomone
They're offering it for free if you buy a console. That's a bit different to simply giving it away to everyone.
We don't say that razor blades are free just because you happen to get a few thrown in when you buy a new razor. It's either built into the cost of the product, or it's an acceptable cost that the company is willing to take to encourage sales, similar to advertising.
- 8,705
I don't think you're approaching this in the right way. You seem to still be in battle mode. But if that's how a mod behaves, it's hardly surprising there's such a culture of peacocking on this site.
I must have missed the proof that the 60 million figure excluded marketing. My apologies. So you still think marketing and distribution costs twice as much as "making" the game? I was only ever responding to the numbers.
There is no validity to a guess, and I'm unsure as to what you think I'm dismissing. But to think that your assumptions are any better than my conscious, cautious ignorance is nothing more than arrogance.
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,430
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
Because someone is willing to challenge unsupported factual claims its 'battle mode' and 'peacocking'?
I do truly love that (so much its my new location), can I ask does that apply when you making rebuttals to unsupported sound related issues using sourced extrapolations or is that something different?
It has nothing at all to do with me being a mod, and everything to do with simply presenting a rebuttal to a claim I consider to be unsupported, that you asked me to explain a position I never made while you have no intention of asking the question of the person who made it still remains a mystery to me?
At what point did I state it was proof?
I didn't, however when the developer is asked how much a title cost to make and a figure is given the balance of probability is that is what you are going to get, had the question been asked of a Sony rep and an answer given then coming from the publisher it would be reasonable to assume that it would then include marketing, distribution, etc.
I've also not claimed that marketing and distribution costs twice as much as making the game, so I'm not sure where that has come from at all?
However I do once again find it interesting that you question this and yet ignore a claim (that is totally unsupported by any source at all) that 100% of all PS4 owners would download GT7 and that 90% of them would then go onto purchase DLC.
Do I think that reasonable estimation taken from sourced figures are better than un-sourced numbers pulled out of the air?
Yes I do, if you consider that to be arrogance then I can live with that quite easily.
However I've not said that my numbers are better than a "conscious, cautious ignorance" so please do not imply that I have. My comment was a direct observation that you are clearly happy to dismiss one set of numbers (that have a least a root in valid data) and yet give a free pass on a set that have none? That smack of a rather large bias, and if that makes me arrogant I can also live with it quite easily as well.
What I would once again ask is why you ignore one set and target the other? The 'don't want to get in the 'battle' doesn't cut it, by addressing one set while giving a free pass to the other rather clearly indicates you have already done so.
Last edited:
- 8,705
I was only responding to your numbers. I stated at the start that the argument should never have continued, because there is no basis to conduct it on. So using "less made up" figures is not an excuse, and challenging unsupported factual claims with more unsupported (you said yourself there's no proof) factual claims is counter productive.
You stated that PD would get about 15% of retail value, and Sony 25-30. PD, unburdened by marketing costs etc. (again, your claim), only need to recover the cost of "making" the game. You state that is 60 million dollars, putting Sony's share at 120 million, and total sales well in excess of 6 million at full price, just to break even.
GT5P was reported to have recouped the 60 million before GT5 released, and it's had just over 5 million sales at less than half the price of a "full game". That implies the total cost (including marketing) of making the game is less than half what you claim. That is all I was picking up on. And the continuing of a pointless argument.
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,430
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
And I stated that I disagree, am I not allowed an opinion or to post a reasonable rebuttal using what I consider to be more valid data?
If so why not?
Why does doing so make me a target for personal attacks and digs (battle mode, peacock, arrogant)?
If you consider the 'argument' to be pointless and wanted to make that point then why not include all that are involved in it?
Going forward it will be interesting to see if you apply the exact same standard to you own posts, given that a large amount regarding how PD deal with sound can't be proven.
No I said that based on industry norms they would get around 15% of the revenue, I didn't state it, I used it as an illustrative figure, something I have repeatedly been clear on. Feel free to make it $30 million to develop GT5 if you like, I don't give a hoot given that your then making as much (arguably more) of a leap as I am and it will still not make giving GT7 away and using DLC alone as revenue a better financial option for Sony (or PD).
