IO interactive survive and Square Enix fall.

Avatar image for ghosts4ever
Ghosts4ever

17215

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 20

User Lists: 0

#1 Ghosts4ever
Member since 2015 • 17215 Posts

Hello friends,

So Square enix actually fired IO interactive back in 2016 after Hitman release, ruined Deus Ex in favor of avengers and marvel money, killed sleeping dogs series as shut down thier developers etc. yet after saperate from square enix IO got Hitman IP and still better than ever. take a look at this

On other hand Square enix avengers disappoint everyone and they lost money

and This is the series they killed Deus Ex for. forcing Eidos to work on Avengers with crystal dynamic and turn into Loot RPG crap and they failed. as a result avengers turned out to be biggest failure of 2020 along with Cyberpunk.

IO on other hand finally deliver masterpiece in a shape of Hitman 3 and now are working on James Bond game which I believe will be first truly great James bond game and could be IO next masterpiece.

So my friend, are square enix will be angry if they don't separate IO interactive and killed Deus Ex? this is how table turn. independent studio survive and AAAA company fall.

what do you think? lets discuss my friends.

Avatar image for Chutebox
Chutebox

47338

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 Chutebox
Member since 2007 • 47338 Posts

What?

Avatar image for Miyomatic
Miyomatic

2814

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3  Edited By Miyomatic
Member since 2005 • 2814 Posts

Bad english. And FFVII Remake.

Avatar image for rmpumper
rmpumper

1273

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 rmpumper
Member since 2016 • 1273 Posts

Square always get good sales on their games, but they also overspend when developing them, so in the end the corpos get to complain about losing money every singe times for years and years and yet they keep doing it. One could thing that the games are considered as losing them money because the executives are lining their own pockets with the development funds.

Avatar image for louixiii
LouiXIII

9890

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 LouiXIII
Member since 2015 • 9890 Posts

I'm happy Hitman 3 has been met with great reviews but 48m isn't shit to a company like Square. Just last year they released FF7 Remake and do you know how much money they made off of that alone? 5 million copies sold to date. Being that the game hasn't come down in price much, I bet majority of those sales were at $60 per unit and probably more in other countries.

Now...5m x $60 = $300m. Subtract dev and ad cost (roughly $25-$50m) and you still got a hefty $250m (on the low end) and that was just one game. Don't get me started on TR numbers...

Point I'm making is that it's awesome that Hitman 3 doing great review wise but sales wise, that's to be seen. Furthermore, companies like S/E wipe their asses with $48m.

Just saying...

Avatar image for hardwenzen
hardwenzen

6963

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#6 hardwenzen
Member since 2005 • 6963 Posts

Friend, i can tell you're very very excited.

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
mrbojangles25

49263

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#7 mrbojangles25
Member since 2005 • 49263 Posts

Good for IOI

Avatar image for st_monica
St_Monica

380

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#8 St_Monica
Member since 2020 • 380 Posts

I bet @ghosts4ever doesn't care either Hitman or Avengers at all. This poor man just wants his favorite Deus Ex back. And ironically, if the Avengers game sells well, it's more likely that a new Deus EX game will come out with that money.

Avatar image for R4gn4r0k
R4gn4r0k

36428

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#9 R4gn4r0k
Member since 2004 • 36428 Posts

AAA industry isn't interested in linear sales model anymore

Sell games > profit

Instead they want to sell you marketplaces where they can keep earning money with season passes, microtransactions and to a lesser extent now: lootboxes.

Avatar image for ProtossRushX
ProtossRushX

8857

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10  Edited By ProtossRushX
Member since 2007 • 8857 Posts

I don't want square enix to fall they could still make a comeback like capcom did with re2 remake

They should have made it turn based tho i think that hurt them for ff7 classic mode wasn't enough.

Music didn't seem as good nobuo's ff7 music they should have just hired a orchaestra to redo his and make it sound better.

