Quote:
Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES
Not sure what this cost comparison is suppose to prove? All I know is this data can be 'looked at' in different ways to prove different things..
As it is, this data can be very misleading..
For example, a bigger software team can do more in less amount of time. So for this data to really be useful you would have to take into account how many worked on it and how long it took to develop those 'games' you listed. Ill bet that none of them took 6 years like CoD has.
Also note that and a lot of those games are spending a lot of money 'creating' worlds that don't exist, the neat thing about WWII flight sims is they only have to worry about 'copying' a world that already exists. 
And as you noted marketing is included in those numbers, marketing can be a very big chunk of the pie!
With that in mind, when I look at this data, I see it as 'proof' of how small the flight sim market is in the rest of the gaming world, and not much else. |
well on the other hand, Cod supossedly has an engine made from scratch. Wich reduces de costs since buying an engine like unreal or frostbite does cost millions of dollars