Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
54,487
16,567




At the beginning of this year, Epic Games announced it had made $30 million in revenue from its Infinity Blade series of iOS games. Now, Epic CEO Tim Sweeney says Infinity Blade is its most profitable game, in terms of resources invested versus revenue.

NewImage31.png


"The most profitable game we've ever made, in terms of man years invested versus revenue, is actually Infinity Blade. It's more profitable than Gears of War."

This is why Sweeney believes that future growth will be fueled by free-to-play. "Nowadays the high end of the game business is in these console game," he says. "Activision invests almost $100 million per year in Call of Duty." And who can realistically afford to do that? At the same time, he notes that Epic has been "very very surprised to see how fast smartphone and tablet devices are improving."
Infinity Blade 2 was launched last year at the iPhone 4S introduction. Infinity Blade Dungeons, a prequel to the first two games, was previewed at E3 2012 and is expected to launch later this year.

Article Link: Infinity Blade Delivered Epic's Best Return on Investment
 

hkenneth

macrumors regular
Jul 25, 2011
245
23
This proves to me that in just a matter of years, game consoles will be almost obsolete.

I deeply doubt that in just a matter of years, there will be any possibility for portable devices to provide the same level of graphic acceleration as SLI or Crossfire. Unless Nvidia wanna kill themselves or Apple is able to "innovate" their own superior GPU (which Intel tried so hard but still can't).
 

Aidan5806

macrumors 6502
Feb 20, 2012
312
0
If I'm not mistaken, Dungeons was also previewed at the New iPad keynote where the CEO of Epic Games stated that Dungeons was supposed to be released in May.
 

Ryth

macrumors 68000
Apr 21, 2011
1,591
156
This proves to me that in just a matter of years, game consoles will be almost obsolete.

They won't be obsolete, but the advantage of the iPad is that the mobile tech is catching up to the desktop tech and has the advantage of being updated every year, where a console/desktop is updated ever 5-7 years.

But he is right, you cannot run a multi-million dollar game investment anymore...the returns just arent there for literally everyone but a select few.
 

hkenneth

macrumors regular
Jul 25, 2011
245
23
They won't be obsolete, but the advantage of the iPad is that the mobile tech is catching up to the desktop tech and has the advantage of being updated every year, where a console/desktop is updated ever 5-7 years.

But he is right, you cannot run a multi-million dollar game investment anymore...the returns just arent there for literally everyone but a select few.

I think iPad together with those casual games created a new game market nitch for those consumers who don't play hardcore multi-million dollar invested games. But those who used to play hardcore 3d games will still insist on the original platform.

Just like the iPhone CPU is as robust as the CPU used to launch Apollo 11 does not mean NASA will use iPhone to launch their spacecrafts.
 

seanm9

macrumors regular
Dec 29, 2007
143
0
Cape Cod, MA
I think iPad together with those casual games created a new game market nitch for those consumers who don't play hardcore multi-million dollar invested games. But those who used to play hardcore 3d games will still insist on the original platform.

Just like the iPhone CPU is as robust as the CPU used to launch Apollo 11 does not mean NASA will use iPhone to launch their spacecrafts.

that's the thing as portable game devices get better so does what you can do with a console... i mean i love my ipad/iphone for gaming as time wasters... but for real gaming give me a console or computer... if you think of the power they pack into an iPad... think of the power that is available if you scale up the size to be the size of an Xbox360/PS3.. handheld gaming is growing so quickly right now becasue it was pretty lame in the past and could only get better... it will hit a wall fairly quickly where you can't shrink the insides anymore and cant get more power with out generating too much heat... as in melting plastics or metal cases scorching your skin...


I think that the iphone CPU is much more robust that what launched the Apollo rockets... Apollo tech level was probably closer to an S/E 30

;)
 

Skika

macrumors 68030
Mar 11, 2009
2,997
1,245
that's the thing as portable game devices get better so does what you can do with a console... i mean i love my ipad/iphone for gaming as time wasters... but for real gaming give me a console or computer... if you think of the power they pack into an iPad... think of the power that is available if you scale up the size to be the size of an Xbox360/PS3.. handheld gaming is growing so quickly right now becasue it was pretty lame in the past and could only get better... it will hit a wall fairly quickly where you can't shrink the insides anymore and cant get more power with out generating too much heat... as in melting plastics or metal cases scorching your skin...


