Not quite sure where your getting your information from but you're a bit off on it. EA may be all about the money, what company isn't? Doesn't every company need to make a profit? Criterion is developing the console version of the game. They are also making the Vita version. Up until this point, nobody really cares about the vita one way or another. It is a global sales flop in context of the hoped for success. It needs a flagship game. Enter Criterion. They are making a version for the vita that is as close to a direct copy of the console version as possible. It's still not a direct port. It's not a high res iOS game and it is the console developer doing it because they wanted it as close to their console version and wanted it to be representative of their own product as possible. Firemonkeys is developing the iOS version. Another top end developer. But they are not making the same game design. They will still develop something hugely impressive for iOS. That's three versions in my book. The vita and iOS version will have nothing in common but the name. The vita and console will have the same overall design and experience but they are different platforms, different development, same developer. I believe each will be excellent in the context of the platform they will be on.
And your problem with basic economics is what? Why on earth would they spend tens of millions developing an open world iOS console comparable game for a market like iOS where a recent survey, up on slidetoplay, showed that the majority of iOS users are happy to pay $3 on average for a game but not more. What, do they want to lose millions of dollars at EA?
Here's why it'll never happen. http://www.slidetoplay.com/story/most-mobile-gamers-willing-to-pay-3-dollars-for-games I'd imagine if they thought people would pay enough for it for them to make a profit on it, we'd already have it.
I'm perfectly chilled. My point is about the economics of game development, particularly in relation to iOS. I'm not making an argument, I'm making a valid counter point. I would have thought that was perfectly acceptable. It's not worded or toned in an aggressive manner. $3 being considered the acceptable price point for a mobile game and wanting that game to be of equal quality to console is something that surely can't seem right to everybody.
The, "And your problem with basic economics is what?" and "Why on earth.." made it sound differently. If that wasn't the intent, then my apologies. Things can get mixed up when all we have to go by is text.
The intent behind the wording you exampled was to simply emphasise the point they were in association with, not to enflame, antagonise or to be aggressive. If they came across that way, that was most certainly not my intent.
If big budget productions don't make money on iOS why is Gameloft continuing the MC and NOVA series, with development times reaching a year and a half in the case of N3? No it's because they want a more "casual" game.
Your argument in regards to big budget productions can be made for the whole casual/core also. Seeing as there are "hardcore" games on iOS(from EA and GL, plus others), so why not this one? In the end nobody really knows what EA's reasoning is. It might be a mix of both the audience they are targeting and the cost of most iOS games.
Okay both are correct there. iOS is definitely considered to be more casual by developers and NOVA 3 did take year and a half to develop. But MC3 is considered very successful by Gameloft and it has 6 and a half million total downloads. Not that's obviously a very good number. I'll use MC3 as an example as I don't have NOVA 3 numbers to hand. So take at the $6.99 launch price, that's $45,435,000. A big number. However, that doesn't take into account the four sales its had at 99c when the biggest download numbers would have happened. So you could probably half that revenue number. Then you have development cost, marketing and much more costs, including Apple's own 30% cut of that number. So say it cost 5 million to develop, did they actually make a profit on it. Bring it down to a development cost of about 2 million or less and with the download numbers, they maybe had some chance. So suddenly profit doesn't seem quite as high as you'd think for a big budget iOS game. So it's quite natural for developers to do the big budget thing on iOS very rarely. And certainly why you won't see the 40 million plus (and i use that number very loosely as a baseline) that it costs to develop AAA console titles, the likes of NFSMW, heading in the direction of iOS.
You forget the IAP. Plenty of kids with their mom's credit card or people oozing cash out of their ears buy some. And again, if it isn't profitable to make these games then they will not be made. Clearly there is a great deal of money to be made in these big budget shooters when Gameloft has 3 entries in just this series alone and the 4th is coming soon promising to be bigger and better in every way.
Were giving it everything weve got to cram the entire PlayStation 3 game onto the Vita. The whole of Fairhaven City, all the events and modes and of course, all the cars will be squeezed onto Sonys tiny box of tricks plus a sprinkling of exclusive events just for Vita players. Because we love you. -Copied from the NFS: MW site.
Actually, you're right, I actually did forget about iap. I tend to just associate it with freemium even though its everywhere. No numbers for that. Do you think a lot would have used it though with the rank unlock system? I understand its used when it can be bought straight away, but I'd wonder would iap type of buyers put that kind of time into a game anyway. Good point though, don't know why that never occurred to me.
I didn't say anything about big budget productions not making money on iOS. What I meant is: EA is going to price the console version of NFS:MW at, for example, 50. EA mobile knows that they can't price the iOS version at 50 because no one would buy it due to the way the AppStore works. So what if make the console version for iOS and price it at 4? Everyone would buy the cheaper version (iOS) and avoid the more expensive version (console). That's why SE prices its iOS games at ~20, because if Chaos Rings, Drakerider, etc. were priced at 5 everyone would only buy their iOS games because they are cheaper but they are really cool. And that's why we get Street Fighter X Tekken and Super Street Fighter 4: Volt with less characters, stages and worse graphics than their console versions. And a large etc.
Wow, some people and their sense of self importance and downright rudeness in front of a keyboard is amazing. I wonder if their real lives are as fulfilling. Ps. The addition of touch controls might have had more to do with those that were polite and reasonable to Sam than those that behaved like a baby looking for bottle and then throwing a tantrum. Play nice or don't play at all. That attitude will not get you too far.
http://www.pocketgamer.co.uk/r/Android/Need+For+Speed:+Most+Wanted/news.asp?c=45670 Not sure if this has been posted yet, but it looks like we're finally getting a touch steering option in iOS need for speed. According to pocketgamer, it sounds pretty effective too.
