Game Developer magazine (and its brainy Game Developer Research division) recently published its second annual enumerated accolades for the fine folks who make the games that you crudely jam into your home entertainment consoles -- or, in layman's terms, the "Top 50 Developers 2009" report. The rankings are based on how many games a studio created, the sales for those games, and their metacritic ratings. Quality of box art and amount of 'tude possessed by the games' protagonists, however, were not taken into consideration.
The results are utterly shocking -- for the second year in a row, Nintendo took top honors, with fellow money-printing organization Blizzard taking second place. Ubisoft Montreal skyrocketed from 12th place in the '08 report to third place in the most recent rankings. Regardless of your fanboyism for a certain developer, we think we can all agree -- in such a financially (and employmentmentally) challenging time, we're just glad to hear there's at least 50 game developers that haven't been forced to shut down.
The full list is posted after the jump.
[Thanks, Braz!]
1. Nintendo
2. Blizzard Entertainment
3. Ubisoft Montreal
4. Rockstar North
5. EA Canada
6. Konami
7. Valve Software
8. Epic Games
9. EA Tiburon
10. Treyarch
11. Hal Laboratory
12. Capcom
13. Traveller's Tales
14. Bethesda Game Studios
15. Insomniac Games
16. Namco Bandai Games
17. Ea Redwood Shores
18. Koei
19. Kojima Productions
20. Harmonix Music Systems
21. Media Molecule
22. Lionhead Studios
23. Vicarious Visions
24. Maxis
26. Neversoft Entertainment
26. Game Freak
27. Square Enix
28. Digital Illusions CE (Dice)
29. Success
30. Ready At Dawn
31. Atlus
32. Criterion Games
33. TOSE
34. Mythic Entertainment
35. Firaxis Games
36. Volition
37. Sega
38. SCE Japan Studio
39. Ironclad Games
40. Marvelous Interactive
41. Yuke's Future Media Creators
42. SCE London Studio
43. Visual Concepts
44. Intelligent Systems
45. Omega Force
46. Monolith Productions
47. Funcom
48. SCE Studios San Diego
49. Rare
50. Treasure
Reader Comments (65)
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 1:45PM (Unverified) said
I love treasure, but have they ever had a financially successful game past WarioWorld? Or is my head up my butt?
Reply
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 1:29PM (Unverified) said
What the hell, Naughty Dog was 27th last year, and this year they aren't even mentioned?....
Reply
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 1:32PM StormEagle said
It's only because they don't spew out games every 3 months like most of the other developers on this list. Nevermind the fact the Uncharted is an amazing game. There's a lot of mistakes on this list.
Reply
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 2:21PM (Unverified) said
uh,
"This is a detailed supplement to this month's Top 50 Developers countdown in Game Developer magazine, which saw over 600 industry professionals from Game Developer magazine and Gamasutra.com surveyed regarding their opinions on more than 150 developers, as well as allowing them to rate any relevant experiences with working with the companies in question"
As you can see, games release do influence the results, but they are not solemnly based on them, hence why I find it shocking for Naughty Dog to not even be mentioned.
Reply
"This is a detailed supplement to this month's Top 50 Developers countdown in Game Developer magazine, which saw over 600 industry professionals from Game Developer magazine and Gamasutra.com surveyed regarding their opinions on more than 150 developers, as well as allowing them to rate any relevant experiences with working with the companies in question"
As you can see, games release do influence the results, but they are not solemnly based on them, hence why I find it shocking for Naughty Dog to not even be mentioned.
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 2:46PM Vidikron said
"This data was used along with sales chart data for the calendar year 2008, number of SKUs from January through December 2008, and average review scores from Metacritic (with the exception of those titles not covered by Metacritic), to determine company rankings. "
The data must be weighted heavily toward recent activity. I mean, if the number of SKUs and sales, as well as Metacritic rating for those SKUs, are part of the calculation it would be tough to make the list if you released 0 SKUs during that year. IMO, Naughty Dog is better than most on that list, but they are certainly not very prolific so it's easy to understand why they wouldn't be there this time.
Reply
The data must be weighted heavily toward recent activity. I mean, if the number of SKUs and sales, as well as Metacritic rating for those SKUs, are part of the calculation it would be tough to make the list if you released 0 SKUs during that year. IMO, Naughty Dog is better than most on that list, but they are certainly not very prolific so it's easy to understand why they wouldn't be there this time.
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 2:46PM rockies123 said
lets just assume the list is compiled based on the games released for the past 12 months or so (since it's an annual list). If you dont release anything new, then you're not on the list. That doesn't mean Naughty Dog is not good though, coz uncharted was awesome! :D
Reply
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 2:48PM rockies123 said
maybe because kojima prod. didnt release games as frequently as konami itself? just my opinion though.
Reply
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 1:35PM StormEagle said
33. TOSE wiki their resume and explain to me how they're even on this list much less beating anyone behind them?
Reply
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 1:39PM Professor Lario said
I approve of Atlus, but where is my Team ICO?
