• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

WB Again Blames Suicide Squad For 41% Revenue Drop Year-on-Year

tkscz

tkscz

Member
DEI wasn't even the biggest issue with the game. The heads of WB thought the best idea for the game was to jump on the GaaS looter shooter bandwagon of the time, even though the majority of GaaS games were failing, including the opposing Avengers GaaS from Square. The game is boring. After about three hours in, you've pretty much seen everything. The numbers going up stop being a good reason to continue playing. Most people dropped the game well before reaching the end, we saw it in real time on Steam.

DEI was an issue with the story. It became obvious how the story was going when the only member of the Justice League too powerful to be controlled was Wonder Woman. It wasn't enough to defeat and kill the other members but to humiliate them in such a way and think fans of the property would enjoy that is only something DEI writers would think who want to "deconstruct" characters. Then the DLC story doubles down on these decisions and if no one wanted them in the main game, they sure as hell aren't going to pay for more.
 
EDMIX

EDMIX

Writes a lot, says very little
tkscz said:
DEI wasn't even the biggest issue with the game. The heads of WB thought the best idea for the game was to jump on the GaaS looter shooter bandwagon of the time, even though the majority of GaaS games were failing, including the opposing Avengers GaaS from Square. The game is boring. After about three hours in, you've pretty much seen everything. The numbers going up stop being a good reason to continue playing. Most people dropped the game well before reaching the end, we saw it in real time on Steam.

DEI was an issue with the story. It became obvious how the story was going when the only member of the Justice League too powerful to be controlled was Wonder Woman. It wasn't enough to defeat and kill the other members but to humiliate them in such a way and think fans of the property would enjoy that is only something DEI writers would think who want to "deconstruct" characters. Then the DLC story doubles down on these decisions and if no one wanted them in the main game, they sure as hell aren't going to pay for more.
Click to expand...


This.


The majority don't know what DEI is and don't care lol The biggest issue with this game is it seeking to be a GaaS type game, from a IP and team simply not known for this. Majority simply wanted some single player type game. So this combination of trying to make it some GaaS from a fanbase expecting some deep singleplayer type comic book story was a disaster in the making.

I liked its first trailer. I was like "oh cool, I guess we play the bad guys"

Then find out later its GaaS

Annnnnnd time to ignore.

Never cared about any DEI stuff, didn't play it so don't know what the story is and don't care, don't care about the DLC, don't care about anyone's opinions on agendas or anything of the sort.

It means I'm already gone before any fot that stuff is talked about cause you FIRST have to even like GaaS to even care about the following. I think gamers simply don't care about such concepts for online MP ideals. Look at Spiderman success or even the Batman series for Rocksteady prior to this.

Its original medium is comic books, something where a story is being told, fans have this idea of wanting to live out those experiences in a format seeking to tell a single player type story. The moment you say "GaaS" they have already left the room lol
 
Last edited:
Rentahamster

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
They ran out of GaaS.

harley quinn rimshot GIF
 
Salz01

Salz01

Member
I just want to know if somebody got fired. Or a group of people that were responsible for the decision. People should have seen this coming months ago, if not years ago.
 
rabbity-thing

rabbity-thing

Member
tkscz said:
It wasn't enough to defeat and kill the other members but to humiliate them in such a way and think fans of the property would enjoy that is only something DEI writers would think who want to "deconstruct" characters.
Click to expand...
Character deconstruction has led to some of the finest comics stories ever written. A lot of comic book fans really aren't bothered by seeing their favorite characters dragged through the mud since they have seen so many different takes on them over the years. Superman as a god. Superman as a regular guy. Superman as a government tool. Superman as an overpowered alien fascist dictator. Superman as a guy with a mullet. Honestly, it's hard for me to imagine someone growing up consuming a large amount of comics media actually caring about something as trivial as a bad take on a specific character or universe. We've seen it before. We'll see it again. It's not a big deal.
 