I think that the iphone CPU is much more robust that what launched the Apollo rockets... Apollo tech level was probably closer to an S/E 30

;)

I agree with you. I mean i absolutely love my iOS devices for gaming because they are always with me, and they actually provide a nice gaming experience, especially the iPad. But i wouldn't trade my PS3 for them. I need physical buttons and big budget games with more advanced controlling scheme.

I think they both have a place and can co-exist with each other.
 

LethalWolfe

macrumors G3
Jan 11, 2002
9,368
119
Los Angeles
Activision can dump $100mil annually into the CoD/MW series because the games generate BILLIONS of dollars in revenue every release. At least the last three or four versions have generated hundreds of millions of dollars on launch day alone. MW2 set a single day entertainment sales record, Black Ops broke that record, MW3 broke Black Ops' record and I wouldn't be surprised if MW3's record gets broken this fall.

Now, can everyone have sales numbers like these? Of course not, but there is obviously still a place for big budget games like CoD/MW just like there is a place for big budget movies even though cat videos on YouTube get millions of views.


Lethal
 

Earendil

macrumors 68000
Oct 27, 2003
1,549
0
Washington
This proves to me that in just a matter of years, game consoles will be almost obsolete.

I think I know what you meant to say, but you didn't quite say it :)

They won't be obsolete, but the advantage of the iPad is that the mobile tech is catching up to the desktop tech and has the advantage of being updated every year, where a console/desktop is updated ever 5-7 years.

I think iPad together with those casual games created a new game market nitch for those consumers who don't play hardcore multi-million dollar invested games.

that's the thing as portable game devices get better so does what you can do with a console... i mean i love my ipad/iphone for gaming as time wasters... but for real gaming give me a console or computer...

I agree with you. I mean i absolutely love my iOS devices for gaming because they are always with me, and they actually provide a nice gaming experience, especially the iPad. But i wouldn't trade my PS3 for them. I need physical buttons and big budget games with more advanced controlling scheme.

I think they both have a place and can co-exist with each other.

Let me give my take, you guys let me know if this is what you are all trying to say :)

In years long past, if you wanted to play an electronic game, you had to buy a dedicated electronic device. Computers came along, and stole a percentage of those people that wanted to play games, but to play "new" high end games, your hardware still had to be on the absolute cutting edge. Often times games couldn't even be maxed with current hardware. What all of that produced though, is that every last electronic gamer was on only a handful of platforms and tech, because all software required cutting edge hardware.

Whether you were a casual gamer, hardcore gamer, first person shooter, RPG, simple games, complex games, it didn't matter, you either had a console, or a desktop computer. The same device that was the best at playing solitaire, was also the best one for playing Doom.

Now though, the number of platforms available for gaming is large, and becoming more niche. The result of this is that the next console released can't count on a casual gamer buying an expensive console so that they can do casual gaming. Other aspects of a persons life entice people into having smart phones, which means they HAVE casual games. Those gamers are satisfied. Why would a satisfied gamer go buy a console? Or the newest Graphics Card? Or a high end desktop computer?

The big question is not whether a gaming platform will have a smaller percentage of the pie moving forward, they inevitably will. The question is whether they know how to survive with a smaller piece, and if they can cater to their core audience. Consoles won't be obsolete, but they will be more niche than they have in the past. Desktop computers won't be obsolete, but they will be more niche.

I think the electronic gaming industry has survived so far because even though the amount of pie each platform took home was less and less, the influx of new gamers was growing even faster. I would expect the pace of growth in the next 10 years to slow, and for the gaming industry to mature even more. The sign of a mature industry is not a single do-it-all platform, but a specific tool that caters to an intentional customer base.

Of all the ways that people can check their email in todays world, people choose the tools that work for them. You can't stick all gamers under the same electronic roof any easier than you can all those that send email. Gamers will pick up the device that gives them the experience they desire. The console market can no longer count on the casual gamer picking up a console.
 

balconycollapse

macrumors regular
Aug 7, 2003
210
94
Ames, IA
Is it just me or are there a mess of games that people tend to buy just to show their device off to friends but aren't really all that fun? I feel like this game is one of those eye candy titles. Some want to play the game not the graphic. Listen to the music and not the speakers. But for some the graphics are more satisfying then the game.
 

