Quote Originally Posted by TonyTheTiger View Post
The difference is that when a movie is completed it can keep making money for years and even decades. Back to the Future is still a viable moneymaker for Universal. Even films that flop at the box office can earn money through various means. When movies age they don't lose their relevance. People will watch A Christmas Story on TBS or buy a Blu-ray of Terminator 2. Video games, though, age like computer software. After a few months they've essentially exhausted their entire revenue stream. And they generally can't be resold or repackaged as-is unless it's bona fide classic like Super Mario Bros. 3, and even then it won't sell for more than $5 or so. Budgets need to reflect this reality.

It's specifically because games are competing with Hollywood that this mess started. Back in the mid-90s a budget could only be so big, regardless of what a game's vision was. A flop could only do so much damage under these circumstances. But the shackles came off and the beast ran loose. With those technical limitations no longer an issue and 15 years worth of unchecked growth, here we are in a state of unstable equilibrium in which the majority of publishers are operating under the constant threat of total collapse. It's unsustainable.
It really depends on the movie. Universal has a back catalog of thousands of films that generate no net home video revenues and no net licensing revenues even when you account for the typical accounting tricks. For every Back to the Future there are nine other films that never recoup their initial investment even decades later. Movies absolutely do lose relevance and resale value. I actually do a lot of television and film licensing and you would be shocked at how little of the catalog of major studios actually generates any revenue at all in any given year.

While I agree that the future revenue prospects of many games is weaker than films (although with various services like GOG, Steam and various budget publishers re-releasing games in bundles and slimline packaging and in enhanced editions, there certainly is some revenue to be had), the cost of entry for purchasing a game is anywhere from $60+ at release to usually no lower than $20 in the bargain bin (admittedly, there are some games that eventually go lower). That's a much healthier chunk of revenue than the half of an $8-$15 for a movie ticket a studio gets or some percentage of $10-$20 for a DVD or Blu-Ray which most consumers won't even buy anymore or even the lucrative packaging deals studios get by bundling hits and selling them to cable, broadcast or streaming services.

People have been making these same predictions of doom and gloom for years. With Sony and Microsoft both selling record numbers of their new consoles, the console and video game business looks healthier than ever. While things can always change down the road, until some amazing new form of interactive entertainment comes along that makes video gaming obsolete, I just don't see the video game market collapsing.