H

Hypereides

Gold Member
diffusionx said:
Uc1p02N.jpeg
Click to expand...
These executives are lucky most investors and shareholders don't have a finger on the pulse to know its hot air. They've gotten way too comfortable with the marketing folks handling and fixing this predicament for them.

DryvBy said:
Quit hiring the usual suspects for game devs and hire talented people that enjoy fun. Maybe start and interview with how said person feels about Communism? Are all games political? Just stuff like that and if they answer positively on either or more, just stop the interview and sue them for wasting your time.
Click to expand...
Honestly, this would be a great initiative. It would filter out the most egregious candidates straight out of the gate.

RoboFu said:
No one wanted that game but worse is they didn't listen to when gamers said it was crap when first shown.
Click to expand...
None, if not very few, of these execs and suits play video games themselves. The "coke barons" have gotten comfortable with not "tasting" their own merchandise. Its about time they revise that.

If the management (e.g. executives, c-suites) don't even play-test their own video game products themselves, then how can/should anyone trust the company on delivering anything worth of quality?
 
Last edited:
N30RYU

N30RYU

Member
Thankfully the problem when you go woke to end being broke... is that tou won't only go woke... you also become a shell of what you were before 'cause the good devs will go away
 
Last edited:
laynelane

laynelane

Member
That decision to focus on GaaS over AAA games is really working out for them. Aside from that, it's been interesting watching the reception of all these games made for the mythical "modern audience". It's just unfortunate that the clueless decisions made by execs often cost the jobs of the people lower than them in the hierarchy.
 
EDMIX

EDMIX

Writes a lot, says very little
Salz01 said:
I just want to know if somebody got fired. Or a group of people that were responsible for the decision. People should have seen this coming months ago, if not years ago.
Click to expand...
I mean, I personally feel the whole GaaS thing with a concept that makes more sense as single player isn't really a thing to fire over.

It sucks

I didn't buy it (i don't really know who did on here, maybe someone can tell us more about the game)

either way, I don't know if I feel this is enough to fire. We bitch about so many um "copy and paste" games from EA and Ubisoft, someone does something different and we bitch about that too?

Let say going forward they just do Arkham Batman single player shit, Batman Beyond single player shit, Joker single player shit where you play a bad guy and he killing citizens lol If that happens, can someone see just WHY those big AAA publishers tend to go with proven concepts vs take risk?

Cause I feel strongly, that in alternate universe where instead of Rocksteady's flop with this we got Batman Arkham Knight 2 : Joker Returns, Batman Beyond : Enter da Mcginnis etc people would just be bitching about them just doing those single player games like "I just want to know if somebody got fired for them playing it safe and copy and paste"

I'm not saying this is a great game, this is a game I'm puzzled at who the fuck its for lol

I'm saying maybe even with the flop, we can at least respect they tried to do something different, in a industry this community and gaming in general seems to frown on a IP continuing the same path
 
Seyken

Seyken

Member
What genuinely baffles me is how this idea ever made it out of the paper. If you want to make a GaaS game with DC characters and Rocksteady at the helm, who the hell thought the goddamn Suicide Squad was the path?

Gotham Knights is something that I can look at and think "yeah, I understand what they were thinking and going for there, even if it didn't ultimately succeed". This one is just unbelievable levels of bad decisions anywhere you look.
 
StreetsofBeige

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
Game was junk from the beginning.

I dont even know anything about Suicide Squad aside from it's a B or C tier superhero group and Harley Quinn is in it. And going by the first gameplay trailers, it was a shooter where everyone shoots waves of soldiers and enemy vehicles with purple weak spot blobs, which is exactly the same as shooting orange ones in Lost Planet. How many people want to play superheroes shooting assault rifles? Why would an enemy chopper have a giant purple spot to shoot at?

As for anyone asking why focus so much money and attention on a SS game? Well, it was probably WB's best guess at a GAAS cast of characters they could milk with mtx.