Earendil

macrumors 68000
Oct 27, 2003
1,549
0
Washington
Is it just me or are there a mess of games that people tend to buy just to show their device off to friends but aren't really all that fun? I feel like this game is one of those eye candy titles. Some want to play the game not the graphic. Listen to the music and not the speakers. But for some the graphics are more satisfying then the game.

Selling entertainment based on a few eye popping graphics, but without any real content? Say it aint so!

Actually, I burned a lot of hours on infinity blade when I played it on my iPhone 4G. I bought the next one for my "new" iPad half for the visuals, but half because I expected to get the same amount of game play out of it. I didn't though, and I now just use it to show off my iPad ;-)
 

dasmb

macrumors 6502
Jul 12, 2007
293
226
that's the thing as portable game devices get better so does what you can do with a console... i mean i love my ipad/iphone for gaming as time wasters... but for real gaming give me a console or computer... if you think of the power they pack into an iPad... think of the power that is available if you scale up the size to be the size of an Xbox360/PS3..

See, while this is true, the problem is that the quality of games does not scale with the quality of hardware. The reason is simple: as gaming hardware improves, so do gaming expectations. The visual assets of a game take a long time to design and to produce and require skilled creatives; bump up the pixel count, and you bump up the level of detail requirements, and you bump up the time needed to create an acceptably detailed model. At the same time, fewer people are buying high end gaming consoles and high end games. So you have higher development costs and lower sales potential...what can you do? Make a shorter game, make a game that doesn't live up to its promise or charge more for the game.

Infinity Blade is, in essence, a short game that re-uses visual assets in a way that allows for extended playability. Hence it's very profitable, even at a measly $5 per copy.
 

Lordskelic

macrumors regular
Nov 3, 2010
115
0
Texas
Lol, I hate how on the internet if you don't phrase things correctly, people take stuff the wrong way. What I meant was more along the lines of in a few years, game consoles will really start feeling the heat from mobile devices.
 

StrudelTurnover

macrumors regular
Feb 25, 2008
125
0
Well, one of those dollars is a bag of coins I didn't get because the app crashed after processing payment.

If you go to Apple's website it says the merchant is responsible for in-app fulfillment.

If you go to Epic's website it says Apple is responsible for errors in payment processing.

:( I decided not to give either of them a third dollar.
 

sunspot42

macrumors regular
Aug 7, 2007
121
3
Big Trouble Ahead For Console Gaming

Mobile devices aren't just disrupting the computer market, they're going to destroy the existing console model as well. Here's why:

Microsoft spent something like $30 billion - with a "b" - developing and launching the Xbox and Xbox 360. They've yet to come anywhere close to making back that initial investment (although they are finally making money quarter to quarter on the business, after about a decade of consistent losses). So from a business sense, consoles were already a dud. Microsoft incinerated a vast fortune on the business and managed to come in third overall behind Sony in the first generation and Nintendo in the second. In fact the only company that's made big money off of gaming hardware in the past 5 years was Nintendo, and that's because they did it cheap and appealed to casual gamers.

Well, mobile devices are going to destroy that final profitable business model for console hardware. Because pretty soon just about everybody is gonna own a mobile device capable of playing decent casual games, and they'll be carrying it wherever they go. Mobile is convenient, ubiquitous, and the titles are uniformly cheap. I don't see Sony or Microsoft or Nintendo sinking tens of billions into launching the next generation of consoles, and if they do there's gonna be a bloodbath because they aren't going to draw the kind of casual gamers we know the consoles need to be remotely profitable.

On the other hand, if they don't spend billions developing and subsidizing awesome new hardware there's gonna be a different kind of bloodbath, because hardcore gamers - the guys the studios count on to spend big bucks on big complicated titles - will start to migrate to the PC if next-gen consoles can't offer a superior experience. Which they won't if Microsoft and Sony skimp on the hardware. That means studios will lose money developing software for these new consoles, which means they'll stop releasing titles, and that in turn will motivate customers - hardcore and casual both - to look elsewhere for their gaming fix. It's a vicious circle.

PC prices meanwhile will continue their downward trajectory, putting additional price and performance pressure on the console manufacturers. They'll be squeezed from below by mobile, and from above - and not very far above, either - by the PC. Why spend $300 on a console when you can get a PC with similar - or in a year or two even better - graphics for $100 more?