Avatar image for fedor
Fedor

8435

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11 Fedor
Member since 2015 • 8435 Posts

Well FF7R sold 5 million as of August and they have a ton of games on the horizon. I think SE is fine.

Avatar image for Litchie
Litchie

27324

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#12 Litchie
Member since 2003 • 27324 Posts

Square Enix losing 48 million on Avengers is probably not that big of a deal for them. Bigger deal for us, as an Avengers 2 should be less likely. 👍

Cool for IO Interactive though. Hopefully SE realize their mistake while IO got a big grin on its face.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
uninspiredcup

44220

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 86

User Lists: 2

#13 uninspiredcup
Member since 2013 • 44220 Posts

@R4gn4r0k said:

AAA industry isn't interested in linear sales model anymore

Sell games > profit

Instead they want to sell you marketplaces where they can keep earning money with season passes, microtransactions and to a lesser extent now: lootboxes.

Yea, rarely buy AAA games now and feel pretty bad for kids growing up now with all this... shit.

Pretty vile really.

God bless the 90's.

Avatar image for R4gn4r0k
R4gn4r0k

36428

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#14 R4gn4r0k
Member since 2004 • 36428 Posts

@uninspiredcup said:

Yea, rarely buy AAA games now and feel pretty bad for kids growing up now with all this... shit.

Pretty vile really.

God bless the 90's.

I mean kids growing up with predatory F2P mobile schemes must develop real spending issues later in life, I'm sure.

"Where is the way to buy my success?"

Avatar image for BassMan
BassMan

13482

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 154

User Lists: 0

#15  Edited By BassMan
Member since 2002 • 13482 Posts

@louixiii said:

I'm happy Hitman 3 has been met with great reviews but 48m isn't shit to a company like Square. Just last year they released FF7 Remake and do you know how much money they made off of that alone? 5 million copies sold to date. Being that the game hasn't come down in price much, I bet majority of those sales were at $60 per unit and probably more in other countries.

Now...5m x $60 = $300m. Subtract dev and ad cost (roughly $25-$50m) and you still got a hefty $250m (on the low end) and that was just one game. Don't get me started on TR numbers...

Point I'm making is that it's awesome that Hitman 3 doing great review wise but sales wise, that's to be seen. Furthermore, companies like S/E wipe their asses with $48m.

Just saying...

It is still a net loss with titles under performing. That means FF7 Remake combined with all the other titles didn't make them shit when all the chips were counted. Also, don't mistake revenue for profits. Revenues have to exceed the costs of development, marketing, manufacturing/distribution, royalty fees, etc. before there is a profit.

Avatar image for SolidGame_basic
SolidGame_basic

29936

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16 SolidGame_basic
Member since 2003 • 29936 Posts

Hitman is less mainstream than your beloved DOOM. Unfortunately having a good score doesn't always equate to good sales.

Avatar image for pc_rocks
PC_Rocks

5159

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#17 PC_Rocks
Member since 2018 • 5159 Posts

Ummm...where are the sale numbers for Hitman?

Avatar image for madrocketeer
madrocketeer

8250

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: -6

User Lists: 0

#18 madrocketeer
Member since 2005 • 8250 Posts

18-4. Also got i_p_daily's troll thread right. The giveaway was the word "change," which is not in Ghost's vocabulary.

Anyway, it's just nice to have an independent developer doing well. That said, while Square Enix make plenty of questionable business decisions, they'll be okay so long as they have Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy.

Avatar image for Archangel3371
Archangel3371

33820

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#19 Archangel3371
Member since 2004 • 33820 Posts

While I was pretty disappointed with how the Marvel Avengers game turned out Square-Enix still do some great stuff that I very much enjoy so I think that they’ll do just fine.

