Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Popular 'Monument Valley' Game Earned More Than $5.8M, Saw 1.7M Sales on iOS
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The game has absolutely nothing in common with Fez (just like Fez is not a ripoff of Nebulus, something someone said the other day).
When I saw this article, I knew I had to post a comment But you said exactly what I wanted to say, so thanks for the time saver!
This game really is so novel in the way it merges M.C. Escher like impossibilities into a believable 3D puzzler.
Indeed. If you haven't already read it, check out this article by the authors of 'Threes', regarding the rip-off game '2048': The Rip-offs & Making Our Original Game
That's the world we live in now. People feel somehow entitled to digital content for free. In the real world, you'd look like an idiot if you complained that $2 or $3 was too much to spend on the purchase of a game. (Heck, you might pay that much just to play ONE game in an arcade.) But in the reality distorting online community, where there is one whinger, there'll be many others, so the self-justification for pirating stuff snowballs.
But that's the view of my middle-aged self. I have to confess, when I was a teenager, my friends and I traded pirated C-64 games at school all the time and my conscience wasn't troubled. So um, yeah Perhaps it's also just a sign of immaturity. I wonder what the average age of today's software pirating community is?
You can calculate it, roughly. Some assumptions here, I may be wrong.
The original game took 55 weeks to build at a cost of $852,000. Around 5 weeks spent doing the Android version. That means Android specific work cost around $78,000.
Android split of revenue is about $1m.
So safe to say they covered their costs.
It's quite a risk to spend so much money for an investment that is going to have to compete with so many games, and to hope to get some awards.
It seems even worst than filmmaking these days.
I can't imagine for the others who don't get an award from Apple, how they are doing if they are not the EA or other big guys.
Also what's crazy is ...how people are expecting creative work like this quality to be free. Sad.
It seems even worst than filmmaking these days.
I can't imagine for the others who don't get an award from Apple, how they are doing if they are not the EA or other big guys.
Also what's crazy is ...how people are expecting creative work like this quality to be free. Sad.
It took around 8 people about a year to think up, create and finish the app. How much would it cost you to hire 8 experienced designers and app developers and pay them one years salary in your locale?
A game like this cannot be free and if it was it would be filled with annoying in app purchases. Much better to just buy the game outright. I had no idea something like this would take so long and cost so much money to create.
meanwhile, the previous company i was working at made apps for ios and android and had ~60% of their revenue from android.
I guess it depends of the apps
what company?
You need to be big enough to have real tax people on staff to pay almost no tax. People's image of corporations are MegaCorp Inc. Most corporations aren't like that at all.
You don't hear about normal corporate tax rates because reporters don't write about them. The public doesn't care that BoringCorp paid at Y tax rate; they care that MegaCorp (a company that makes more than the GDP of Africa) paid less tax than their secretary.
----------
You can calculate it, roughly. Some assumptions here, I may be wrong.
Again, they know the numbers, so we don't have to guess.
I'd guess that they spend substantially more than 5 weeks of time working on the Android version, and I'd be just as wrong as you.
????? Nevada, Wyoming, Delaware. It's that simple. I don't know any company even small that pays 47%.
Wonderful and beautifully constructed game. The attention to detail is astounding. And the focus on gameplay is refreshing when so many other mobile games have gone to the free-to-play model, where the gameplay is nothing more than a cynical exercise designed to goad players into making in-app purchases.
Despite its notoriety, $5.8 million almost seems like a trivial amount compared to the obvious amount of work that went into developing the game. And the high % of piracy on the Android side just serves as disincentive to other developers that might want to develop a similar game free from distracting ads and baiting tactics (i.e., virtually requiring "coins" or "gems" to advance levels).
The backlash from self-entitled cheapskates because Monument Valley charged $1.99 for the next round of levels just fuels the cynicism. With this kind of attitude, why would any developer take the up front approach of charging for upgrades to the game itself, when they can simply nickel and dime players to no end with coins/gems for special abilities or hints to advance?