Making a Batman game like 10 years ago only goes so far as a GAAS game. For most gamers, they'd probably buy none even if available since it's a SP focused game with him in the same black costume all game so you dont need mtx junk. You cant lock batarangs and grappling hooks behind an mtx paywall either. You need him to have his gear available. And I dont see how a competitive MP mode would work either. So a Batman game as a GAAS model wont work.

WB took one look at that model and said forget about tried and true SP sales for a well received franchise, since there's going to be a sales cap of xxxx copies sold. Lets roll the dice on SS GAAS and hope it can parlay into years of mtx cash flow.
 
Last edited:
yazenov

yazenov

Member
laynelane said:
That decision to focus on GaaS over AAA games is really working out for them. Aside from that, it's been interesting watching the reception of all these games made for the mythical "modern audience". It's just unfortunate that the clueless decisions made by execs often cost the jobs of the people lower than them in the hierarchy.
Click to expand...

That is the result when you live in an echo chamber where you think the "modern audience" is the majority, whereas, in reality, they are the vocal minority on X and REEE that don't even buy games. They are loser activists who do not care about the games and just want to send "the message" / agenda.

Now reality hits them hard where they are most vulnerable (their wallets). This should hopefully wake them the fuck up after they are broke looking for a new job after the inevitable layoffs.

Make games for most of their audiences, instead of the vocal minority on X. Profit? Its a simple concept. Cater to the majority.
 
The artful mincer

The artful mincer

Member
Can someone explain to me how this game lost them $200 million?

Is it as simple as this game cost 300 to 400 million to develop and the game has only generated about 100 to 200 million so far? Or something more complex than that?
 
yazenov

yazenov

Member
The artful mincer said:
Can someone explain to me how this game lost them $200 million?

Is it as simple as this game cost 300 to 400 million to develop and the game has only generated about 100 to 200 million so far? Or something more complex than that?
Click to expand...

  1. Development costs (overheads). The game took a long time to develop, several years worth of salaries, rent, and utility bills to pay, and was in development hell I presume.
  2. Advertisement costs, including shills salaries, "influencers", and Twitter bots)
  3. Sweet Baby INC. consultation costs 💩
  4. Royalty fees from using the Batman IP, I think it is a different department so they still need to get paid for audit purposes)
  5. Development and maintenance cost and server cost after the game launched ( GAAS)
  6. Bank finance costs, Principal, and interest.

It's a GAAS game so it will be a continued loss unless they cut their losses, shut it down completely, and stop the DLC and additional content.
 
Last edited:
Shake Your Rump

Shake Your Rump

Member
stn said:
All they had to do was make a Suicide Squad game that was strictly single-player and not based on GAAS.
Click to expand...
You have to look from their perspective. Creating a single-player game is like buying a stock market index fund. Yes, it will make money at a fixed rate, but that is not good enough. Creating a GaaS is like buying stock market options: you have a big chance of losing money, but a chance of making a lot of money.

This is what interests investors and executives. These games aren’t created to be good games. This is just another form of gambling.
 
Last edited:
LordCBH

LordCBH

Member
Seyken said:
What genuinely baffles me is how this idea ever made it out of the paper. If you want to make a GaaS game with DC characters and Rocksteady at the helm, who the hell thought the goddamn Suicide Squad was the path?

Gotham Knights is something that I can look at and think "yeah, I understand what they were thinking and going for there, even if it didn't ultimately succeed". This one is just unbelievable levels of bad decisions anywhere you look.
Click to expand...

At least Gotham Knights was an ok game if you got it for $10 like I did. Great? Hell naw. But for $10 it’s pretty fun. I got SS free when they did the prime day thing a couple weeks ago and uninstalled after the first two mission. It’s not even good free lol
 
E

Evil Calvin

Afraid of Boobs
1. Focus on single-player games
2. Only the top GAAS games succeed and make good money. Don't go all in on one of these as your 'make or break' games.
3. Suicide Squad sucks. They aren't even super heroes. Legion of Super Heroes or JLA would have made more sense.
 