Avatar image for louixiii
LouiXIII

9890

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#20 LouiXIII
Member since 2015 • 9890 Posts

@BassMan said:
@louixiii said:

I'm happy Hitman 3 has been met with great reviews but 48m isn't shit to a company like Square. Just last year they released FF7 Remake and do you know how much money they made off of that alone? 5 million copies sold to date. Being that the game hasn't come down in price much, I bet majority of those sales were at $60 per unit and probably more in other countries.

Now...5m x $60 = $300m. Subtract dev and ad cost (roughly $25-$50m) and you still got a hefty $250m (on the low end) and that was just one game. Don't get me started on TR numbers...

Point I'm making is that it's awesome that Hitman 3 doing great review wise but sales wise, that's to be seen. Furthermore, companies like S/E wipe their asses with $48m.

Just saying...

It is still a net loss with titles under performing. That means FF7 Remake combined with all the other titles didn't make them shit when all the chips were counted. Also, don't mistake revenue for profits. Revenues have to exceed the costs of development, marketing, manufacturing/distribution, royalty fees, etc. before there is a profit.

FF Series + TR series = INSANE Success...

Avengers under performed...

How do you figure the other titles didn't make them shit when they're still developing games? Money doesn't grow on trees...

And if you look above, dev and marketing cost was factored in. It's simple mathematics. AAA games roughly cost $20m to dev plus another $25m for marketing. They own the IP so what royalty fees? Distribution sure but when close to half of your sales are digital, that eliminates a lot manufacturing cost.

I don't even own many Square games but business is business. If you think one bad title hurts an entire company, you don't understand the business.

Avatar image for BassMan
BassMan

13482

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 154

User Lists: 0

#21  Edited By BassMan
Member since 2002 • 13482 Posts

@louixiii said:
@BassMan said:
@louixiii said:

I'm happy Hitman 3 has been met with great reviews but 48m isn't shit to a company like Square. Just last year they released FF7 Remake and do you know how much money they made off of that alone? 5 million copies sold to date. Being that the game hasn't come down in price much, I bet majority of those sales were at $60 per unit and probably more in other countries.

Now...5m x $60 = $300m. Subtract dev and ad cost (roughly $25-$50m) and you still got a hefty $250m (on the low end) and that was just one game. Don't get me started on TR numbers...

Point I'm making is that it's awesome that Hitman 3 doing great review wise but sales wise, that's to be seen. Furthermore, companies like S/E wipe their asses with $48m.

Just saying...

It is still a net loss with titles under performing. That means FF7 Remake combined with all the other titles didn't make them shit when all the chips were counted. Also, don't mistake revenue for profits. Revenues have to exceed the costs of development, marketing, manufacturing/distribution, royalty fees, etc. before there is a profit.

FF Series + TR series = INSANE Success...

Avengers under performed...

How do you figure the other titles didn't make them shit when they're still developing games? Money doesn't grow on trees...

And if you look above, dev and marketing cost was factored in. It's simple mathematics. AAA games roughly cost $20m to dev plus another $25m for marketing. They own the IP so what royalty fees? Distribution sure but when close to half of your sales are digital, that eliminates a lot manufacturing cost.

I don't even own many Square games but business is business. If you think one bad title hurts an entire company, you don't understand the business.

They reported a net loss. So, that means the successful titles were not enough to offset the losses for that reporting period. I don't see why that is so hard to understand. Also, AAA games can cost a lot more than 20 million to develop and they still have to pay royalties to Sony/MS/Valve, etc. when selling digital. Avengers is reported to have a budget of 100+ million dollars.

Avatar image for ProtossRushX
ProtossRushX

8857

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#22 ProtossRushX
Member since 2007 • 8857 Posts

I don't see how FF7 Remake selling 5 million is a huge win.

The original the classic turn based champion FF7 PS1 sold 17 million copies thats a huge win. This isnt.

They abandon there classic fans pokemon is still turn based fire emblem is still sorta tactical.

No.

