• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

AndyD

Mambo Number PS5
Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,602
Nashville
It's probably worth reading the article
There's no detail there as to that part of it. All it says is "Due to confidentiality agreements, developers are not allowed to discuss the exact details of their PS Plus game deals, but it's understood that Sony typically pays a one-off fee to secure a title for the service."

However, the most telling part is this: "During development, Lanning said that he felt that the PS Plus collaboration was needed in order for the studio to finish and release Soulstorm. " So without this money, he'd have no game to sell at all. So to subsequently complain seems odd to me.
 

MitchUK

Member
Oct 27, 2017
103
I enjoyed Soulstorm and would have actually paid for it, but delay or not I don't think the numbers would have been that different as you didn't need a PS5 to redeem to library.
 

Det

Member
Jul 30, 2020
12,878
I feel as if Sony got ripped off lmao. They paid between $2.5M to $5M for it on PS+ given the MSRP and 50k to 100k sales estimate he originally envisioned, which the deal covered.
 

Fantastical

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,370
Well that's certainly one way to justify sales to yourself. The whole "it got delayed a few months so more PS5s were out there so more people could get it free" is… really odd.
 

Shopolic

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
6,854
I liked old Oddworld games, but still haven't played this one and maybe won't until adding to Game Pass.
Its trailers weren't that interesting and hype of the game was near zero too and it was also 66 on Metacritic. So I don't think it had the potential to be a good seller without Plus too. I even think they got more money with Plus compared to a situation without Plus!
 

RedHeat

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,689
I feel like the headline is far more dramatic and suggestive than what the words are actually saying here.

It reads to me like Lanning isn't saying that launching on PS+ was a disaster for them in itself, it's that they cut a specific deal based on 'there'll only be x amount of PS5s in the wild by our release date so this is a good reimbursment for x amount of sales' and then the release date slipped and, by the time it ended up hitting PS+, it was redeemed by a lot more people than they initially budgeted for. He thinks it was devestating how little they got for how many times it was downloaded. I think?

"The most we could sell is less than the money we're getting... we might sell 50,000 units at launch, maybe 100,000 units. It was pretty small numbers because there wasn't going to be a lot of PS5s."

(He) felt as though the company "did a pretty good deal" in the end.

"Soulstorm was initially slated to launch in January 2021, but ended up moving back to April. The delay meant that Soulstorm quickly became the most downloaded game on PS5.

"Because [Soulstorm] slipped to April, we had the highest downloaded game on PS5 and it was, I think, approaching... close to four million units or something like that for free because they were all subscriptions. So for us, it was devastating.""
Was there that many more PS5's shipped during that period of time? I'm sure they could've calculated an increase in their deal, even if they didn't plan on delaying the game
 

Wereroku

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,227
He didn't give specifics unless there is more in the podcast that the article doesn't list. He says it was downloaded 4M times, so we'd need to know how much they got paid per each download.

He admits they would've sold 100k exclusively on PS5 without plus, so it sounds like he wishes it has been multiplatform from the start.

Honestly I really wish someone would give us some hard data on $$ made from games on plus, gold, game pass and eventually plus premium, etc.

It's wild that, and idk what data he has obviously, that he thinks it would've been more profitable to sell much less, like 1/4th I imagine, instead of it being free for 4M ppl.
Go read the other article that was posted. He negotiated a single lump sum payment for the PS+ inclusions. The problem was they estimated it to be January 2021 and they figured PS5s would be very limited so they only estimated the payment for maybe 50k-100k downloads. Because they delayed the game they had to release it for the April 2021 ps+ which blew their estimates out of the water but they didn't get any additional money. Basically they screwed themselves over because they had to delay.
 

Fisty

Member
Oct 25, 2017
20,220
If it wasn't on Plus, the sales would have been really bad and no one would have played it

At least people played it
 

Embedded

Member
Oct 27, 2017
616
Can't read the article right now.
Does he give a number of trophies given for the first boss or something similar?
Downloads don't say much. If a lot of players finished the game, then i can accept that statement.
 

Aurora

Member
Jul 22, 2018
1,367
Lemuria
It's niche. Without PS+ far fewer people would have played it and not many more would have bought it.

I think Lorne's politics (which I feel seep into the game's rather unwise character designs and narrative) might have turned off some people too.

Could you elaborate on this?

didn't the game release on PS4 as well? not seeing the correlation with 3/4 months of PS5 sales

The game released on PS4 day and date with the PS5 version, but only the PS5 version was offered on PS+.
 

Fantastical

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,370
I feel like the headline is far more dramatic and suggestive than what the words are actually saying here.

It reads to me like Lanning isn't saying that launching on PS+ was a disaster for them in itself, it's that they cut a specific deal based on 'there'll only be x amount of PS5s in the wild by our release date so this is a good reimbursment for x amount of sales' and then the release date slipped and, by the time it ended up hitting PS+, it was redeemed by a lot more people than they initially budgeted for. He thinks it was devestating how little they got for how many times it was downloaded. I think?

