Jump to navigation
Advertisement

Ghostbusters budget was $15m - $20m News

PSP Xbox 360 PlayStation 3 Wii
News by Ellie Gibson

21 July, 2009

It's been revealed that Ghostbusters cost between $15 million and $20 million to make. That's Ghostbusters the game, of course; the film was made in 1984 and therefore cost about £3.99.

According to Texas newspaper the Star Telegram, "The videogame has already achieved "blockbuster" status with an estimated 1 million units sold. Terminal Reality’s videogame was the product of years of planning and execution, thousands of hours of work [and] a final budget of $15 million - $20 million."

Ghostbusters is now back in fashion, so much so that Dan Aykroyd has said he's working on a third film. So how about another game? "You can bet that if that movie were to come out, we’d just love to do another Ghostbusters game based on it," said Terminal Reality co-founder Mark Randel.

The article goes on to quote "video-game reviewer Ellie Gibson" of "Euro-gamer.net", who is clearly considered the leading authority on such things in Texas. Read her review for the full lowdown.

Advertisement

Are you excited about Ghostbusters on PlayStation 2?
View Eurogamer readers most anticipated games

Thanks!

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

Comments: 1-44 of 44 in total

Poster
Comment Low-scoring comments hidden. Log in to see them!
login_name
21/07/09 @ 08:56
#1
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Before you start a new one, how about you fix the old one? Thank you.
BabyJesus
21/07/09 @ 08:57
#2
+3
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Blasphemy

Ghostbusters (mostly anything with Bill Murray also) will never go out of fashion.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 21/07/09 @ 09:58
JohnnyWashnGo
21/07/09 @ 09:03
#3
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
15 million dollars and they still couldn't write a game that lets you invert the x-axis in the control system.
LeD
21/07/09 @ 09:10
#4
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I thought the game was very decent. A bit repetitive perhaps, and some difficulty spikes, but all in all not your average shovelware.
poopmonster
21/07/09 @ 09:11
#5
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Ghostbusters, the movie, had a budget of $30million, and grossed $239million at the box office.

Somehow I don't think that will be replicated by the game...:p
Vertical Stand
21/07/09 @ 09:20
#6
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Tried the demo, seemed ok, more serious than the films, actually made me think the team had a straight up survival horror game in them, no book monsters mind.
Optimaximal
21/07/09 @ 09:25
#7
+2
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I thought the fact they couldn't make sequels out of it was the reason Activision binned it in the first place!
designerheadache
21/07/09 @ 09:36
#8
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Perhaps fix the achievements/trophies that are bugged, so on-one can get them first then, before going on to another one.
squarejawhero
21/07/09 @ 10:10
#9
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Game was great, all the ingredients needed to satisfy the GB fan, and the capturing is hella fun.

Too busy enjoying busting with the gang to notice any missing achievements. :D
jade2001
21/07/09 @ 10:22
#10
-1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
What the hell is it with people complaining about lack of inverting options. A game is playable without it!

I thought the game was BRILLIANT. It was funny, fun to play an stayed true to the franchise (obviously since Aykroyd and Ramis wrote it).
I would like a 2nd game but only if Aykroyd and Ramis wrote it AND the guys came back to voice it.
Darren
21/07/09 @ 10:49
#11
-2
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
The decision to delay the Wii, PC and Xbox 360 versions in Europe until October/November will surely result in disappointing sales at such a saturated time of year. Many people will likely overlook it because there'll be too many other games coming out at the same time. I guess we can blame Sony for that though...

It's a lovely game on the PC, I loved it immensely to the point where I just wanted to keep playing it until I finished it. It's a bit shallow perhaps but it captures the essence of the source material almost perfectly and is hugely enjoyable not to mention funny. It's also a decent length which makes up for the lack of multiplayer on that version plus it's cheaper than the console versions anyway.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 21/07/09 @ 11:49
IneptPercy
21/07/09 @ 10:51
#12
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
The PC version is kind of broken but can be fixed by messing with a config file, how can there be in AA option? Yet it is there, as a quick mess with the config and all is smooth again.

As for game play, I love it as its the game I always wanted when I was a kid.

Ninja_Tino
21/07/09 @ 11:01
#13
+2
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Lack of inverting is a big thing! Some find it nigh impossible to play otherwise. If I couldn't invert the y axis I'd be a dead man on all fps's.
b00n
21/07/09 @ 11:07
#14
+6
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
invert options should be included in every game, period.
MisterSlimm
21/07/09 @ 11:14
#15
+2
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
$15-$20 million? Great accountants they have. What's $5 million between friends?
TurboBailey
21/07/09 @ 11:48
#16
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Im sure you can invert the controls on the PS3 version.

