Well if they want easy money they should release ff16 soon and not in 2023

I think it's more than just the licensing costs, I think it's a combination of incompetence and poor marketing, Guardians of the Galaxy was good compared to SE's last Marvel outing (The Avengers game). It's not like Square-Enix hasn't shown how terrible their time/budget management is.

I thought the reviews and streamers would have helped save this title, but apparently not.

Guardians would’ve sold better if it didn’t look so much like Avengers, and if the Avengers didn’t suck THAT hard.

Guardians probably sold fine.

Avengers is another story.

Make sensible projections next time. For once. 😅😅😅

Probably Avengers lost $190 mill and Guardians the rest.

Movie based games rarely if ever do well. I would have thought companies would steer away from these types of games or at least make sure they don't over pay for the license. In an effort to ensure at least a small profit if sales tank.

Many games counted with the Avengers game would be in negative numbers, doesn't give you a clear picture how it went for the other game.

Making Avengers a live service killed anyones faith in Guardians even if it actually turned out pretty good

I supported Guardians of the Galaxy by buying a copy and I have enjoyed it a lot. Great game.

I strongly believe had Avengers been a traditional style game where you went to unique locations fighting all kinds of enemies familiar to the Avengers series it would’ve done so much better.

I’ll be honest, the game starts off brilliantly. It’s not until you get to the point where you’re constantly fighting the same enemies in the same desert with only giant robot beetle bosses that something smells rotten in Denmark.

Still losing money they are under contract to support avengers for a while longer despite it costing them

Tried tapping into insomniacs success with Spiderman. Close, but no cigar. Insomniac best do a good job with wolverine, or the risk equal egg on de face lol

Not surprised...I'm sorry but it is not my type of game...and I heard it ran horribly.

They're both just money grabs. Avengers has a great campaign but the live service aspect of it ruins a lot. Guardians just has really bad, unfun gameplay.

...i hope this didnt happened. Guardians is an awesome game, I'm really hoping for part 2.

Of course many aren't buying games... Only renting... This problem will only get bigger.

I think a combination of paying too many royalties, panic and the dreadful start of the avengers game skrewedbthem over. Game development is expensive , but if you need to pay super royalties that's a bad start... then most average joes would be remembering the bad disappointing start of the GAAS Avengers and most won't be able to know the difference between the two...even sub continously most would be scared for life by GAAS avengers. It didn't sell as some have hoped and boom put it on sale at half price on black friday. Every 2 copies sold equals one...it was the perfect storm for a fairly decent game.

Oops.

With how hot Marvel is right now this is a massive failure on them to capitalize on that popularity. Same with EA and Starwars, you only got yourselves to blame. Practically easy money and you blew it

People have a really hard time with understanding that game success is relative to production costs. People are really locked into the idea that if a game "sold millions" it is a success.

What bothers me is I felt Guardians was actually a fantastic game and I was one of those that was quick to take a massive dump on it from what they showed at E3. Crazily enough, it ended up being my Game of the Year for last year.

I was really hoping we’d get another installment, but Square being Square pretty much farted that out of existence.

When people say E3 is dead and the last couple of years show we do not need in-person conventions for games to be a success; I have said wait until big-budget game tanks or does not meet expectations. This is a good example as a case can be made that if there was E3 and if they were at PAX West and people could see the game, play the game, and generate some gameplay video and images from the show; perhaps they would have done better. A few million spent on shows, booth props, swag, etc might have cut that 200 million loss way down.

They had Avengers at E3, cut scenes only I believe. We got it at PAX West and it was off-site in a hotel that was not open to the public. We got a bit of gameplay and then a presentation. No pics, no video. Public was not given much to see and go on.

Knock it out for something like £19.99 or £24.99 and it’ll generate so many sales, they’d go dizzy. Look at sales figures of even Nintendo games. Knock those cards out for under £29.99, pull in more money. Too many people buying used games that hammer new games sales also. Many AAA games hit low figures. Why can’t games hit 20 million plus? It’s not rocket science.

Gaas is full of failures

Titanic was a successful movie, you didn't see them make a video game adaptation of that.

Guardians of the Galaxy was an awesome game. Unfortunately my hopes for a sequel are probably squashed now.

It's a shame Guardians of the Galaxy was a great game and much better than Avengers. But Avengers was such a disaster since they insisted on making a games as a service that people didn't even bother with Guardians because they connected it with Avengers even though they are very different games.

Maybe dont make it a soulless cashgrab with monetization ruining even the tiniest aspect of the game. Also probably make an actual satisfying gameplay loop, game is just bland grinding for the sake of grinding.