MasterAce
Posts: 140 +164
The costs of an employee are way more than the base sallary with taxes, insurance, healthcare and whatever. In Finland we talk of 160%, could be much more in US for example.
Yes, video game budgets are skyrocketing, but the reason goes beyond graphics
- Thread starter Skye Jacobs
- Start date
ScottSoapbox
Posts: 1,557 +2,786
7 million extortion (Wukong) isn't easy, it's hard work! Just ask Sony and the 500 million they 'spent' on Concord, that's what this article comes down to: DEI is DIE.
ScottSoapbox
Posts: 1,557 +2,786
Exactly this! It depends on the industry and state but it is typically 150-200% here. Developers making $100-150K/year isn't the problem - that's the norm. (Those jealous of their pay should learn to code.)
Hiring 300 people and then complaining about labor costs is the problem. I.e., Bad management. These big studios assume their next project is going to be a hit and therefore justify huge budgets that they drunkenly spend on everything. Then blame everyone from the grunt developers to the gamers for their failure to manage the project's quality or costs.
m3tavision
Posts: 1,658 +1,389
If these Companies would completely remove their marketing department and worked on their game. And when it's ready spent just $1mil on a Game Trailer showcasing a game nobody has ever heard of.. and it's phenomenal.
Social media will do the rest if your product is worthy. Viral marketing only works to sooth the Egos of these Devs and to gain sympathy.
Social media will do the rest if your product is worthy. Viral marketing only works to sooth the Egos of these Devs and to gain sympathy.
Billybobjoey
Posts: 66 +90
Have you seen all the layoffs and studio closures in the past 2 years alone? We're already in the crash. It's just not as sudden as the last one.
Anton Longshot
Posts: 98 +192
Realistic graphics?
I insist on 100% photorealism in the live actors movies I watch.
My games however only need to be great fun to play.
Also, I do not own a fancy crazy expensive graphics card so I never buy new AAA games and probably never will. The required hardware also eats large amounts of electricity which is quite expensive where I live.
So when this bubble bursts I probably won't even notice.
I insist on 100% photorealism in the live actors movies I watch.
My games however only need to be great fun to play.
Also, I do not own a fancy crazy expensive graphics card so I never buy new AAA games and probably never will. The required hardware also eats large amounts of electricity which is quite expensive where I live.
So when this bubble bursts I probably won't even notice.
Rudy, your common sense and sense of humor never escapes me.
Be careful, the keyboard warriors are watching!
GoldenGoat
Posts: 303 +317
I think game reviews are the main thing that makes or breaks a big budget game. I've seen some games that we really fun get mediocre reviews and then nobody buys them and they lose money. This is true with other products outside of gaming too though.
I don't think there's anyone to blame here except simple supply and demand. Supply costs are too high, and the demand price is too low (and needs to be). $30-40 Atari Games (pre-crash), $50 Nintendo/PS1/Xbox games, then $60 in the post-3D era, and finally crossed into $70. Yet these games (PC) are finding themselves on major sales less than a year in. My buy price is $20-30 (occasionally $40-50), and according to inflation, that $50 game from 1985 would be $150 in today's money. No one's buying standard edition games for $150. Couple that with MUCH larger studios / budgets than we saw in the 80s and 90s. DLCs and microtransactions cover some of it (and controversial), but I've found these largely avoidable, don't solve the problem, and create a new one. I don't have the answer, and I only see the divide getting worse as people continue to expect more for less (and often get less for more).
If you do look for a compromise, the 6800 XT is ~$350 and I can generally keep it to just over 200W after undervolting. Getting 4K/100fps in Cyberpunk in FSR Quality. 9070 XT looks to be an even better value but will be more expensive.
Antias
Posts: 69 +64
LOL some of my associates and I call it "Rapids"...
gamerk2
Posts: 1,214 +1,328
I forgot to mention, even putting aside AGILE, that the size of management itself is a problem.
Back in the 90's, my father ran my companies Software department. On one particular project, he was responsible for approximately 100 individuals across two coasts (New York & California).
Fast forward to today, and the standard is that "No manager should be responsible for more then Ten people". So you have 10x the size of management, both costing significantly more, but also diffusing responsibility and hampering decision making.
Throw in companies being basically run by their financial departments (you have to justify *everything*, and that drives all development towards whatever the latest trend happens to be), and is it any shock that most big-budget games are...big-budget, samey, micro-transaction filled messes that force an open-world design even if it doesn't make any logical sense?
Back in the 90's, my father ran my companies Software department. On one particular project, he was responsible for approximately 100 individuals across two coasts (New York & California).
