Support NeoGAF

[Buzzman]

So EA and Ubisoft should invest hundreds of millions into a long-shot that might destroy the company and cause thousands to lose their jobs,

for the love of gaming

This is probably one of the worst ideas I've ever read on here, good job OP.

 

[rrs]

And Daikatana bombed hard.

yeah, but Deus Ex was awesome

 

[Dabi]

By this I mean, aside from the annual dead line projects that take a few years to produce, why not invest in one major IP that is ran off a blank check, no dead line, AAA productions through the roof. You know, like how a 1st party exclusive is suppose to be. Their catalogue would be mobile, indie, annual sports/ block buster action, MMO, and major passion product. The game would be bug free, none gender or age target specific, have no dlc, no freemiums. No busines over art. Just a present for gamers and for the love of gaming.

I'm assuming this stems from Horizons cycle. I have no clue about how financing works behind games but I don't see why they can get a small team of about 20-35 people and just spend a few years prototyping ideas. Once they have the best idea shift resources over and get the project done. Could be interesting, the long preproduction times Sony gives teams is definitely paying off.

 

[Lashley]

Sure, if they like to lose money

 

[Tigress]

Horizon was 4 or 5 years. Rumors about them working on a new ip started the same year the ps4 came out in 2013. Bethesda spends a lot of time on their games but I don't think they have ever worked on a game for more than 5 years either. Oblivion was about 5 years and so was Skyrim. Fallout 4 was 4 was 5 years as well. 6 or 7 years is probably too long. Tech changes would change too much during that time and might make your game outdated.

Ah, to be fair I was taking the thread more as a longer than just a year or two (give them time to actually really work on the game rather than rush stuff out) rather than 7 years literally. I mean 4-5 years still seems like a long time compared to what Ubisoft does with their games. But come to think of it, EA isn't as bad as Ubi about wanting to rush games (and Ubi seems to be backing off that strategy some). And I think I tend to think more about the times between fallout and forgetting Elder Scrolls (funny thing is an Elder Scrolls game was my first Bethesda game but Fallout has definitely become my favorite series so I focus on it a lot more).

Anyways, as some one who enjoys open world/sandbox (even better) games, it seems the ones who do it right are the ones who have a reputation of the game taking a while to come out. Where as the ones that tend to give them a bad name tend to be the ones more rushed out.

 

[xealo]

Oh yeah because that 60 million copies of GTA V sold is too costly for Rockstar to recover from.

There are very few games that moves the kinds of numbers GTA does. Implying Rockstars flagship series are anything but the exception to the norm in terms of sales gives a pretty skewed view of the situation.

 

[Nirolak]

Ubisoft basically does.

Watch Dogs was 6 years, The Crew was 6 years, and The Division started development around 2009.

Not sure it's producing astonishing results.

 

[Arksy]

.

On the flipside, if Valve had shareholders we'd be up to half life 5 by now...

 

[King Tubby]

This is the kind of proposal that betrays a childlike understanding of game development and how businesses operate.

Oh yeah because that 60 million copies of GTA V sold is too costly for Rockstar to recover from.

Yes, just follow this simple formula and you'll produce one of the best selling games of all time. Why didn't anyone think of that before?

 

[breakfuss]

Too many people are focusing on the specifics (which are indeed unrealistic) and not the essence of what the op is saying.
I think he is talking about a franchise that doesn't come out every year or every other year and that it is a passion project and not a product of target groups.
Personally i don't know if they have such franchises or not or if they should but i would probably be more interested in them than those yearly franchises that i don't buy.

Fair enough. OP should probably be revised then because it's ridiculously naive.

 

[wildfire]

Ubisoft basically does.

Watch Dogs was 6 years, The Crew was 6 years, and The Division started development around 2009.

Not sure it's producing astonishing results.

And all of them weren't close to polished let alone bug free.

When any company is capable of delivering a game after 2 years of development with .01% chance of finding a bug they have the skill to apply that to most of their games. Simply put noone has the expertise to pull off that check box. You can't expect teams working on pieces of a game and glueing them together to not run into this problem.

 

[ScatheZombie]

Annual projects are not completed in one year. Most games that appear to be on an annual cycle actually have 2-4 year development cycles that are staggered across multiple studios - such that studio A releases in year one, B in year two, C in year three, and then A again in year four.

Nothing operates on a blank check.

That's not how first party exclusives are supposed to be.

Just because a game is in development for a longer time, with a larger budget, doesn't mean it will be bug free. The worst game I personally launched in terms of known issues on release day was in development for over 6 years

You always target a specific market.

A longer development cycle would basically demand DLC or microtransactions.

The games industry is a business. Only independents have the power to 'make art'.

 

[Skab]

Heh. Grats on having devs call out your thread as an example of the average gamer being uninformed about game dev on Twitter.

 

[Weltall Zero]

I have a different Simpsons quote that sums up this thread.

Not sure they got the right Homer for the image, though...