Avatar image for judaspete
judaspete

4531

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#23 judaspete
Member since 2005 • 4531 Posts

@pc_rocks: That's the question, right? Avengers didn't meet it's projections, but will probably tripple the sales of Hitman.

That said, I'm glad things are working out for IO. Proof AA ideas can still be viable in the modern world, if you manage scope, budget, and expectations properly.

Avatar image for locopatho
locopatho

24100

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#24  Edited By locopatho
Member since 2003 • 24100 Posts

An underperforming live service skinner box still makes much more money than a regular single player game.

Avatar image for louixiii
LouiXIII

9890

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#25 LouiXIII
Member since 2015 • 9890 Posts

@BassMan said:
@louixiii said:
@BassMan said:
@louixiii said:

I'm happy Hitman 3 has been met with great reviews but 48m isn't shit to a company like Square. Just last year they released FF7 Remake and do you know how much money they made off of that alone? 5 million copies sold to date. Being that the game hasn't come down in price much, I bet majority of those sales were at $60 per unit and probably more in other countries.

Now...5m x $60 = $300m. Subtract dev and ad cost (roughly $25-$50m) and you still got a hefty $250m (on the low end) and that was just one game. Don't get me started on TR numbers...

Point I'm making is that it's awesome that Hitman 3 doing great review wise but sales wise, that's to be seen. Furthermore, companies like S/E wipe their asses with $48m.

Just saying...

It is still a net loss with titles under performing. That means FF7 Remake combined with all the other titles didn't make them shit when all the chips were counted. Also, don't mistake revenue for profits. Revenues have to exceed the costs of development, marketing, manufacturing/distribution, royalty fees, etc. before there is a profit.

FF Series + TR series = INSANE Success...

Avengers under performed...

How do you figure the other titles didn't make them shit when they're still developing games? Money doesn't grow on trees...

And if you look above, dev and marketing cost was factored in. It's simple mathematics. AAA games roughly cost $20m to dev plus another $25m for marketing. They own the IP so what royalty fees? Distribution sure but when close to half of your sales are digital, that eliminates a lot manufacturing cost.

I don't even own many Square games but business is business. If you think one bad title hurts an entire company, you don't understand the business.

They reported a net loss. So, that means the successful titles were not enough to offset the losses for that reporting period. I don't see why that is so hard to understand. Also, AAA games can cost a lot more than 20 million to develop and they still have to pay royalties to Sony/MS/Valve, etc. when selling digital. Avengers is reported to have a budget of 100+ million dollars.

This is what you're not understanding. We're talking about a company that's worth BILLIONS....not millions but billions. With that being said, comments like "That means FF7 Remake combined with all the other titles didn't make them shit when all the chips were counted. Also, don't mistake revenue for profits" is ludicrous.

Here's a link.

https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/SQNXF/square-enix-holdings/net-worth

As of yesterday, they were worth $6.88 billion USD. So if you really think they didn't make a profit from titles like FF7 and the TombRaider trilogy, you need a straight jacket.

Like I said before, they wipe their asses with 48m.

Avatar image for BassMan
BassMan

13482

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 154

User Lists: 0

#26  Edited By BassMan
Member since 2002 • 13482 Posts

@louixiii said:
@BassMan said:
@louixiii said:
@BassMan said:

It is still a net loss with titles under performing. That means FF7 Remake combined with all the other titles didn't make them shit when all the chips were counted. Also, don't mistake revenue for profits. Revenues have to exceed the costs of development, marketing, manufacturing/distribution, royalty fees, etc. before there is a profit.

FF Series + TR series = INSANE Success...

Avengers under performed...

How do you figure the other titles didn't make them shit when they're still developing games? Money doesn't grow on trees...

And if you look above, dev and marketing cost was factored in. It's simple mathematics. AAA games roughly cost $20m to dev plus another $25m for marketing. They own the IP so what royalty fees? Distribution sure but when close to half of your sales are digital, that eliminates a lot manufacturing cost.