And given that's percentage of revenue and not costs I would once again ask why you claimed I stated that Marketing and Distribution cost twice as much as development?
Its amazing that you are so keen to pick these apart by a claim that 100% of PS4 owners would download GT7 and 90% of them would purchase DLC gets a free pass, once again I have to wonder why and what you reluctance to actually address that is about?
Could you supply a source for that as the best I can find is that revenue from GT5P helped to offset development costs for GT5, something I have covered in other threads already.
I don't consider it pointless so I know why I'm going to carry on discussing it, but if you consider the discussion pointless then why are you continuing it?
Last edited:
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,430
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
Yes but it would still remove a massive revenue source from them.
I find it almost impossible to believe (and the rough numbers indicate this) that you could generate a larger revenue by giving GT7 away and only relying on DLC revenue than by selling it and getting revenue from both.
Its basic math (and to keep some happy lets make the figure really basic), GT5 had an attach rate of 12.5% and while we have no true DLC attach rates for GT5 we know that the very high end of the industry is around 10%. So you would have to massively increase the attach rate for GT7 and massively increase the DLC attach rate to make it a financially viable model.
Industry norms also show that this model has historically worked only when the 'free' bit is cheap to develop (and the GT series is not) and the developer has a good track record of sold DLC (which PD doesn't have with either and in the case of GT6 has moved to a free DLC model at present).
- 8,705
Well I was just stating my opinion. You can spend your time as you please, I just find the fruitlessness of some of these arguments goes against the whole reference ideal of the site. I'd expected a mod would be more inline with that ideal, but I suppose that's just my expectation.
Not one of those was a personal dig. The first was my impression that you mistook my intent. The second is an observation of behaviours on the site. The third means unfounded confidence, i.e. in your figures - as opposed to my presumed confirmation bias. The ignorance I referred to was mine, in that I don't know Sony's budgeting.
It's the mod thing again.
I have evidence
. Plus, whilst some members here actually do make games, I have also made a few systems capable of what PD demonstrate on the sound front. By all means observe, I am usually very careful with facts and speculation.You don't know that. Which should not be taken to mean I believe they will do that, nor should. It's the last thing I'd want.
It seems to leave a lot of profit otherwise.
I didn't see it. And I can't say I believe it. As I said, pointless!
No source, it must have been over zealous claims I was remembering at the time. It would only offset a small amount as you say.
I'm addressing the issue of revenue split, and apparent budget - I was never interested in why the figures were presented, just that they were. So can we drop battle mode and focus on that? It's far more interesting.
(Unless, of course, as now seems likely, you've done all this before, in which case I'll happily take a linky, and with it my leave)
One source claims 80 million for GT5, and marketing seems to peak around 100% of dev costs for the list they have. Which leaves a lot unaccounted for still - what is the typical ROI for a game like GT?
vgsales.wikia.com/wiki/Most_expensive_video_games
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,430
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
I don't think you understand how moderation works here at all, its not a mod thing at all. If you wish to address an entire conversation and say you believe it pointless it would be a good idea to ensure that you speak to all involved (and its not as if multi-quote is hard to use now) and certainly include the person that made the original claim!
As for going again the 'reference' thing, what exactly are you on about? Have I not supplied sources for the estimations I have carried out? Well yes I have.
Have you failed to read the entire conversation (as yiou admit in a moment) and then targeted a single participant in it with a standard that you don't meet yourself? Why yes you have.
Why is that?
Oddly enough so do I, hard data from the industry that shows what the attach rates are, what the DLC attach rate norms are. They are more than enough to make reasoned estimates (and I have presented them as just that). Now unless you know exactly how PD work with audio in GT, how they will work with it in GT7, how every other competitor works with it (and I mean sourced, exacting detail) then you are doing the exact same thing.I have evidence
You take what you know to be fact and make reasoned assumptions based on that using your own experience and models and present it back as a likely scenario, I know this as I actually follow your well thought out comments on audio. I've done no different with this. I have used industry data and my own experience of business financial systems, built models from them and presented them as a likely scenario (and I have never claimed them as fact)
So once again why are you attenpting to hold me to a differeing standard?