Last edited:
StreetsofBeige

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
Shake Your Rump said:
You have to look from their perspective. Creating a single-player game is like buying a stock market index fund. Yes, it will make money at a fixed rate, but that is not good enough. Creating a GaaS is like buying stock market options: you have a big chance of losing money, but a chance of making a lot of money.

This is what interests investors and executives. These games aren’t created to be good games. This is just another form of gambling.
Click to expand...
I'd also add the game makers didnt themselves any favours either. If management pushed a GAAS game that explains that part. But I dont think any suit and tie exec sitting on the 50th floor at WB head office is telling them to make a shooter game zipping around rooftop to rooftop like Spiderman shooting anything purple.

I do have to say that skimming SS videos (or the one someone posted a month or two ago compiling all cut scene kills), anything to do with cut scenes seems very well done in terms of production values.
 
Last edited:
Heimdall_Xtreme

Heimdall_Xtreme

Hermen Hulst Fanclub's #1 Member
The game is not to blame. It's the fault of that mediocre WB company for wanting to release it like this.
 
MadchesterManc

MadchesterManc

Member
LordCBH said:
At least Gotham Knights was an ok game if you got it for $10 like I did. Great? Hell naw. But for $10 it’s pretty fun. I got SS free when they did the prime day thing a couple weeks ago and uninstalled after the first two mission. It’s not even good free lol
Click to expand...

Almost the same for me. CDKeys had Gotham Knights for like £4.49 a while back so I picked it up, and Suicide Squad was free with Prime. I gave Suicide Squad a decent crack of the whip, but after about 4 hours I'd had enough. It was just boring as hell with naff combat. Worse than Gotham Knights. I still have Gotham Knights installed as its alright for a quick bash as Batgirl every so often
 
tkscz

tkscz

Member
rabbity-thing said:
Character deconstruction has led to some of the finest comics stories ever written. A lot of comic book fans really aren't bothered by seeing their favorite characters dragged through the mud since they have seen so many different takes on them over the years. Superman as a god. Superman as a regular guy. Superman as a government tool. Superman as an overpowered alien fascist dictator. Superman as a guy with a mullet. Honestly, it's hard for me to imagine someone growing up consuming a large amount of comics media actually caring about something as trivial as a bad take on a specific character or universe. We've seen it before. We'll see it again. It's not a big deal.
Click to expand...
Yes, we have but not the average joe and janes who only watch animated series or movies. Those people have never or rarely get to see that imagery and make up the majority of fans these days. To them, seeing the Flash get pissed on or the Batman death scene was disheartening. It wasn't that they were evil or died, but how disrespectful it felt to people who cherish these characters. While I agree that character deconstruction can get use some great stories, lately it's not done that. Like all writing tools, character deconstruction can go very very wrong in the wrong writer's hands.
 
Cyberpunkd

Cyberpunkd

Member
Hero of Spielberg said:
I would love to be a fly on the wall in a board meeting and watch one of these weasels talk around the elephant in the room about why nobody wants to play their game. It would be equal parts hilarious as fascinating
Click to expand...
They will not, everyone will avoid giving strong opinions because it will cost them their job.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Warner Bros CEO: "Suicide Squad Release was a disappointment"
Sales-Age 2 3
118
7K
Angry_Megalodon replied
Rocksteady hit by layoffs after Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League underperforms
2 3
131
8K
Drew1440 replied
Intel Announces Q3 2024 Financial Results: Revenue of $13.3 Billion and Net Loss of $16.6 Billion
Business 2
73
4K
Ironman_Bad replied
Bloomberg: Behind ‘Suicide Squad,’ the Year’s Biggest Video-Game Flop
2 3
143
9K
MALpractice311 replied
Alan Wake 2 is still not profitable | Other Remedy Financial Reports (approx 80% of costs recouped)
Sales-Age 4 5 6 7 8
357
17K
MrTroubleMaker replied
Top Bottom