• 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.

Sony paid $3.5 million to make ARK: Survival Evolved a March PS Plus game.

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
This should be a good rough idea of the kind of money these companies pay to bring games to their services.

Additional note: Ark 2 will remain on game pass for at least 3 years after launch and Ark 1 has also extended the deal "perpetually" i-e indefinitely, to stay on the service.


Feu0Ug8WAAMGvfj
 
Last edited:

anthony2690

Banned
Is this even a good game?
It's genuinely awful.
Well in my opinion atleast, tried it on Xbox one early access thought it was absolutely unplayable, deleted it.

Mildly curious to see if it was playable on series X now, and very quickly uninstalled it just looks and plays awful.

People love it, and I'm not going to tell them they shouldn't.

But some people love being shat on too, so yeah 🤷‍♂️
 

Dr.Morris79

Member
It's genuinely awful.
Well in my opinion atleast, tried it on Xbox one early access thought it was absolutely unplayable, deleted it.

Mildly curious to see if it was playable on series X now, and very quickly uninstalled it just looks and plays awful.

People love it, and I'm not going to tell them they shouldn't.

But some people love being shat on too, so yeah 🤷‍♂️
I got suckered into it, quite badly, on my own, for hours.

It's hard as nails but there is quite a good'ish game there, buried in the pain.
 
Last edited:

Zathalus

Member
Considering Gamepass made 2.9 billion dollars last year if this is the price it costs for Ark (and 600k for Cooking Simulator) it seems extremely unlikely that subscription services are not profitable.

Even more for PS Plus as that has a even larger user base.
 

Kvally

Banned
Considering Gamepass made 2.9 billion dollars last year if this is the price it costs for Ark (and 600k for Cooking Simulator) it seems extremely unlikely that subscription services are not profitable.

Even more for PS Plus as that has a even larger user base.
PS Plus =\= Game Pass
 
Considering Gamepass made 2.9 billion dollars last year if this is the price it costs for Ark (and 600k for Cooking Simulator) it seems extremely unlikely that subscription services are not profitable.

Even more for PS Plus as that has a even larger user base.

Do you think MS would pay the same for a survival indie game like this as they would a AAA title on day one on their GamePass service?

You're also forgetting the server infrastructure and service marketing costs.

That said, there's still a fair chance they are profitable.
 

Mephisto40

Member
Do you think MS would pay the same for a survival indie game like this as they would a AAA title on day one on their GamePass service?

You're also forgetting the server infrastructure and service marketing costs.

That said, there's still a fair chance they are profitable.
The only AAA day one games that come to gamepass are microsoft published games, so they probably don't have to pay that much to the developers to put them on the service tbh, if anything
 

Fbh

Member
I don't get the gamepass number for Ark 2.
Is that what they are paying to have Ark 1 for a month? for six months? for the whole 3 years?

Because assuming it's a $60 game that seems really low. Even taking away the 30% cut from the vendor $2.3 mill is the equivalent of 55k sales which isn't much for a popular IP. Unless of course the game is full of microtransactions.
 

EDMIX

Member
It's a jank ass game but there's a huge market for 'survival' games like this I guess.

Agreed, I don't really get it as I don't like the game, but someone does.

Its one of those games I wish was around 25 years ago when I was at the age of giving a fuck lol A part of me is jealous of what them kids get to play after school lol
 

octiny

Banned
so additional 1 mil to permanently keep the game in PS Plus library?
Seems like a better deal for Sony and for the players.

Ark launched on GP long before this at the height of it's popularity, 18 months beforehand. Are they even comparable at this point? That's like boasting about only having to pay $20 on a formerly $60 game w/ the small caveat that you'd have to wait 2 years to play it.

That said, ARK on GP includes all the DLC over the years (Ultimate Survivor Edition). Does the PS+ version have that or is that how they sucker you in like when they gave it away for free on Epic & Steam?

Context matters.
 
Last edited:

Chukhopops

Member
Pretty sure both platform holders get that money back (and then some) via their MTX cut on the players who get sucked in.

That kind of deal is a no brainer for any sub service.
 
Why courting this developer? Wasn't the first Ark barely okay? Vin Diesel's model is worth all these millions being thrown by both companies to host the game? Life is a mystery...
 

solidus12

Member
Waste of money if you ask me, you could have developed a PS1/PS2/PS3 emulator that reads discs and put in on PS store for like 40 - 50 bucks...
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Why courting this developer? Wasn't the first Ark barely okay? Vin Diesel's model is worth all these millions being thrown by both companies to host the game? Life is a mystery...

Folks on this forum probably don't like it, but the game very likely does gangbuster numbers and leads to a lot of DLC sale.

Why else would both MS and Sony throw millions to keep the game on their services.
 
Top Bottom