I don't even own many Square games but business is business. If you think one bad title hurts an entire company, you don't understand the business.

They reported a net loss. So, that means the successful titles were not enough to offset the losses for that reporting period. I don't see why that is so hard to understand. Also, AAA games can cost a lot more than 20 million to develop and they still have to pay royalties to Sony/MS/Valve, etc. when selling digital. Avengers is reported to have a budget of 100+ million dollars.

This is what you're not understanding. We're talking about a company that's worth BILLIONS....not millions but billions. With that being said, comments like "That means FF7 Remake combined with all the other titles didn't make them shit when all the chips were counted. Also, don't mistake revenue for profits" is ludicrous.

Here's a link.

https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/SQNXF/square-enix-holdings/net-worth

As of yesterday, they were worth $6.88 billion USD. So if you really think they didn't make a profit from titles like FF7 and the TombRaider trilogy, you need a straight jacket.

Like I said before, they wipe their asses with 48m.

Why are you bringing up the company's worth? That still does not change the FACT that they posted a net loss during that reporting period. Stop deflecting and just accept the facts. You are trying way too hard and are looking like an idiot.

Avatar image for i_p_daily
I_P_Daily

21442

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#27 I_P_Daily
Member since 2015 • 21442 Posts

@madrocketeer: Lol, yeah it was a good thread my friend, lets discuss 🤣🤣🤣

Avatar image for louixiii
LouiXIII

9890

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#28 LouiXIII
Member since 2015 • 9890 Posts

@BassMan said:
@louixiii said:
@BassMan said:
@louixiii said:
@BassMan said:

It is still a net loss with titles under performing. That means FF7 Remake combined with all the other titles didn't make them shit when all the chips were counted. Also, don't mistake revenue for profits. Revenues have to exceed the costs of development, marketing, manufacturing/distribution, royalty fees, etc. before there is a profit.

FF Series + TR series = INSANE Success...

Avengers under performed...

How do you figure the other titles didn't make them shit when they're still developing games? Money doesn't grow on trees...

And if you look above, dev and marketing cost was factored in. It's simple mathematics. AAA games roughly cost $20m to dev plus another $25m for marketing. They own the IP so what royalty fees? Distribution sure but when close to half of your sales are digital, that eliminates a lot manufacturing cost.

I don't even own many Square games but business is business. If you think one bad title hurts an entire company, you don't understand the business.

They reported a net loss. So, that means the successful titles were not enough to offset the losses for that reporting period. I don't see why that is so hard to understand. Also, AAA games can cost a lot more than 20 million to develop and they still have to pay royalties to Sony/MS/Valve, etc. when selling digital. Avengers is reported to have a budget of 100+ million dollars.

This is what you're not understanding. We're talking about a company that's worth BILLIONS....not millions but billions. With that being said, comments like "That means FF7 Remake combined with all the other titles didn't make them shit when all the chips were counted. Also, don't mistake revenue for profits" is ludicrous.

Here's a link.

https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/SQNXF/square-enix-holdings/net-worth

As of yesterday, they were worth $6.88 billion USD. So if you really think they didn't make a profit from titles like FF7 and the TombRaider trilogy, you need a straight jacket.

Like I said before, they wipe their asses with 48m.

Why are you bringing up the company's worth? That still does not change the FACT that they posted a net loss during that reporting period. Stop deflecting and just accept the facts. You are trying way too hard and are looking like an idiot.

Easy. In my initial response, I said that Square-Enix wipes their asses with $48m which is a FACT. You're replying to a comment I made making you the "deflector" here...

I never said they didn't take a loss because that's been documented but if you'd brush up on your comprehension skills, you'd actually see where I was coming from. Read my original comment but take your time this go-round because you're the one that's starting to sound a bit slow....but your claim that S/E didn't make a profit from FF7 Remake makes you sound remedial.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Fantasy_VII_Remake

So don't get pissy with me for some stupid shit you said. Check the mirror pal

Avatar image for Jag85
Jag85

15449

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 218

User Lists: 0

#29 Jag85
Member since 2005 • 15449 Posts

Square Enix are still printing money with Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest and Tomb Raider. They can afford to eat a loss on Avengers. And that's only for a single quarter. They'll still make profit on the overall fiscal year.