Oh and should you state its not the same standard I would like to see sources that detail exactly how GT and its competitors source, record, mix, etc audio down to the most minute details. without what else can I do but deem your comments on audio as pointless?
Please show me when I have claimed it to be a 100% fact.
I've not, I've presented it as a rough estimate based on teh figures we know to be true within the industry, to put a counter point to something that simply pulls fgures out of the air (and you have not bothered to read).
Or marketing costs more than you think. However Sony (and other publishers) don't do this ot of the goodness of their hearts.
Big money can (and is) made in games for publishers. Is it fair that the suits get more of the revenue than the creatives? Arguably, but that's a quite different argument.
Reading and understating the chain of a conversation is pointless?
No, I would call it a basic requirement of not risking wading into something with half the information and a lack of context.
And I got called arrogant!
So you've gone from $60 million to a small amount, OK.
Now why have you been hammering me for apparent speculation when you have just gone and done the same, I didn't think you did this?
You see this is my entire point, an un-sourced claim that can't e backed up should be challenged (even if its with rough estimations), not to show teh exact figures, but to show that its an unreasonable claim (a claim that in the context of the conversation you have not even bothered to read).
We will never know exactly, because of the manner in which PD and Sony are structured (A point I have already addressed, and you would know if you had actually read the conversation), which is why I've used industry norms and the hard data we have to put estimates together.I'm addressing the issue of revenue split, and apparent budget - I was never interested in why the figures were presented, just that they were. So can we drop battle mode and focus on that? It's far more interesting.
(Unless, of course, as now seems likely, you've done all this before, in which case I'll happily take a linky, and with it my leave)
One source claims 80 million for GT5, and marketing seems to peak around 100% of dev costs for the list they have. Which leaves a lot unaccounted for still - what is the typical ROI for a game like GT?
vgsales.wikia.com/wiki/Most_expensive_video_games
But with any product of this nature (and many others - my main experience is with vehicle design, build and manufacture) by spliting the development and marketing budgets you get better control over both sides of the process and by running separate balances its easier (particularly with separate business structures as PD and Sony have) to write one off should you need to. It also allows you to know exactly when each element has been covered and you head into profit.
Keep in mind that ROI will then have to be used to fund future development (this process actually over laps from one 'product' to another when you are looking at series), but the one thing that is a reasonable estimation to make is that each GT title needs around 4 - 6 million units to shift before the get to a profit stage (smoothing out higher dev for the first title on a platform and lower dev for the second), which given the cost to develop and market is not unreasonable.
Now in the case of PD its also very likely (as I again have said) that Sony will inject cash into PD as needed, however they will only continue to do this if the GT series provides them with a solid return. Studios that fail to do that Sony have a track record of being quite firm with (Studio Liverpool for example).
- 8,705
@Scaff You seem intent on misrepresenting my intent. Either that or you're misunderstanding / twisting my words. It's difficult addressing the reams of new accusations when you keep missing the fundamental point. I am not affiliated with that bee in your bonnet, and I should do well to ignore you from now on. Talk about a 'win' at any cost.
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,430
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
Or perhaps your intent and fundamental point isn't clear.
You have after all jumped into the middle of a conversation that you have by your own admission not fully read and don't seem to care about, as such you have simply focused on one person and one part of the conversation and seem to have taken it out of context. As such I have no idea what your point is and how it relates to the context of the conversation, nor why you have clearly put a standard in place that you don't follow yourself.
Ignore away, as I have said its not about a 'win or a 'battle' (a focus you seem intent on) its about a conversation and the context behind it, neither of which (by your own admission) you seem the point in.