Moribundman
21/07/09 @ 11:55
#17
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@JohnnyWashnGo Invert the X axis?! Wouldn't that make the game unplayable?!

@NinjaTino Via system settings my 360 defaults games to inverted Y axis where applicable and (back=look up, forward=look down) and the game plays as "normal" to me...
cherryuk
21/07/09 @ 12:05
#18
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
It relies too heavily on the PKE meter to be interesting, but is a well made game.
Darren
21/07/09 @ 12:10
#19
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@IneptPercy - Enabling AA via the INI file is not recommended as it causes a huge performance loss even at 2 (MultiX=2, MultiY=2). Better to use nHancer to set the AA Compatibility to STALKER and force it through the graphics drivers IMO. I can run the game with 8X AA even at 1920x1200 with only minor slowdown. Even with 4X AA the jaggies are pretty much non-existent.
rhubarbandcustard
21/07/09 @ 12:11
#20
-3
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I would love to know how games budgets are broken down by costs. I resent paying over the odds for games, and almost always buy at budget prices.

Why would any game cost so much? It's all virtual.

You just need a graphics engine,staff and a big shed to sit them in. Right?

How many staff do you employ for costs to soar to twenty million? How big is this shed?
Darren
21/07/09 @ 12:29
#21
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@rhubarbandcustard - Ghostbusters came out on a number of different formats, which presumably all had their own sub-team working and testing them, all being paid a salary (presumably). Games also typically take a year or two to develop plus there's additional costs involved if they use a custom-built engine as Terminal Reality have for their own games. This is also a licensed game too remember so that is more expense. Factor in advertising, etc., and I guess it all adds up.
Wolf_Cryer
21/07/09 @ 12:35
#22
+2
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I like the way Sony made this a timed exclusive in the UK in the hope that people wouldn't see the far superior 360 version. Against my better judgement I tried the PS3 version out, my eyes were sore after about 15 minutes of "gameplay"
sneetch
21/07/09 @ 12:35
#23
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"Ellie Gibson?" "Eurogamer?"

I haven't had time to check (I'm a busy man after all) but I'm pretty sure that's a made up name and a made up website.
rhubarbandcustard
21/07/09 @ 12:37
#24
-9
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Ghostbusters licence value in 2009 - 1 dollar
Bill Murray voice over, based on star value - 1 dollar
Dan Ackroyd voice over, based on star value - 1 dollar
other original ghostbusters voice over, based on star value - less than one dollar
Ghostbusters theme tune licensing deal - 1 dollar and 25 cents

This is freaking Ghostbusters! LOL

20 million on this 80's nonsense makes as much sense as spending 20 million dollars on a Rainbow videogame (even if featuring authentic voice over work from Zippy and Bungle.)

Daryoon
21/07/09 @ 12:49
#25
+2
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
20 million on this 80's nonsense makes as much sense as spending 20 million dollars on a Rainbow videogame (even if featuring authentic voice over work from Zippy and Bungle.)

I'd buy a 360 for that. Serious.
FWB
21/07/09 @ 13:04
#26
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Here's a suggestion... could EG do an article covering how an average (if such a thing exists) game's budget is broken down? Not of vital importance but it'd be fairly interesting.
CountFapula
21/07/09 @ 13:34
#27
-1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I don't know what you invert whiners are complaining about, the game was fine. I loved it.

Some of you just love to complain about anything, I suppose. Glad I'm not a miserable bastard who wants everything to be bad :)
CountFapula
21/07/09 @ 13:36
#28
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Rhubarb you tard- did you miss the part where the game has already sold 1 million copies, despite being sony only in europe?

And you seriously don't think Bill Murray has star power?

Hahahah what a fuckin idiot.
IneptPercy
21/07/09 @ 14:00
#29
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Darren:-

I am running an ATI card so chaging the excuteable to UT3.exe lets the CCC control it, I tried it there and then tried it using the ini tweak. Setting the ini AA doesn't seem to use 2x, it looks more like 2x2 supersampling to me.

Either way after messing around a bit I found the ini tweak gave the best results with the smallest performance hit for me.