The gaming business as we've known it for the past couple of decades is about to be hopelessly disrupted by the mobile revolution. The same sort of thing happened back in the early '80s, when the price of a decent home computer fell down into the same range as the price of a game console, while offering better graphics and cheaper software. Atari, Coleco, Mattel and a host of other industry heavyweights all imploded as a result, along with a bunch of software makers. Look for Microsoft (at least their gaming business), Sony and Nintendo to suffer a similar fate.
 

darkplanets

macrumors 6502a
Nov 6, 2009
853
0
Yet even with all of that investment, GOW2 was still buggy as all get out, and multiplayer was broken as hell (even with subsequent patches). Still haven't bought 3 and don't know if I ever will.

Epic lacks some serious QC on their console side.
 

MH01

Suspended
Feb 11, 2008
12,107
9,297
Mobile devices aren't just disrupting the computer market, they're going to destroy the existing console model as well. Here's why:

Microsoft spent something like $30 billion - with a "b" - developing and launching the Xbox and Xbox 360. They've yet to come anywhere close to making back that initial investment (although they are finally making money quarter to quarter on the business, after about a decade of consistent losses). So from a business sense, consoles were already a dud. Microsoft incinerated a vast fortune on the business and managed to come in third overall behind Sony in the first generation and Nintendo in the second. In fact the only company that's made big money off of gaming hardware in the past 5 years was Nintendo, and that's because they did it cheap and appealed to casual gamers.

Well, mobile devices are going to destroy that final profitable business model for console hardware. Because pretty soon just about everybody is gonna own a mobile device capable of playing decent casual games, and they'll be carrying it wherever they go. Mobile is convenient, ubiquitous, and the titles are uniformly cheap. I don't see Sony or Microsoft or Nintendo sinking tens of billions into launching the next generation of consoles, and if they do there's gonna be a bloodbath because they aren't going to draw the kind of casual gamers we know the consoles need to be remotely profitable.

On the other hand, if they don't spend billions developing and subsidizing awesome new hardware there's gonna be a different kind of bloodbath, because hardcore gamers - the guys the studios count on to spend big bucks on big complicated titles - will start to migrate to the PC if next-gen consoles can't offer a superior experience. Which they won't if Microsoft and Sony skimp on the hardware. That means studios will lose money developing software for these new consoles, which means they'll stop releasing titles, and that in turn will motivate customers - hardcore and casual both - to look elsewhere for their gaming fix. It's a vicious circle.

PC prices meanwhile will continue their downward trajectory, putting additional price and performance pressure on the console manufacturers. They'll be squeezed from below by mobile, and from above - and not very far above, either - by the PC. Why spend $300 on a console when you can get a PC with similar - or in a year or two even better - graphics for $100 more?

The gaming business as we've known it for the past couple of decades is about to be hopelessly disrupted by the mobile revolution. The same sort of thing happened back in the early '80s, when the price of a decent home computer fell down into the same range as the price of a game console, while offering better graphics and cheaper software. Atari, Coleco, Mattel and a host of other industry heavyweights all imploded as a result, along with a bunch of software makers. Look for Microsoft (at least their gaming business), Sony and Nintendo to suffer a similar fate.

Though this assumption is based that one segment steals gamers from the other segment. What is is fact happening is that gamers are locked into a segment based on the games that are provided, for instance, a hardcore FPS/RTS gamer will have a hardcore PC, and probably a console for some aimless relief, they will also probably have a mobile phone with some games on it for when they are travelling to and from work. At the end of the day they live for complex PC titles though play the others.

Take infinity blade, in all honesty it gets really boring real fast, its just repetitive and frankly not a great game, though I have it, and use it to pass time. While at home I would never play it while I have my PC and a console.

At the end of the day there are soooooooooo many more casual gamers/bored people out there that are happy to spend $0.99 on a game to pass time while commuting etc, just cause Epic made a heap of money of these bored communiting sods... does not indicate gamers are about to jump ship, on the contrary most consider mobile gaming without physical control to be a joke.

The mobile game industry will grow bigger, though PCs and Consoles are going nowwhere. People said consoles would kill PCs, due to the much lower cost and graphics capabilities..... on that there is no point comparing todays PCS with thier GPUs to a PS3 which was released in 2006, back in 2006 you would have to spend a fortune on a PC to match the PS3. PCs gaming has infact become stronger where it should have died. What Consoles and mobile cannot tap is MMORPGs.

