My point is that the budget available for making the actual game is already quite high (because of the increased cost of creating acceptable content and acceptable *amount* of content) - and the budget for marketing should be seen as an addition to this, not available for the developer.
Thank you for taking this in a new direction.
I don't think, though, that we see the developers as being responsible for how the entire budget is spent. At least, I don't.
I know that the publishers have most of the power - if not all - and I know that it's Microsoft who chose to market Gears of War like it did, and not Gearbox. There are exceptions, however, to how developers FEEL about this lack of control. My sense is that most modern AAA developers have no real issue with marketing controlling the response, at least not judging from people like Bioware dudes who post here on occasion.
Based on my job interview with IOI - where you're placed - it didn't seem like you (not you, personally, but IOI) had a problem with the kind of power EIDOS has over you. In fact, it was kinda celebrated at that interview.
That said, I'm not really saying LESS money should be spent on marketing. But that's because I'm trying to be realistic. I know that this business is ALL about the cash - at least for the publishers (ok, MOSTLY about the cash).
That's why I'm suggesting to spend the SAME amount of money, but instead of marketing all the Hollywood flashy stuff - and this includes what I refer to as obsessive content detail, as in Altair with 2000 animations - use marketing to SHIFT focus away from what's cool NOW, to what COULD be cool in the future. This being, of course, evolved gameplay and mechanics.
I'm suggesting, or rather wondering, if it's possible to "educate" the casual market about gameplay without losing money. In fact, maybe they can SAVE money, but not on marketing - but on development. They could move away from excessive content detail (including all those things I mentioned, like famous voice actors and Hollywood CGI sequences, etc.) - to game design. In theory, this should require less people spending less time - and as such they could spend less money in terms of the overall budget.
As my very first post claimed: Casuals control the market today, and casuals buy what they're told to buy - as long as the voice is the one in market control.
This is the irony, because AAA publishers HAVE market control - because they spend all that money on marketing and media manipulation. If you don't know what I mean by media manipulation - think GTA4 and 10 out of 10 across the board.
So, in a tragic kinda way, developers/publishers are digging their OWN grave by trying to out-Hollywood each other. They keep whining about the realities of the market - but they're actively supporting that reality.