"The most we could sell is less than the money we're getting... we might sell 50,000 units at launch, maybe 100,000 units. It was pretty small numbers because there wasn't going to be a lot of PS5s."

(He) felt as though the company "did a pretty good deal" in the end.

"Soulstorm was initially slated to launch in January 2021, but ended up moving back to April. The delay meant that Soulstorm quickly became the most downloaded game on PS5.

"Because [Soulstorm] slipped to April, we had the highest downloaded game on PS5 and it was, I think, approaching... close to four million units or something like that for free because they were all subscriptions. So for us, it was devastating.""
How many people bought a PS5 post April 2021 vs post January 2021? I guess it's directly post-launch but I find this unconvincing that they lost so many sales to this.
 

SuperOctopus

Member
Apr 22, 2020
2,648
I feel like the headline is far more dramatic and suggestive than what the words are actually saying here.

It reads to me like Lanning isn't saying that launching on PS+ was a disaster for them in itself, it's that they cut a specific deal based on 'there'll only be x amount of PS5s in the wild by our release date so this is a good reimbursment for x amount of sales' and then the release date slipped and, by the time it ended up hitting PS+, it was redeemed by a lot more people than they initially budgeted for. He thinks it was devestating how little they got for how many times it was downloaded. I think?

"The most we could sell is less than the money we're getting... we might sell 50,000 units at launch, maybe 100,000 units. It was pretty small numbers because there wasn't going to be a lot of PS5s."

(He) felt as though the company "did a pretty good deal" in the end.

"Soulstorm was initially slated to launch in January 2021, but ended up moving back to April. The delay meant that Soulstorm quickly became the most downloaded game on PS5.

"Because [Soulstorm] slipped to April, we had the highest downloaded game on PS5 and it was, I think, approaching... close to four million units or something like that for free because they were all subscriptions. So for us, it was devastating.""
Yep, I think your interpretation is right. The headline is more dramatic that what it actually is. And I'm sure the 4 millions are how many people redeemed the game on the store and not the ones who downloaded it and played it. Anyone with a PS+ subscription can redeem PS5 games without having a PS5 so it could have been redeemed by all subscribers on the service for all we know. Talking about the number of available PS5 at the time is misleading.
 

NewDust

Visited by Knack
Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,596
I don't think shifting from Jan '21 to April '21 accounted for 3.850.000 more downloads (or more likely, claims).
 

Dust

C H A O S
Member
Oct 25, 2017
32,221
I played it on PS+ but I don't think I would have ever bought it otherwise. Am I a lost sale?
 

MadMod

Member
Dec 4, 2017
2,726
I downloaded it but didn't play it. Bait headline, really wouldn't have sold 4m. I'm part of the 4m and didn't even touch it, let alone would have bought it.
 

JimD

Member
Aug 17, 2018
3,496
My big question is if there were legitimately 4 million downloads to PS5 only. That number sounds wrong. I could see 4 million subscribers *claimed* the game, but that could be anyone with a PS4 as well.

If the number is 4 million copies claimed instead of downloaded to a PS5, then Lanning's reasoning makes no sense. The numbers would have been the same in January as they were in April.
 
Oct 25, 2017
56,661
Go read the other article that was posted. He negotiated a single lump sum payment for the PS+ inclusions. The problem was they estimated it to be January 2021 and they figured PS5s would be very limited so they only estimated the payment for maybe 50k-100k downloads. Because they delayed the game they had to release it for the April 2021 ps+ which blew their estimates out of the water but they didn't get any additional money. Basically they screwed themselves over because they had to delay.
O well that's a lil understandable I suppose I'd kick myself alil over that. Why everybody attacking the dude than he a dick?
 

PLASTICA-MAN

Member
Oct 26, 2017
23,610
Hopefuly they won't do a retaliation move and remove it form the accounts who claimed it through PS+ cus they are so pissed.
They really need to chill, plan betetr deals in advance, or simply make betetr games in the future.
 

J-Spot

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,320
Well based on trophy data those 4 million people didn't play it for very long.

I'm always shocked that Oddworld continues to be a thing. For such a long running series I don't think I've ever seen anyone actually bring it up it conversation. In my own limited exposure to it I found it pretty unappealing.
 
May 14, 2021
16,731
This was the game that illustrated just how bad the coil whine on my PS5 is. When it hits the main menu, holy shit is it loud. That alone made me turn the game off and delete it.
 

Det

Member
Jul 30, 2020
12,878
O well that's a lil understandable I suppose I'd kick myself alil over that. Why everybody attacking the dude than he a dick?

Yes. That and he admits the game likely wouldn't have finished without the deal in the first place. Game got delayed, shit happens, but literally anyone with a PS+ sub can claim it so I don't really see much difference if it did launch in January as originally planned.
 