Despite its notoriety, $5.8 million almost seems like a trivial amount compared to the obvious amount of work that went into developing the game. And the high % of piracy on the Android side just serves as disincentive to other developers that might want to develop a similar game free from distracting ads and baiting tactics (i.e., virtually requiring "coins" or "gems" to advance levels).
The backlash from self-entitled cheapskates because Monument Valley charged $1.99 for the next round of levels just fuels the cynicism. With this kind of attitude, why would any developer take the up front approach of charging for upgrades to the game itself, when they can simply nickel and dime players to no end with coins/gems for special abilities or hints to advance?
Read over on touch arcade that 40% of iOS installs were legit 5% of android installs were legit
A comment on Touch Arcade said that 40% of iOS installs were paid for. The comment also references another article which I can't find.
I'd hold out on judgement until we get more information.
Monument Valley's blog only indicates "free" on the Amazon version... so I assume both iOS and Android are paid versions. It doesn't sound like there was ever a "free" version on iOS... so 100% of iOS installs should have been paid.
EDIT:
It was a tweet from the developer that said 40% of installs on iOS were paid.
So... 60% of iOS installs were free... and they still made all that money?
Now I'm really confused...
Last edited:
Meanwhile, the previous company I was working at made apps for iOS and Android and had ~60% of their revenue from Android.
I guess it depends of the apps
I work in the industry and your situation is definitely not common. But even then, I'd be willing to bet that the lower cost of development and support for iOS resulted in higher profits from the iOS version.
In the past, even paid games have short promotional periods on IOS when they were free. That's how I've installed many games; many total junk, but some, true gems. This happens less often now with IAP. They used this so people could get their hands on it and spread the word, so when they become paid for again, they don't appear very very far on the chart.
Doesn't explain the huge number of not paid for installs fully, but could explain parts of it.
----------
Yes, 47% seems impossible, especially if you have a good knowledge of the tax code. I live in the province of Quebec and my company doesn't pay near that and we are certainly not known for our low taxes ;-).
Thanks! I just edited my earlier comment after I found that quote
I still don't quite understand it though. They made this great inforgraphic showing how well they did on iOS... and then they say 60% of the iOS installs were not paid for.
Looking at how many installs they had at launch... if they did have a promotional period... it should have radically affected their revenue.
You can calculate it, roughly. Some assumptions here, I may be wrong.
The original game took 55 weeks to build at a cost of $852,000. Around 5 weeks spent doing the Android version. That means Android specific work cost around $78,000.
Android split of revenue is about $1m.
So safe to say they covered their costs.
But, would it had made sense to develop first on Android (without an IOS version), considering the much lower exposure would have meant less publicity and a bigger chance of failure or much longer payback period.
I'd say NO, not currently.
The funny thing is, that people on Android can thank IOS apps for subsidizing their app devellopment. Otherwise, they would get a deluge of low rent terrible applications.
----------
Thanks! I just edited my earlier comment after I found that quote
I still don't quite understand it though. They made this great inforgraphic showing how well they did on iOS... and then they say 60% of the iOS installs were not paid for.
Looking at how many installs they had at launch... if they did have a promotional period... it should have radically affected their revenue.
One thing you have to understand is how incredibly hard it is to get people to notice your app nowadays. Even if you lose 50% of your potential sales, it could still be worth it if you go viral and those sales are high. Better 50% of 10M, than 90% of 1M.
The number of free installs is linked to the lack of easy way to promote your work. Not sure what solution there are for this. All app stores (Google, Apple, Amazon) I feel are a mess.
Make sense... thanks.
But do we know for a fact that they gave the app away for free on iOS at some point?
I'm still puzzled by that tweet saying only 40% were paid for on iOS. That seems incredibly low considering how much revenue was contributed by iOS.
Don't know for sure, but a google search could uncover this if you have the patience to do it, I don't. But, it has been common.
Also, you often get promotions (not always going to $0 (unless the original app was $1), but often knocking a buck off the price) near the various holidays when people tend to actively seek out apps with a frenzy when they get new devices.