Call of Duty : Modern Warfare 2 takes $bn dollars
13/01/10 16:22 Filed in: Personal | Technology
I read on the BBC news site (for want of a better description) that Activisions excellent Call of Duty : Modern Warfare 2 has taken $1bn so far. You might remember it took $550 million in the first five days, which is pretty good going.
The unknown written on the BBC points out that this is pretty close to movie hits Titanic ($1.8bn), not to mention Avatar.
However, we are told, direct comparisons can't be made because essentially the 'ticket' price is three times higher for the games than the films.
This is true, but all a classic case of the lack of journalism I've come to expect from the BBC these days.
Sure, it costs three times the price. But the average gaming experience (one player) is expected to be around 6-8 hours. So that's three to four times the duration of entertainment.
But the most obvious way in which you cannot compare the two is in production costs. With estimates of production costs for Avatar running from $250-280 million I find it very unlikely that Activition spent more than a tenth of that on COD6. Then you've got advertising. I'm betting that total promotion for Avatar is going to be around $50m. Making the total spend in the $300m range. Making a profit of $700m.
Meanwhile, Call of Duty 6 : Modern Warfare 2 (Manchester United 1) made $500m profit in the first week and can only have made even more as it went on.
Games like Call of Duty represent the maxim of games production in turns of production cost and values. This is a game with a cast of "known" people (if only when you see their faces). Call of Duty 5 : World At War (Average) had Keifer Sutherland and Gary Oldman in it for gods sake!
The unknown written on the BBC points out that this is pretty close to movie hits Titanic ($1.8bn), not to mention Avatar.
However, we are told, direct comparisons can't be made because essentially the 'ticket' price is three times higher for the games than the films.
This is true, but all a classic case of the lack of journalism I've come to expect from the BBC these days.
Sure, it costs three times the price. But the average gaming experience (one player) is expected to be around 6-8 hours. So that's three to four times the duration of entertainment.
But the most obvious way in which you cannot compare the two is in production costs. With estimates of production costs for Avatar running from $250-280 million I find it very unlikely that Activition spent more than a tenth of that on COD6. Then you've got advertising. I'm betting that total promotion for Avatar is going to be around $50m. Making the total spend in the $300m range. Making a profit of $700m.
Meanwhile, Call of Duty 6 : Modern Warfare 2 (Manchester United 1) made $500m profit in the first week and can only have made even more as it went on.
Games like Call of Duty represent the maxim of games production in turns of production cost and values. This is a game with a cast of "known" people (if only when you see their faces). Call of Duty 5 : World At War (Average) had Keifer Sutherland and Gary Oldman in it for gods sake!