Avatar image for silentchief
Silentchief

530

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#30 Silentchief
Member since 2021 • 530 Posts

Actually really wanted to get into Hitman. Any reason I should buy the first two in the new trilogy? Like does the story matter?

Avatar image for Jag85
Jag85

15449

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 218

User Lists: 0

#31  Edited By Jag85
Member since 2005 • 15449 Posts

@BassMan said:
@louixiii said:

I'm happy Hitman 3 has been met with great reviews but 48m isn't shit to a company like Square. Just last year they released FF7 Remake and do you know how much money they made off of that alone? 5 million copies sold to date. Being that the game hasn't come down in price much, I bet majority of those sales were at $60 per unit and probably more in other countries.

Now...5m x $60 = $300m. Subtract dev and ad cost (roughly $25-$50m) and you still got a hefty $250m (on the low end) and that was just one game. Don't get me started on TR numbers...

Point I'm making is that it's awesome that Hitman 3 doing great review wise but sales wise, that's to be seen. Furthermore, companies like S/E wipe their asses with $48m.

Just saying...

It is still a net loss with titles under performing. That means FF7 Remake combined with all the other titles didn't make them shit when all the chips were counted. Also, don't mistake revenue for profits. Revenues have to exceed the costs of development, marketing, manufacturing/distribution, royalty fees, etc. before there is a profit.

Incorrect. Square Enix reported an overall net profit for the first half of fiscal year 2020 (April-September)...

Final Fantasy 7 Remake, Avengers push Square Enix H1 sales up 43%

For the six months ended September 30, Square Enix posted revenues up 43% year-over-year to ¥172.73 billion ($1.67 billion). Profits were also up 46.3% to ¥16.05 billion ($155.4 million).

Square Enix sold a total of 12.08 million copies of new games during the first half, split almost evenly between physical and downloadable versions, compared to 8.65 million copies in last year's first half when its biggest releases were a Switch port of Dragon Quest 11 and an Xbox One version of Final Fantasy 10/10-2 HD Remaster.

The publisher gave little indication as to just how Final Fantasy 7 Remake and Marvel's Avengers performed, but some of their performance can be inferred.

In the first half when Final Fantasy 7 Remake launched, the publisher's HD Games division posted net sales of ¥34.1 billion ($330.1 million) and an operating income of more than ¥10 billion ($96.8 million).

For the second quarter when Marvel's Avengers launched, Square Enix's HD Games business saw net sales of ¥23.7 billion ($229.4 million) and an operating loss of more than ¥5 billion ($48.4 million).

In other words, the amount of profit Square Enix made from Final Fantasy VII Remake was more than enough to offset whatever loss they made on Avengers by a significant margin.

Avatar image for firedrakes
firedrakes

2937

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#32 firedrakes
Member since 2004 • 2937 Posts

@Jag85: on top of that their anime/manga div is making money like always

Avatar image for Jag85
Jag85

15449

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 218

User Lists: 0

#33 Jag85
Member since 2005 • 15449 Posts
@firedrakes said:

@Jag85: on top of that their anime/manga div is making money like always

Yeah, the report is only talking about the HD games division (e.g. FF7R and Avengers). Their other divisions are all profitable, including MMO games (e.g. FFXIV and DQX), mobile games (e.g. DQ Walk and FF Brave Exvius), and manga (e.g. Fullmetal Alchemist and Manga Up).