Fast forward to today, and the standard is that "No manager should be responsible for more then Ten people". So you have 10x the size of management, both costing significantly more, but also diffusing responsibility and hampering decision making.
Throw in companies being basically run by their financial departments (you have to justify *everything*, and that drives all development towards whatever the latest trend happens to be), and is it any shock that most big-budget games are...big-budget, samey, micro-transaction filled messes that force an open-world design even if it doesn't make any logical sense?
Not how it works.
1. The market also grew and sales are several times higher than back then.
2. You also have many more revenue streams, not just game sales.
3. Digital is much cheaper for distributors even with 30% cuts from stores.
Kn0xx
Posts: 60 +58
I have been here long enough to have a meaningfull sense, of why game industry is at dawn fall state.
Yes, game quality is getting way higher, but the tools are much more easier and more "smart" than before.
On older days, a game did take a long time to develop, because, everything had to be coded/invented, many game studios had their own engine... nowdays.. game-engines reached at a minimum "standard" status of delivery and capabilities...
For me, the AAA costs of big studios, are mostly paying dev to reach a deadline, no matter the cost, bug-free enough for a release ... to generate revenue.
Its common knowledge by the markting teams, that "NEW" gets attention and money, even if is such a "facelift" of an old/previous game ....
Big studios pay for managers to meet deadlines and target audience, managers will hire many devs to meet the CEO's targets ...
Games like BG3, BM:W, are a different breed of games, in this case, different breed of studio management..
You can also see how Black Desert was "born" from a very tight budget ....and how is it today...
Games like Starfield and StarCitizen should be a wake-up call to players and studios... of how a game not supposed to be, and how a game not supposed to be made... no matter the money.
Yes, game quality is getting way higher, but the tools are much more easier and more "smart" than before.
On older days, a game did take a long time to develop, because, everything had to be coded/invented, many game studios had their own engine... nowdays.. game-engines reached at a minimum "standard" status of delivery and capabilities...
For me, the AAA costs of big studios, are mostly paying dev to reach a deadline, no matter the cost, bug-free enough for a release ... to generate revenue.
Its common knowledge by the markting teams, that "NEW" gets attention and money, even if is such a "facelift" of an old/previous game ....
Big studios pay for managers to meet deadlines and target audience, managers will hire many devs to meet the CEO's targets ...
Games like BG3, BM:W, are a different breed of games, in this case, different breed of studio management..
You can also see how Black Desert was "born" from a very tight budget ....and how is it today...
Games like Starfield and StarCitizen should be a wake-up call to players and studios... of how a game not supposed to be, and how a game not supposed to be made... no matter the money.
I've been saying this for years. Gaming market needs to crash to weed out all the mediocre developers.
Game development is getting lazier & lazier. Games release broken & many stay broken. No optimizations. To dependent on fake resolutions & fake frames. Hardware has become mediocre too. Graphics cards are being held back by upscalers and frame generation. Instead of producing more powerful/efficient cards they're focusing on BS upscalers and frame generators.
In my opinion the problem is not the "mediocre" developers but the opportunistic publishers that want to make a quick dollar by rushing out broken games that should still remain in development till full completion, but instead they are using the consumers to be their Beta testers while those poor bastards are paying full price just for wanting to play on "release" date.
Everything I said is accurate.
Games are cheaper than they have ever been, not more expensive.
Back in the day there were not millions of indie games under $30. Triple AAA games have remained the same price. They have not been impacted by inflation unlike everything else.
Saying games are getting more expensive is not baked in reality.
The context of the discussion is important, aka the big budgets of the games. It sounded like you were defending increasing the cost of a game
And outside of the context, computers are cheaper now than they were in the 70s. Inflation isn't everything.
I'm guessing you're the vocal minority previously mentioned. I personally prefer cartoony graphics in games. I prefer the effort to be put into making a game both interesting and fun to play as opposed to spending that effort making a dull game look photo realistic. (I'm in my early 60's)Seems like an argumentation a 7-year-old would come up with. Does the son consult the father on this?
Context of the discussion is multiple people talking about how game prices have gone up and are very expensive.The context of the discussion is important, aka the big budgets of the games. It sounded like you were defending increasing the cost of a game
And outside of the context, computers are cheaper now than they were in the 70s. Inflation isn't everything.
While they are cheaper than they ever have been, thats the context and what I am getting at.
The production costs are insane. The best games came out of small studios with a handful of people - now they've surpassed an entire Hollywood production. That said, as long as the profits are there, companies see it as a necessary expense, I.e. the cost of doing business.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Every angle covered: nearly 250 Sony cameras set to capture Super Bowl LIX- captaincranky replied
-
Apartment landlords can force tenants to use specific ISPs under new FCC action- scavengerspc replied