The mobile gaming industry has been the fastest growing thanks to apple, though once PS4 and Xbox 360 2 or whatever comes out, consoles will boom again, PC gaming future is looking bright also. I just wonder if Mobile can continue its rise or will is steady out
 

SockRolid

macrumors 68000
Jan 5, 2010
1,560
118
Almost Rock Solid
Is it just me or are there a mess of games that people tend to buy just to show their device off to friends but aren't really all that fun? I feel like this game is one of those eye candy titles. [...]

Agree 100%. Looks extremely impressive. But I found the actual gameplay ponderous, repetitive, predictable, and boring.
 

Earendil

macrumors 68000
Oct 27, 2003
1,549
0
Washington
Mobile devices aren't just disrupting the computer market, they're going to destroy the existing console model as well. Here's why:

Do you really mean destroy? I'd say it won't look the same, or serve the same purpose, but I don't see Microsoft or Sony exiting the console market any time soon.

sunspot42 said:
On the other hand, if they don't spend billions developing and subsidizing awesome new hardware there's gonna be a different kind of bloodbath, because hardcore gamers - the guys the studios count on to spend big bucks on big complicated titles - will start to migrate to the PC if next-gen consoles can't offer a superior experience.

I think the one saving grace for the console market is that it no longer really needs "awesome new hardware". At least, you don't need to mash together a couple next gen CPUs and GPUs to make a game look good. I think the hardware for the past couple years has outstripped developers ability/time/money to take advantage of. At this point the XBOX 360 was released almost seven years ago. In that time games continue to get better and better (visualy) not because the hardware has allowed them to, but because the primary motivation for "shiny new game" is only to beat what has come previously. Once they beat the previous benchmark (which isn't an easy feat), the priority for even better graphics goes down.

The 360 was certainly no slouch when it was released. But I think that someone could release a console with year old hardware, making it substantially cheaper, and still power the next generation of games for many years to come. When a current costumer goes looking for a console, they don't care that the xbox only has 512mb of video ram, they care that GW3 plays flawlessly. They care that the next version of their favorite game looks beautiful. No don't there are still people obsest with specs out there, but I don't think they are the majority, and I don't think it matters like it did 10 or 20 years ago.

sunspot42 said:
The gaming business as we've known it for the past couple of decades is about to be hopelessly disrupted by the mobile revolution. The same sort of thing happened back in the early '80s, when the price of a decent home computer fell down into the same range as the price of a game console, while offering better graphics and cheaper software. Atari, Coleco, Mattel and a host of other industry heavyweights all imploded as a result, along with a bunch of software makers. Look for Microsoft (at least their gaming business), Sony and Nintendo to suffer a similar fate.

I think you are spot on. The only thing I don't think will happen will be seeing the big players fall quickly. In terms of profit, units sold, and costumer differentiation, the big players today really outstrip old school companies like Atari.

Though this assumption is based that one segment steals gamers from the other segment. What is is fact happening is that gamers are locked into a segment based on the games that are provided, for instance, a hardcore FPS/RTS gamer will have a hardcore PC, and probably a console for some aimless relief, they will also probably have a mobile phone with some games on it for when they are travelling to and from work. At the end of the day they live for complex PC titles though play the others.

I think you're wrong, at least as any sort of absolute. I think "mobile" gaming has expanded the gaming market in terms of the number of "gamers", but I also think that as the avenues for getting ones "game on" diversifies, that people will pick and choose where they spend their time. I think it is completely plausible that people will game on multiple platforms, but a person will not own every platform, therefore some platforms have to suffer. Personally, I grew up as a hard core computer gamer. I dreamed of new graphics cards. Now days, I play lots of card and turn based games on my iPhone/iPad and FPS style games on my 360. I didn't research and choose, those, they ended up in my life. And do you know what I find? I don't dream about expensive computer graphics cards any more. I'm quite satisfied by what I have. I don't think what happened to me is the end all, but I bet you that there are people out there that have a computer and phone, and find they don't want a console any more, or any combination. The days when "To be a gamer" when that you had a console, or cutting edge computer hardware are over.