Given that its pretty much impossible to read your intent or point. The closest I can get is that you don't agree that development costs are separate to marketing and distribution costs, despite links that show the break down, totally missing the point that as far as the context of the conversation goes that is actually of minor importance.
mister dog
(Banned)
- 8,396
- Spain
- misterdog
- misterdog7
Let's settle this once and for all shall we gentlemen?
- 6,911
- United Kingdom
Noticed in UK, GT6 seems out of stock in some places and seems reduced to clear. I wonder if they are getting a new edition out or just stock issue.
- 296
Yes, I agree the revenue would be lower, but whether it would be financially viable, some very rough numbers:
Consoles' price elasticity appears to be about 3, so increase in sales would be about 60/400x.125x3 approx 5.5%.
The tie-ratio of about 9 would produce 9x7 $63 profit from licence fees
Hardware profit of $18
PS+ profit, say 20% margin over 4 years at 50% adoption, $20 (I would imagine the actual incremental margin on PS+ is a lot higher since it has a large fixed cost)
About $100 in total
So about $55m per annum on 10m console sales, which should cover the marketing/development costs.
Of course, this is all just idle speculation, it's never gonna happen
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,430
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
Indeed.Yes, I agree the revenue would be lower, but whether it would be financially viable, some very rough numbers:
Consoles' price elasticity appears to be about 3, so increase in sales would be about 60/400x.125x3 approx 5.5%.
The tie-ratio of about 9 would produce 9x7 $63 profit from licence fees
Hardware profit of $18
PS+ profit, say 20% margin over 4 years at 50% adoption, $20 (I would imagine the actual incremental margin on PS+ is a lot higher since it has a large fixed cost)
About $100 in total
So about $55m per annum on 10m console sales, which should cover the marketing/development costs.
Of course, this is all just idle speculation, it's never gonna happen
I have to confess that without a bit more info I'm not 100% sure how you came to some of these figures or how you are using them.
Couple of observations I would however make, I doubt you would get as high an additional take up on PS+ given that you don't need it for Free to Play games on the PS4 (and that's the model that's been suggested) as those figures look to be the same as the current adoption rate for PS+.
I would also be cautious of taking this over anything more than a year at the same level, historically GT titles have had a huge level of demand that then drops off very quickly to produce a long, slow tail, as I serious doubt you would get a 5% year on year uplift in sales just due to a free copy of GT.
You have however done what the originator of the point refused to do and that's at least looked at what additional PS4 sales could result from it, I would make the final observation of how many of these would not have bought a PS4 anyway even if GT7 cost them $60? Take that into account and the revenue advantage looks even lower.
- 13,861
- Adelaide
- Neomone
They may have intentionally underproduced so that the "long tail" sales will be taken care of by digital. If they're struggling to make profit as has been suggested by others in the thread, it may make sense not to "waste" money producing more discs.
There may be a 2.0/XL edition coming out, but the sensible time to have it would be for the holiday season, so they'd really want to release it sometime this week to catch the majority of the sales. If there isn't a new version on shelves by the end of next week it's probably safe to say that what you're seeing isn't because of that.
- 40,757
In deference to Zer0, I think I realized today what he was angling at with the "it's on PS4" bit. Instead of system power or Kaz's whimsical talking up of the PS4, I think might have been referring to the console's importance on the market at the time of the hypothetical however-many-years-from-now game, in comparison to the PS3 in its twilight years as was the case with GT6.
- 50,837
- Australia
- SpacedustDaddy
I cant help thinking how GT6 woild have sold if it was GT6P. If all cars were ONLY the current Premiums and the missing RMs from GT5P, the 15th Anniv Cars by Pre-order, plus the VGT cars and free cars(M4s, NISMO GT-R) as updated during the year, would it have sold more or less or the same as current numbers.
December 23rd is next week. If PD released the "full" GT6 (Course Maker, Suzuka 2014, Andalucia, Standards/Standard Premiums, 15th Anniv Cars included would this have been acceptable and people willing to spend the full amount for it on PS3? I know what's done is done. We wait for GT7 on PS4. It just gets me how GT5P worked fine to build up to the "finished" product. Might have done well for GT6 to have had a GT6P.