There is a few ways around it but in the end it should already be in the game options. Its this kind of thing which gives PC gaming a bad name.
aidey6
21/07/09 @ 14:05
#30
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I wonder if Terminal Reality are using the same mathematician who worked out that the PS3 version was displaying 75% of the resolution of the 360 version for the sequel.....

http://www.joystiq.com/2009/06/17/ghostb...
Edited 3 times, most recently on 21/07/09 @ 15:51
johnny_death
21/07/09 @ 14:40
#31
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I want a sequel too, great game.
CountFapula
21/07/09 @ 14:46
#32
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
No, it's PC gamers that usually give PC gaming a bad name. See: Left 4 Dead 2 Boycott stupidity.

Neg me all you like homos, it's still the truth.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 21/07/09 @ 15:54
homerbert
21/07/09 @ 15:03
#33
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@ Poopmonster.

The game sold a million units at approximately $60 a game. Which means the game grossed 60 million dollars already, on a budget of approximately 17million. That means it grossed three and a half times its costs. That's after a short period of time and before it's been properly released in Europe. So not movie figures, but impressive nonetheless.

That said, the figures for both the movie and the game are useless as they don't count distrbution, prints, advertising, the proportion of the gross the creators see, etc etc.

Bit of fun to number crunch anyway.

Eoin
El-Dev
21/07/09 @ 15:29
#34
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"Neg me all you like homos, it's still the truth. "

I think we should all take a little time to appreciate this comment from an all round nice guy.


As for Ghostbusters, I'll wait for it to be £20 or so. Don't think it deserves full price at the minute.
CountFapula
21/07/09 @ 15:57
#35
-1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
El Dev, you know what I am saying is true.

I have seen lots of people who have told the truth get negged, simply for saying how it is- the karma system is retarded, since most people are too stupid to use it properly, and neg things they don't agree with no matter how much it makes sense.

You know it , and I know it- it's the hardcore, elitest PC gamers who make PC gaming look bad. Not all PC gamers by a long stretch, but the left 4 dead 2 boycott was all pc gamers, and it was the most pathetic thing I have seen in a while.
donnie080208
21/07/09 @ 16:27
#36
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
is a million sales really that amazing worldwide on what 3 or 4 platforms in its first month or so on sale?not nowadays in my book
CountFapula
21/07/09 @ 18:13
#37
-2
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
who cares about your books, I mean really?

If the maths are right, it's made sixty million on a budget of 17. I'd say that's a massive sucess, personally.

It doesn't have to sell as much as Halo to be sucessful, tard.
WJF
21/07/09 @ 22:00
#38
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Woah, wait, no inverted controls?

I know for cack-handed people (ho ho) that sounds like nothing, but for those of us that simply cannot use a joystick when up is up and down is down, it basically breaks a game.

EDIT: For certain types of game, that is. Not beat-em-ups or whatnot.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 21/07/09 @ 23:01
CountFapula
21/07/09 @ 23:38
#39
-2
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Wait, you can't get the simple concept that up is up and down is down? You want it to be down is up and up is down?

And you are calling OTHER people cackhanded?

HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
IneptPercy
22/07/09 @ 00:43
#40
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
My brother is the same with this inverting thing, he won't accept that a short period of getting use to it and playing games none inverted will cure him of this strange thing.
CountFapula
22/07/09 @ 01:59
#41
-2
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
It's so weird people actually want things done the wrong way round

up = up

down = down

It's really not hard to get
smelly
22/07/09 @ 21:15
#42
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
That doesnt sound right to me.. $20m isnt that much for a normal game... but in this one you have to factor in the cast voice overs - bill murray probably made that much just to say "hello"
smelly
22/07/09 @ 21:20
#43
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"Which means the game grossed 60 million dollars already, on a budget of approximately 17million. That means it grossed three and a half times its costs."


Im sure you know this already - but the developer/publisher probably only sees about $10 or $15 of that $60 price tag... $30 goes straight to the shop keeper, then you have to pay sony/distributors/marketing/etc etc.
homerbert
23/07/09 @ 01:10
#44
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"but the developer/publisher probably only sees about $10 or $15 of that $60 price tag."

Yeah. I was just amused because for some reason everyone acts like box office grosses go straight to the studio. If I'd a penny for every time I read "the film cost "$30million but made $32million so it's in profit, I'd be $32 million dollars in profit myself. It ignores how ridiculously complex finances for entertainment are.

It seems to be becoming increasingly common in games news stories, which is a bit sad. The figures are meaningless without a lot of insider knowlege and a shiload of number crunching.

It'll be interesting to see how digital distribution affects this. Something low budget, distributed online like World of Goo woud be easier to analyse. I'm sure we'll see more of that sort of thing in future.

Eoin

Comments: 1-44 of 44 in total

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

X View gallery