157

Suicide Squad Cost Warner Bros. $200 Million In Revenue (insider-gaming.com)

submitted 1 week ago by simple@lemm.ee to c/games@lemmy.world

34 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 37 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] AmidFuror@fedia.io 65 points 1 week ago

“Starting with Studios, the $400 million+ year-over-year decline during Q1 was primarily due to the very tough comp we faced in games against the success of Hogwart’s Legacy last year in the first quarter, in conjunction with the disappointing Suicide Squad release this past quarter, which we impaired, leading to a $200 million impact to EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortisation) during the first quarter,” CFO Gunnar Wiedenfels said during the investor call after the report was published.

This doesn't line up at all with what Insider Gaming wrote. I don't think they know how to interpret company financials.

Costing revenue itself is a questionable phrase. A game can miss its revenue target, but that's not the same thing. Here it looks like earnings were lower by $200M due in part to more than $400M lower revenue comparing to a Q1 2023, which had the Hogwarts Legacy release.

[-] Itsamelemmy@lemmy.zip 20 points 1 week ago

So basically the single player offline game made bank, but they keep pushing this live service crap thinking it's going to be the next GTA online and not what 90% of the live service crap ends up being.

[-] BigPotato@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. One in ten isn't bad odds.

[-] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 17 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Alana Pierce has a great take on this. Her pount is that all games are a risk, but live service has a chance at infinite upside.

Suits dont give a shit about anything but risk/reward, so live service always seems like the right choice to them, even if 99% of them bomb.

[-] slaacaa@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

This is a very good point. It also shows the delusion of the executives, thinking that their next shitty looter shooter will become the new Fortnite, not understanding the oversaturation of the market. People have limited hours to play per day, the only way they can play your game is if they stop playing something else.

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

That's the thought process, and it's also what's going to bring a lot of these companies down. Their shitty game isn't going to beat the odds when all the other shitty games are also being pushed. Their chance of success and potential return figures are likely off by a large margin.

Edit: For example, Overwatch, which has actually hit the mainstream and has a fairly large player base, I think still isn't profitable.

[-] skulblaka@startrek.website 1 points 1 week ago

I think it was profitable, at one point, up until the bait and switch that was Overwatch 2.

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Yeah, I think the first few years were profitable (excluding Overwatch League), but OW2 for sure hasn't been. I don't think OW1 was by the end either.

They had no way to make more money and it was a one time purchase. The switch to OW2 sucks, and it was exploitative as fuck and full of lies, but they did need some form of continuous revenue stream. It just wasn't the greedy way they went about it, pushing everyone away.

[-] lorty@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 week ago

If it costs 200 million to take a shot, maybe it isn't great odds.

[-] BigPotato@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

If you've got a market cap of three trillion and the investors expect three trillion plus one next quarter, can you afford to risk it?

[-] slaacaa@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Good demonstration of the current quality of journalism. “Cost X in revenue” doesn’t make any sense, as cost and revenue are the exact opposite things, the difference of which (if I simplify) make up the EBITDA that the quote from the company actually referenced for the 200 M USD negative impact.

I’m not expecting a game journalist be an ACCA certified accountant, but should be at least able to write an accurate title based on the available quotes and information.

[-] simple@lemm.ee 50 points 1 week ago

Something something reap what you sow

[-] Alteon@lemmy.world 29 points 1 week ago

Yeah, they really went in hard with Suicide Squad, to be perfectly frank, the only good thing to come out of suicide squad was the Peacemaker show on HBO.

[-] BossDj@lemm.ee 14 points 1 week ago

Best intro EVER

[-] BertramDitore@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

DO YA REALLY WANNA DO YA REALLY WANNA TASTE IIIIT!

I just watched it twice in a row, thank you very much.

[-] Eeyore_Syndrome@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

🇳🇴🤘🎸

The Original Wig Wam:

[-] BossDj@lemm.ee 2 points 1 week ago

Thanks, I'd never seen that! It's pretty glorious itself

[-] Sphks@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 week ago

And Barbie. What a spin-off !

[-] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

And The Suicide Squad.

[-] snooggums@midwest.social 6 points 1 week ago

The Suicide Squad.

[-] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Oof, thank you

[-] Cruxifux@feddit.nl 3 points 1 week ago

Yeah. Sucks they aren’t even planning on starting production on season 2 till 2025

[-] Etterra@lemmy.world 22 points 1 week ago

If only every live service game and technology suffered the same fate. Also p2w.

[-] Protoknuckles@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago

So far.

[-] Stovetop@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

Lesson learned: there can be no good Suicide Squad title unless prefixed by "The".

[-] GlitterInfection@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Fun fact, The Suicide Squad (2021) was a box office flop, whereas Suicide Squad (2016), the only academy award winning DCEU film, was a box office smash hit!