December 23rd is next week. If PD released the "full" GT6 (Course Maker, Suzuka 2014, Andalucia, Standards/Standard Premiums, 15th Anniv Cars included would this have been acceptable and people willing to spend the full amount for it on PS3? I know what's done is done. We wait for GT7 on PS4. It just gets me how GT5P worked fine to build up to the "finished" product. Might have done well for GT6 to have had a GT6P.
mister dog
(Banned)
- 8,396
- Spain
- misterdog
- misterdog7
Been thinking, going off the reactions of people who bought GT6 on this forum, i'd say something like 30-40% had enough of the direction this franchise is taking and will be awaiting reviews before they go out and buy GT7.
If that would be representative on a larger scale to every gamer that buys GT games, that might mean that GT7 sales figures might be up to 40% lower again if Kaz stubbornly maintains his 'vision' of how to make a racing game.
If that would be representative on a larger scale to every gamer that buys GT games, that might mean that GT7 sales figures might be up to 40% lower again if Kaz stubbornly maintains his 'vision' of how to make a racing game.
- 4,093
- Reading
- cutback73
- cutback73
Here is an interesting fact I noticed today.
When I completed my first super lap in the Chaparral 2X (which was pretty slow at about 0m58.5 (nowhere near a bronze), I got the usual message with my online rankings.
I was 128,004 th in the online rankings.
So this year old game on PS3 had more than 128,004 players in the last 4 days (i know its at least one more as one of my psn friends is stuck on more than a minute for his best lap
),[as a minimum they downloaded the update and ran one time trial]
I thought someone might be interested to see this.
PS What an exciting experience it is flying the Chaparral! I love it but not sure I know how to fly it yet. Off to practice...👍
When I completed my first super lap in the Chaparral 2X (which was pretty slow at about 0m58.5 (nowhere near a bronze), I got the usual message with my online rankings.
I was 128,004 th in the online rankings.
So this year old game on PS3 had more than 128,004 players in the last 4 days (i know its at least one more as one of my psn friends is stuck on more than a minute for his best lap
),[as a minimum they downloaded the update and ran one time trial]I thought someone might be interested to see this.
PS What an exciting experience it is flying the Chaparral! I love it but not sure I know how to fly it yet. Off to practice...👍
- 1,089
Worst idea ever for games in general and for sims even more so.
How did you ignore him ? I do not want to his post but can't find ignore option.
- 8,705
Lots of assumptions there. I think Gran Turismo would suffer much more if ("realistic ") racing games were to suddenly go out of fashion again, due to the high casual volume. Maybe it's already starting.
I wonder how many of the washed hands club would return if GT7 is even a half decent recovery.
You can't filter a mod's posts in case they have something really important to say, you have to do it the old fashioned way.
I never block people, but there are plenty of people whose posts I tend to skip over (unless it's worth reading).
Just be careful about trying to start your own conversation off the back of someone else's comment, because you're almost certain to have missed all the context that didn't interest you.
- 13,861
- Adelaide
- Neomone
So this year old game on PS3 had more than 128,004 players in the last 4 days (i know its at least one more as one of my psn friends is stuck on more than a minute for his best lap
I thought someone might be interested to see this.
Assuming ~4,000,000 sales, that means that at least 3.2% of the people that bought it are still playing. You could be really generous and say that the real number is probably somewhere below 5%.
I'm not sure if that's high or low. Probably not that high really, considering that it includes all the people like me who put it in, downloaded the update, tried the cars and then put the disc back in the cupboard.
- 4,019
- Riga
I need to know the answer to these two questions because my PS3 Hard Drive is to small for GT6 I didn't think it would get this big ? I don't want to get a new hard drive and find out they are going to shutdown GT6 online and I don't like the PS4 much and their is not many games on the PS4 I want.
When is GT7 going to be released ?
How long will GT6 be online for or will it be shutdown like GT5 ?
When is GT7 going to be released ?
How long will GT6 be online for or will it be shutdown like GT5 ?
Similar threads