Avatar image for BassMan
BassMan

13482

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 154

User Lists: 0

#34  Edited By BassMan
Member since 2002 • 13482 Posts

@Jag85 said:
@BassMan said:
@louixiii said:

I'm happy Hitman 3 has been met with great reviews but 48m isn't shit to a company like Square. Just last year they released FF7 Remake and do you know how much money they made off of that alone? 5 million copies sold to date. Being that the game hasn't come down in price much, I bet majority of those sales were at $60 per unit and probably more in other countries.

Now...5m x $60 = $300m. Subtract dev and ad cost (roughly $25-$50m) and you still got a hefty $250m (on the low end) and that was just one game. Don't get me started on TR numbers...

Point I'm making is that it's awesome that Hitman 3 doing great review wise but sales wise, that's to be seen. Furthermore, companies like S/E wipe their asses with $48m.

Just saying...

It is still a net loss with titles under performing. That means FF7 Remake combined with all the other titles didn't make them shit when all the chips were counted. Also, don't mistake revenue for profits. Revenues have to exceed the costs of development, marketing, manufacturing/distribution, royalty fees, etc. before there is a profit.

Incorrect. Square Enix reported an overall net profit for the first half of fiscal year 2020 (April-September)...

Final Fantasy 7 Remake, Avengers push Square Enix H1 sales up 43%

For the six months ended September 30, Square Enix posted revenues up 43% year-over-year to ¥172.73 billion ($1.67 billion). Profits were also up 46.3% to ¥16.05 billion ($155.4 million).

Square Enix sold a total of 12.08 million copies of new games during the first half, split almost evenly between physical and downloadable versions, compared to 8.65 million copies in last year's first half when its biggest releases were a Switch port of Dragon Quest 11 and an Xbox One version of Final Fantasy 10/10-2 HD Remaster.

The publisher gave little indication as to just how Final Fantasy 7 Remake and Marvel's Avengers performed, but some of their performance can be inferred.

In the first half when Final Fantasy 7 Remake launched, the publisher's HD Games division posted net sales of ¥34.1 billion ($330.1 million) and an operating income of more than ¥10 billion ($96.8 million).

For the second quarter when Marvel's Avengers launched, Square Enix's HD Games business saw net sales of ¥23.7 billion ($229.4 million) and an operating loss of more than ¥5 billion ($48.4 million).

In other words, the amount of profit Square Enix made from Final Fantasy VII Remake was more than enough to offset whatever loss they made on Avengers by a significant margin.

Your link doesn't work. Also, all that matters is the the last paragraph for the quarterly reporting period....

For the second quarter when Marvel's Avengers launched, Square Enix's HD Games business saw net sales of ¥23.7 billion ($229.4 million) and an operating loss of more than ¥5 billion ($48.4 million).

Avatar image for BassMan
BassMan

13482

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 154

User Lists: 0

#35 BassMan
Member since 2002 • 13482 Posts

@louixiii said:
@BassMan said:
@louixiii said:
@BassMan said:
@louixiii said:

FF Series + TR series = INSANE Success...

Avengers under performed...

How do you figure the other titles didn't make them shit when they're still developing games? Money doesn't grow on trees...

And if you look above, dev and marketing cost was factored in. It's simple mathematics. AAA games roughly cost $20m to dev plus another $25m for marketing. They own the IP so what royalty fees? Distribution sure but when close to half of your sales are digital, that eliminates a lot manufacturing cost.

I don't even own many Square games but business is business. If you think one bad title hurts an entire company, you don't understand the business.

They reported a net loss. So, that means the successful titles were not enough to offset the losses for that reporting period. I don't see why that is so hard to understand. Also, AAA games can cost a lot more than 20 million to develop and they still have to pay royalties to Sony/MS/Valve, etc. when selling digital. Avengers is reported to have a budget of 100+ million dollars.

This is what you're not understanding. We're talking about a company that's worth BILLIONS....not millions but billions. With that being said, comments like "That means FF7 Remake combined with all the other titles didn't make them shit when all the chips were counted. Also, don't mistake revenue for profits" is ludicrous.