Cali32

Member
Oct 11, 2020
1,774
I would've never tried the game if it wasn't on PS Plus. Heck, I tried it and uninstalled after 30 minutes since it's not really my cup of tea.

EDIT: You know what, I don't care at all about this game so they can remove my digital copy from my account cuz I can't stand this dude bitching about "lost sales".
 
Last edited:
Oct 27, 2017
42,700
I think people are missing the point that (from what I understand, correct me if I'm wrong)
1. Devs are paid based on the expected sales/downloads of their game on PS Plus
2. This number seems to be fixed even if it sells way more (so I guess they don't get paid anything for additional downloads?)
3. Because of other games delays, Oddworld ended up performing way better than anticipated, based on what they projected, so they lost out on a lot of money

Granted it wouldn't have sold that much standalone, but it seems the main issue is essentially that devs lose money if their games overperform?
 

Dr. Ludwig

Member
Oct 31, 2017
2,521
It sucks for the rest of the dev team who must've put a lot into this game... Lorne Lanning can eat shit though.

Plus the game is like super mid and buggy as hell at launch.
 

Yerffej

Prophet of Regret
Member
Oct 25, 2017
23,525
Talk about burning a bridge built just for you. That type of game isn't getting to those sales in this day and age without a boost.
 

Mivey

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,825
Given that they must have gotten a decent amount of money from Sony and from Epic, I have to assume they still at least recuperated their development costs. Now if those moves actually lead to build a larger audience that is interested in buying a sequel, well, that's always the big question, isn't it.

I am kinda impressed how passionate Lorne is about this series, and has continued it for so long. Don't understand the appeal myself, New 'n Tasty really didn't feel very great to play and the controls felt very poorly thought out with the puzzles the game expected of you.
 

klastical

Member
Oct 29, 2017
4,712
Let's be real how many ps5s were moved from January to April. It was severely unavailable. The number was certainly higher then they expected but like let's say it was 2 million more units, how many of those 2 million did they expect would actually buy the game?
 

werezompire

Zeboyd Games
Verified
Oct 26, 2017
11,353
Game giveaway numbers are like piracy numbers in that they don't really relate to sales.

I download pretty much every PS+ game, but I only actually play a small fraction. It's even worse with EGS - I think I have a couple hundred games by this point & I think I've only actually turned on one or two.

With Soulstorm, I played the first level, didn't think it was worth my time to keep playing, and deleted the game.
 

Farlander

Game Designer
Verified
Sep 29, 2021
331
Honestly the arguments are weird. If the deal was based on the numbers that were approximated for January 2021, well by January 2021 PS5 already sold 4.5 million copies. By April it was 3 million more. Sure there is a difference, but not something that would drastically change the profitability of the deal had it been based on April numbers, considering that their expectations of 50-100k claims was too low to begin with.
 

Remark

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,546
I mean the game is ass in general so I don't think it would of sold that much but I think in terms of the deal they took less or something because they didn't expect that many downloads. They didn't work out the PS Plus deal in accordance to how much it was actually downloaded or something of that nature.

Either way I think the game would of been a flop so in the end it doesn't matter imo.
 

LakeEarth

Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,176
Ontario
These days, I redeem 98% of plus games without the intention of even playing them tbh
Yeah, it is extremely, extremely rare for me not to redeem a PS+ game.

I did download this game (mostly because I was interested to see how it looked graphically on PS5), played it to the second level, and dropped it soon after. He shouldn't consider me a lost sale though, I don't even like the GOOD Oddworld games.
 

slothrop

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Aug 28, 2019
3,876
USA
It completely depends on the terms and what they were paid to be on there vs their projected sales with and without being on there + their probability of actually hitting the projections. I think they are oversimplifying, though I don't like doubting developers assessments of their business and it is totally possible they made a bad deal. But a bad deal in hindsight is different from a bad deal with the information you had available to you at the time you made a deal.
 

Fantastical

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,370
I think people are missing the point that (from what I understand, correct me if I'm wrong)
1. Devs are paid based on the expected sales/downloads of their game on PS Plus
2. This number seems to be fixed even if it sells way more (so I guess they don't get paid anything for additional downloads?)
3. Because of other games delays, Oddworld ended up performing way better than anticipated, based on what they projected, so they lost out on a lot of money
Ok so if the money itself wasn't enough even if they did launch in January, I suppose they thought that in February and beyond, people who didn't have a PS5 when it was available would then buy it.

… why wouldn't this follow 3 months later? I understand that more people would have access to PS Plus in April but I don't believe this was "devastating".

Looking at the higher than expected downloads in April and thinking that's devastating is just… very weird to me if you were banking on getting paid downloads after the Ps Plus window anyway. Millions of people were still buying PS5s post-April.