Tomb Raider: Underworld sales hit 1.5m Comments by Ellie Gibson
Eidos disappointed, blames economy.
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Poster
|
HuggyAtHome
09/01/09 @ 09:33
0
Will that mean that the price of the promised DLC will be higher to recoup the lost revenue from retail sales? Hope not. Great game with a rubbish ending - so looking forward to more please.
|
|
The_vorlon_man
09/01/09 @ 09:37
0
Poor for a cross platform release. Perhaps they should not have made the demo 360 exclsuive afterall?
BTW, Uncharted sold more than this on the PS3! |
|
thenastypasty
09/01/09 @ 09:44
0
i think they should have released this at a different time of the year with a packed xmas release list there are going to be games that dont sell as well as hoped, i picked this up the other day for less than £20 so it makes you think how many of the 1.5m sales have been discounted.
|
|
Thunderbolt!
09/01/09 @ 09:55
0
I was pleasantly surprised with this game, it was a lot more fun to play that previous Tomb Raider games - I'm looking at you TR3.
And was gorgeous to look at. I think it should have sold better than it did. (Ahem , err.. I'm one of those people who downloaded the wetsuits for Lara and spent most of the game with her in the most skimpiest outfits.) |
|
0
The latest Tomb raider game had that same lazy air about it that some of the past TR games have suffered from.
Anniversary was great. Legend was good too. Latest one was very tight on unlockables, no Croft Mansion and not much replayability. Must try harder Eidos. Then, perhaps you will sell more. Oh, and while you are at it. TROPHY SUPPORT! |
|
0
I guess the point is that modern games require larger development teams to get that "next gen" look. Hence they cost more to make requiring substantial sales to recoup those costs. I read that GTA 4 cost $100m to make. I've no idea how much of each sale goes in to recouping that cost but I'd wager they'd need to sell around 2-5 million copies before they start making a profit. Of course that's a complete guess but shows why the Eidos guys are concerned.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 09/01/09 @ 10:16
|
|
Pinewood_Groves
09/01/09 @ 10:16
0
Well, they shouldn't have released a substandard game, especially in a time when we're flooded with quality titles.
|
|
nickthegun
09/01/09 @ 10:19
0
"Has anybody noticed on Xbox LIVE that one of the most popular downloads is a set of wetsuits for Lara?"
Ways to recoup 20 million: Release DLC costume of nipple tassles and a thong. Release DLC costume of a playboy bunny outfit Charge 3 quid a shot. |
|
Der_tolle_Emil
09/01/09 @ 10:23
0
I would have bought it if I hadn't played the demo. A lot of people think the game is quite good (and I still intend to buy it when it's cheaper) but the demo felt like the same game again including the same annoying camera. This put me off a bit because otherwise I would have gotten it on release because I really enjoyed Legend and Anniversary but the demo was very underwhelming.
|
|
0
I'm not sure what the budget was for the game, but a lot of AAA next-gen games require 3-4m sales to justify the investment.
This business model is pretty broken for the majority of titles, to be honest. BTW 1.5m sales does not equal 1.5m x £40 income... got to remove retail margin (25-35%), distribution margin, cost of goods, platform license, marketing costs, publishing costs and finally development costs (likely to be large). Greed has nothing to do with it, this is a very difficult and costly business. Having seen their share price drop 25% on the news is hardly suggesting they are being greedy.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 09/01/09 @ 10:27
|
|
BillyBrush
09/01/09 @ 10:29
0
3 - 4m sales is big profit..
they lie about break evens which are prob 400k units or 1m if they've spent as much money and effort on it as a Half Life 2 |
|
TurboBailey
09/01/09 @ 10:33
0
Holy Crap - Its on Every format going. I only thought is was on PC / PS3 /XBOX
http://www.play.com/Search.aspx?searchty... |
|
Monkey_Puncher
09/01/09 @ 10:38
0
They should have released it in April or sometime where it wouldn't have got lost amongst the other big releases. Silly people!