Here's a link.

https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/SQNXF/square-enix-holdings/net-worth

As of yesterday, they were worth $6.88 billion USD. So if you really think they didn't make a profit from titles like FF7 and the TombRaider trilogy, you need a straight jacket.

Like I said before, they wipe their asses with 48m.

Why are you bringing up the company's worth? That still does not change the FACT that they posted a net loss during that reporting period. Stop deflecting and just accept the facts. You are trying way too hard and are looking like an idiot.

Easy. In my initial response, I said that Square-Enix wipes their asses with $48m which is a FACT. You're replying to a comment I made making you the "deflector" here...

I never said they didn't take a loss because that's been documented but if you'd brush up on your comprehension skills, you'd actually see where I was coming from. Read my original comment but take your time this go-round because you're the one that's starting to sound a bit slow....but your claim that S/E didn't make a profit from FF7 Remake makes you sound remedial.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Fantasy_VII_Remake

So don't get pissy with me for some stupid shit you said. Check the mirror pal

I never said FF7 Remake did not make a profit. I said that it didn't offset any losses from Marvel Avengers during that reporting period. There was a $48m loss during that quarter.

Avatar image for Jag85
Jag85

15449

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 218

User Lists: 0

#36 Jag85
Member since 2005 • 15449 Posts

@BassMan: I've now fixed the link. It shows that Square Enix's HD Games division made a profit over the six-month period, including a profit for the first quarter when FF7R released and a loss for the second quarter when Avengers released. When taking the total six-month period into account, it's an overall profit, showing that FF7R more than offset Avengers. And that's only the HD Games division. There's also the MMO, mobile and manga divisions, which were all profitable.

Avatar image for BassMan
BassMan

13482

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 154

User Lists: 0

#37 BassMan
Member since 2002 • 13482 Posts

@Jag85 said:

@BassMan: I've now fixed the link. It shows that Square Enix's HD Games division made a profit over the six-month period, including a profit for the first quarter when FF7R released and a loss for the second quarter when Avengers released. When taking the total six-month period into account, it's an overall profit, showing that FF7R more than offset Avengers. And that's only the HD Games division. There's also the MMO, mobile and manga divisions, which were all profitable.

Nobody is talking about the 6 month period. We are talking about the quarterly loss. None of the titles offset the losses during that quarter. A loss is a loss. Too many deflections and goal post moves going on in this thread.

Avatar image for Jag85
Jag85

15449

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 218

User Lists: 0

#38 Jag85
Member since 2005 • 15449 Posts
@BassMan said:
@Jag85 said:

@BassMan: I've now fixed the link. It shows that Square Enix's HD Games division made a profit over the six-month period, including a profit for the first quarter when FF7R released and a loss for the second quarter when Avengers released. When taking the total six-month period into account, it's an overall profit, showing that FF7R more than offset Avengers. And that's only the HD Games division. There's also the MMO, mobile and manga divisions, which were all profitable.

Nobody is talking about the 6 month period. We are talking about the quarterly loss. None of the titles offset the losses during that quarter. A loss is a loss. Too many deflections and goal post moves going on in this thread.

The post from louixiii that you were originally replying to was talking about the whole of last year, not just a single quarter. If your argument was just over a single quarter, then you clearly missed the point of the post you were replying to. Overall for the first half of the fiscal year, SE's HD division made a profit, not a loss. And even if we're talking about just that quarter, it was only the HD division that made a loss, whereas the company as a whole made a profit during that quarter.

Avatar image for BassMan
BassMan

13482

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 154

User Lists: 0

#39  Edited By BassMan
Member since 2002 • 13482 Posts

@Jag85: I was just staying on point based on the OP article which was about that specific quarter. Then goal posts started getting moved and deflections thrown into the mix. Bottom line, they took a loss that quarter where the successful titles were not enough to offset the losses. However, they are a profitable company overall.