Reply
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 1:45PM cuteSAVAGE said
They haven't had a game published since 2005 (this covers 2008). Also, I'm guessing they'd be covered under SCE Japan Studio and not get their own spot.
Reply
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 1:50PM (Unverified) said
Has Team Ico had a successful game? ICO did awful, and Shadow of The Collosus was a sleeper hit at best. Hopefully, Sony can Market The Last Guardian well.
Reply
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 1:51PM snarfoogle said
You can be a top 10 developer for ruining COD?
Who knew.
Reply
Who knew.
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 2:31PM Sly C said
guns, time period, settings, characters, stories, gun effects (explosions, shotguns and MGs rip apart body parts), nazi zombies, a new multiplayer mode...
seems like a good number of changes to me. just because they used the same engine doesn't mean "they barely changed anything". yeah, the WWII era is tired, yeah COD4 is better, but no, world at war is not a mediocre game.
Reply
seems like a good number of changes to me. just because they used the same engine doesn't mean "they barely changed anything". yeah, the WWII era is tired, yeah COD4 is better, but no, world at war is not a mediocre game.
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 2:54PM JXCGunrunna said
didnt say it was mediocre. said they didnt change almost anything.
Guns: same classes, same attachments, same type of leveling, same
Story was nothing ground breaking and CoD4 had better story telling
characters were no better than CoD4(which werent awesome either. good but nothing too special)
the gun effects in CoD1 were as good as the ones in W@W
the gore was an improvement as was the zombies
game modes were a nice change
Reply
Guns: same classes, same attachments, same type of leveling, same
Story was nothing ground breaking and CoD4 had better story telling
characters were no better than CoD4(which werent awesome either. good but nothing too special)
the gun effects in CoD1 were as good as the ones in W@W
the gore was an improvement as was the zombies
game modes were a nice change
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 1:57PM (Unverified) said
When I saw this article I was all like
http://media.ign.com/games/image/article/738/738102/gaijin4koma_peersblog_1200684654.jpg
then I read the list and was all like
http://media.ign.com/games/image/article/738/738102/gaijin4koma2_peersblog_1200684608.jpg
Reply
http://media.ign.com/games/image/article/738/738102/gaijin4koma_peersblog_1200684654.jpg
then I read the list and was all like
http://media.ign.com/games/image/article/738/738102/gaijin4koma2_peersblog_1200684608.jpg
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 1:58PM (Unverified) said
Sempre visito o blog daqui do Brasil, sempre que possível levo as notícias até o povo "Brazuka" e seria uma honra ter um dia a visita em meu blog de jogos de algum dos escritores deste brilhante blog, muito sucesso!
______________________________________________
http://www.tecnojogos.com.br
Reply
______________________________________________
http://www.tecnojogos.com.br
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 2:08PM (Unverified) said
começ da OU dos inglês do fale o um foda para para o também do A., blogue do seu do sobre dos cuidados do ninguém
Reply
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 2:08PM Petebot330 said
I told you I don't speak Spanish! English please.
Reply
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 4:13PM (Unverified) said
Ah Portuguese, the old South American language of love...
Reply
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 2:01PM JXCGunrunna said
top 50 devs of 2009 are not about games that are from 2009. they are games from sometime in 2008 through sometime in 2009. its the reason IW was number 2 in 08. its the reason treyarch is 10 in 09.
Reply
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 2:10PM WiredKnight said
So, after reading your guys' comments, seeing that this list is somehow more about 2008 than 2009, and that we're only halfway through 2009, and the company in the second spot hasn't released anything this year (so far), this list pretty much means nothing, right?
Reply
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 2:20PM kornkid8600 said
Treyarch is garbage.
They came out with two games, one proving they can't make games for crap. Quantum of Solace was a disgrace. On the other hand they come out with WAW, a relatively good game, with the guidance and assistance of IW, in order to keep their originally created franchise name in good standing due to previous mishaps by Treyarch, the garbage producing company. If one company doesn't deserve any recognition for their gaming development its Treyarch. They aren't worth jack, never made a good game on their own. QoS is proof that today they still cannot.
Reply
They came out with two games, one proving they can't make games for crap. Quantum of Solace was a disgrace. On the other hand they come out with WAW, a relatively good game, with the guidance and assistance of IW, in order to keep their originally created franchise name in good standing due to previous mishaps by Treyarch, the garbage producing company. If one company doesn't deserve any recognition for their gaming development its Treyarch. They aren't worth jack, never made a good game on their own. QoS is proof that today they still cannot.
Posted: Jun 17th 2009 2:55PM JXCGunrunna said
lol they had 3 games. spider man web of shadows was last year to
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.
Featured Stories
The most popular posts
in the last 7 days
- Vita 'UMD Passport' won't be offered in US 221 comments
- Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning review: A tempting fate 161 comments
- Blizzard taking Valve to court over 'DOTA' trademark 116 comments
- David Jaffe leaves Eat Sleep Play, layoffs hit developer [Update] 107 comments
- Don't call it a remake: Final Fantasy X is a 'remaster,' to be clear 95 comments