|
|
muscleblade
09/01/09 @ 10:46
0
They should blame it on the competition imo. Too many good games coming out. I can afford every game, but why buy games i never have the time to play. I bought Dead Space, Fable 2,Gears 2, L4D, Naruto 2, POP and dont have time to play more games at the moment. When im finished with those, games like SFIV, FEAR2 and RE5 is out.
|
|
0
BillyBrush, total nonsense 400k-1m as break even. On what basis do you work that out? (I'm in the industry and have been in it for 20yrs). The profit from each game sale is a few quid, not £40 a time. The cost of developing the game has got to be in the region of $10-20m (purely a guess based on many AAA titles) and as such I'd imagine recoup to be well over 1m units - they won't see much in the way of profits at all (if any). It isn't just about the dev costs, it's about publishing (mktg, cost of goods, licenses etc) too.
Had it been a huge success and very profitable, they'd crow about it from the roof-tops, not see 25% wiped off the share value because of disappointing sales. Nice to see everyone enjoying one of the last remaining UK (and European) publishers on their arse. |
|
0
Late quarter releases are for big titles only where it can be assured of huge sales. Sorry to Eidos, but Tomb Raider can no longer be considered a top title amongst the pre-Christmas rush, as much as they like to believe it. Games like Tomb Raider which are not considered big releases just get swallowed up amongst the better and more demanded titles.
This is not to say Tomb Raider is a rubbish game, it was actually quite good. The problem is that their marketing department and publisher failed them. To push for a big time release at Christmas was the worst possible time. Lesser titles like this would gain more attention by releasing in the first quarter - January, February or March when releases are scarce and people are itching to buy new games. |
|
farticusmaximus
09/01/09 @ 10:58
0
I really liked the TRU as I've loved the early TR games and TR:L.
I'll be picking it up at some point within the next few months, but as others have said the glut of quality titles in Nov/Dec means there's a large pile of gaming goodness to consume before I think about buying again. I can see it reaching 2m sales within about 6 months as the Xmas digestion period will have worn off. |
|
0
"Don't you mean "an extra 1 million"."
Actually I think Tomb Raider is the exception rather than the rule, possibly because of her far-reaching assets I don't know. But a lot of games have been released in the past where the protagonist is female, and despite a lot of them being superb most of them didn't sell well. Remember Urban Chaos, or NOLF? Perhaps they weren't marketed properly, or perhaps young, male gamers couldn't stand to play as a woman... we'll never know... |
|
muscleblade
09/01/09 @ 11:00
0
@beckyh
Q1 2009 is not going to be scarce, but i agree with you that they should have released it in a different period. I would have bought TR:U and Mirrors edge if they where relased in a quiet period no doubth. Seems like the quite periods are starting to extinct though. |
|
0
For reference, Tomb Raider Legend was released in Q1 2006 and sold 2.6 million copies in a similar timeframe.
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/sc... I wouldn't blame the low sales on anything other than the credit crunch and the vast amount of competition, personally. Plently of other quality games have struggled in the market this holiday (Mirror's Edge, LBP). I think Crystal Dynamics delivered the best Tomb Raider game yet, and it is a shame 1.5 million sales is considered a disappointment. |
|
Kirly_Wombat
09/01/09 @ 11:18
0
TR:U was cheap in quite a few places leading up to xmas. If it hadnt been sub £20 in those places, theyd have sold even less no doubt.
|
|
spitfire1945
09/01/09 @ 11:24
0
That deserves well to Eidos for what they said about review's scores not to be under 8 or else!
Game isn't an AAA title and scores of 8 or above are not fair... 7 is more like it! F*** you Eidos! |
|
makeamazing
09/01/09 @ 11:38
0
The reason why 1.5 million is considered a disappointment is that Eidos have been in financial trouble for a while, and so they were hoping this was going to help them get out of the mire. So yes in terms of sales 1.5 million is pretty good, but for a company in dire straights, then not as much as they had hoped/wanted.
|
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Advertisement
