I have to agree completely. It would actually help sell the platforms to future developers.

I completely agree that we need to make the business side of things more transparent; not only to each other, but to the public as well.

Hollywood makes a big deal over their budgets and sales figures because it fits into their overall business model. When people know that there is money being made, and money to be made, you expand the scope of people willing to invest. This may work contrary to the publisher funded model that our industry is in, but it would greatly benefit the industry overall to be more liberal with these figures.

I get many phone calls each year from people who think it costs $500-$1000 to make a console game. This includes various IT industries to the average Joes, both of whom have NO IDEA what we are doing and how much it costs/ROI's. When you tell them it costs millions, they are often dumbstruck, and this shock is our own fault completely.

"I get many phone calls each year from people who think it costs $500-$1000 to make a console game."

That is absolutely hilarious.

James Brooksby here. I do understand some reasons why the numbers are not out there from the standpoint of platform. However this is causing a great deal of pain in the digital sector.

(P.S.) We are now near 80k and with our plans will very soon be over 100k in less than 6 months. And for those who don't know, thats pretty good for our space (from what we can gather!).

And I also got those calls about making big games for sub $5,000, but it is getting better.

Links in the article would be helpful:
Original article: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/burn-zombie-burns-sells-70-000-via-psn
DoubleSix website: http://www.doublesixgames.com/
Burn, Zombie, Burn website: http://www.burnzombieburn.com/

Mark - that's not the original article, GI.biz just picked up on Kuju's press release, like we did. Just sayin' :) (Otherwise, we presume that people can work out website URLs themselves.) PS - Hi James!

$500-$1000 dollars is insane. IT people should definitely know better. You can't even buy a website for that much.

The $500-$1000 example went too far, but I get what you were trying to say.

It is rather strange that we never see these numbers, unless it is from the developer, or some major milestone being broke. With the three console companies being publicly traded corporation, you would think that these sales numbers would be easier to obtain.

As a consumer, I want to see those numbers. If I choose to support a developer I like, I want to know how well their product is selling. Otherwise I may be hesitate to buy if I feel they already have enough support (I'm slowly learning developers can never have enough support).

As a developer-in-training, I agree this helps understand the demand for quality games that are a smaller in scope of the Halos, GTAs, or Portals.

As I browse Xbox Live, I'm curious "how many people downloaded this content/game?". With the new rating system added (or to be added) to Microsoft's system. It will further allow me to understand the trends of digital distribution.

Simon - I got that link from the doublesix homepage where it says they talked to GI.biz directly. Either way, it does seem like good practice to link back to a developer and/or their game(s) in articles referencing them. User ease of use aside, if a company provides Gamasutra with a nice story (directly or not), it seems fair to just give them the extra exposure in return.

Hardware makers know the exact amount of copies they have sold. Publishers and developers are likely given an approximate amount (unless the downloads are originated within the publisher itself, for example in PC gaming). However, why would they release that information knowing that a) certain developers will prefer to keep those numbers secret; and b) other companies like NPD are paid for that kind of research? I agree that knowing all titles have sold over 100,000 units lifetime would attract a good number of investors, but on the other side, knowing the difference between different games by different developers may harm funding for too many smaller or independent developers as they are compared with bigger companies.

Many companies only release data when reaching a certain milestone (usually a million downloads). It is a pity that we consider a million a breakthrough mark: one could say the digital market is still too young (regardless of Apple's success) to have such a high milestone.

There's some info on the SBA website that might be able to help calculate digital sales figures a little better.

I think it's one of the hardest things to factor into a business plan. But if you wanted my sales figures, I wouldn't tell you unless I had to. But I would sell them to you for ... I dunno about the price of a full page ad in a magazine.

Hi Simon :) I think you would all be amazed at the variation in sales on digital (from doing lots of research), it varies wildly. On releasing this information, I can see both sides of the argument, but for studios who want to self publish this information is vital and I believe that the platform holders do want developers to do this. However, even the big names are being burnt due to incorrect expectations and so you may see them pulling away as more “mistakes” are made. In short, it’s still a bit “wild-west” and figures would help mature this sector.