Take infinity blade, in all honesty it gets really boring real fast, its just repetitive and frankly not a great game, though I have it, and use it to pass time. While at home I would never play it while I have my PC and a console.

Nor would I, but that's entirely because it's a shallow game. It's not boring because the graphics are bad, it's boring because they put all their money into graphics. Quite frankly that's how I feel with a lot of "cutting edge" games these days. They look pretty, but they have no soul, they aren't "fun". I have played a few RPG style iPhone games that had a pretty good story, and though they were simple and didn't have the graphics or complexity of a modern computer RPG, they were really fun.

At the end of the day there are soooooooooo many more casual gamers/bored people out there that are happy to spend $0.99 on a game to pass time while commuting etc, just cause Epic made a heap of money of these bored communiting sods... does not indicate gamers are about to jump ship, on the contrary most consider mobile gaming without physical control to be a joke.

In fact you are talking about a segment of the gaming market. I don't think people that blow a large sum of money and stand in line for Diablo so that they can play it all night to be the "real" gamers, and everyone who plays Solitaire to not be. I think that if gaming companies have the simple mindset that you do, that they will fail.

The mobile game industry will grow bigger, though PCs and Consoles are going nowwhere. People said consoles would kill PCs, due to the much lower cost and graphics capabilities..... on that there is no point comparing todays PCS with thier GPUs to a PS3 which was released in 2006, back in 2006 you would have to spend a fortune on a PC to match the PS3. PCs gaming has infact become stronger where it should have died. What Consoles and mobile cannot tap is MMORPGs.

Very true. And I think that's where "niche" and "diversified" comes into play. "Back in the day" the number of distinct genres was few, or their were few titles in those distinct genres. Now days if you want to be an MMO, or straight RPG player, you play on a computer. Why? Because it is the best tool for the job. Want to spend hours on end playing card games vs a computer? Spend the money on a touch tablet, as they offer the best experience. Does this mean that you can't use other tools for the job? Of course not! But if you are a "true gamer" in your genre, you will likely buy the best tool for it, and you won't bother with the other ones.

The mobile gaming industry has been the fastest growing thanks to apple, though once PS4 and Xbox 360 2 or whatever comes out, consoles will boom again, PC gaming future is looking bright also. I just wonder if Mobile can continue its rise or will is steady out

I think that gaming, as an entertainment industry, is still growing. That doesn't mean more and more people are convinced that Gears Of War is the way to spend ones time any more than convincing adults in the 70s that Pong is really where it was at. But all new forms of entertainment start out simple (radio, film, music) and expand to fill people's desire. I think that many older forms have filled most of their respective areas, and gaming entertainment has not. But in order to expand their market, each platform needs to try and find a "gaming experience" that invites new people into the fold. They can do that by narrowing it down and being the absolute best at a particular thing, or they can go wide and broad and try and do everything. Time will tell what the best strategy is, but I think what is for sure is that doing the same-O-same-O isn't going to bring in the same kind of profit in the future.
 

Liquorpuki

macrumors 68020
Jun 18, 2009
2,286
8
City of Angels
Well, mobile devices are going to destroy that final profitable business model for console hardware. Because pretty soon just about everybody is gonna own a mobile device capable of playing decent casual games, and they'll be carrying it wherever they go. Mobile is convenient, ubiquitous, and the titles are uniformly cheap. I don't see Sony or Microsoft or Nintendo sinking tens of billions into launching the next generation of consoles, and if they do there's gonna be a bloodbath because they aren't going to draw the kind of casual gamers we know the consoles need to be remotely profitable.

All that cheap casual talk means is that mobile has cornered the budget market with $1-5 pricepoints. It doesn't mean they're destroying the AAA game market with $60 pricepoints.

With business models, in the console industry, software sells hardware. Gamers don't care about hardware as much as they do what type of IP they can play on it. Which is why all console makers have first party IP exclusives they leverage to sell hardware.

And the one thing Epic didn't bother to mention was that Apple did all their marketing for them by demoing their game at WWDC. How many developers have enjoyed that luxury? Epic, Gameloft, a couple other studios, that's it. Most developers see their titles buried in that commoditized mess called the app store with little fanfare. If Apple didn't demo Infinity Blade to help sell the iPad and stick that game in all their commercials, no way would Epic be pulling in $30 million ROI.

And $30 million is puny compared to the ROI of a blockbuster AAA game.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.