 

[Whales]

3 years is more than enough for a super polished game... 7 years is crazy to even think about lol

 

[True Fire]

The game would be bug free, none gender or age target specific, have no dlc, no freemiums. No busines over art. Just a present for gamers and for the love of gaming.

AahAHAHahHAHAHAaAAhhaaaa

A game with a 7 year dev cycle would be something like GTA Online. Loaded with DLC and microtransactions.

 

[mdubs]

Heh. Grats on having devs call out your thread as an example of the average gamer being uninformed about game dev on Twitter.

I saw this and am vicariously embarrassed for the OP's astounding cluelessness

 

[The3DGameArtist]

Good luck actually keeping a good team going for seven years. It's hard enough in the industry to get people to stay on for a proper 3-year cycle.

 

[chillybright]

Too bad op stopped replying... The first few pages were highly entertaining.

 

[Randdalf]

I kind of feel like OP has a point. Having an extended period of development with a small team working on core tech and gameplay before scaling up the game with all of its content could produce good results. Would struggle to keep people interested for 7 years though! If would also let story be developed over a longer period too.

 

[yurinka]

There are some more or less recent games from them that had a (unintentional) 7-10 years long development process.

 

[Mudron]

OP proves that a lot of people have absolutely no idea how ANYTHING - much less videogames - are made.

 

[Trace]

I kind of feel like OP has a point. Having an extended period of development with a small team working on core tech and gameplay before scaling up the game with all of its content could produce good results. Would struggle to keep people interested for 7 years though! If would also let story be developed over a longer period too.

This is how a lot of games already get made. Things in AAA companies will always be prototyped before anyone commits to making a full game.

 

[privitsan02]

This is a horrible idea. Even IP's that were in productions with big budgets and time still flopped like The Order: 1886 or Quantum Break.

You can't just magically expect high-quality and successful games just because you poured love and care into your projects. You'd get laughed out of every meeting and office.

Best wishes.

 

[Hippolnareff]

I mean, I can't say I disagree. I'm happy to say I know next to nothing about game development but the amount of backseat game programming/development/problem-solving that goes on is crazy. Not to mention that this forum is probably the best out there (in my opinion), the line of thinking "Why doesn't this game developer just do X so they can win awards/make more money/make better games?" gets so out of hand in other places. Not hating on anyone, just thought it was an interesting tweet.

 

[Mudron]

I mean, I can't say I disagree. I'm happy to say I know next to nothing about game development but the amount of backseat game programming/development/problem-solving that goes on is crazy. Not to mention that this forum is probably the best out there (in my opinion), the line of thinking "Why doesn't this game developer just do X so they can win awards/make more money/make better games?" gets so out of hand in other places. Not hating on anyone, just thought it was an interesting tweet.

Also, the phrase "a present to gamers" speaks to the weird, unjustified entitlement that a lot of backseat gamers seem to share.

And the idea of a game that spends 7 years in development with an ungodly sum of money dropped into it without restrictions eventually turning out to be a cutting-edge game without DLC or microtransactions that somehow magically appeases all gamers *and* makes a profit for the publisher is a total fucking unicorn.

 

[Arion]

Seems like a high risk low reward situation. Bad idea.

 

[13ruce]

5 years is the sweet spot for epic masterpiece games. If ofcourse they are done well Mass Effect Andromeda is not a masterpiece lol.... And had a long dev cycle.

Rockstar, Nintendo, Sony and another few creste master peices with that time frame.

 

[CosmicQueso]

OP, thanks for this. It's made me go back and rethink everything.

 

[Megatron]

Hey op, spend five years of your life building a really nice piece of furniture. MaKe sure its well sanded, beautifully and meticulously painted, use only the best materials and sell it at the end for $5. It can be your passion project.

 

[Dremorak]

More time does not mean a better game. 7 years would more often than not result in a bloated unfocused mess. They could make 2-3 shorter riskier projects in that time.

 

[Rhazer Fusion]

7 years is way too long for any project. In 7 years you an create 2 or even 3 good games. It's one reason waiting for sequels to certain Japanese games is so excruciating.

 

[SwordStruck]

Name me one major IP currently owned by EA and Ubisoft that sells 1/5th of what GTA V does.

FIFA.

 

[FIREKNIGHT2029]

OP didn't think this one through properly before he hit the new thread button. Never going to happen, too costly and too risky. Using GTA as an example is terrible because GTA is GTA.

 

[Compsiox]

I always think about this.

But it's just not feasible.

I wish a billionaire gamer would fund a game with an unlimited budget and expect to not make the money back. That's more feasible. No shareholders to answer to.

 

[Wagram]

No developer or publisher should suffer through 7 years of development unless that includes 3 years of on and off pre-planning.

 

[Crossing Eden]

5 years is the sweet spot for epic masterpiece games. If ofcourse they are done well Mass Effect Andromeda is not a masterpiece lol.... And had a long dev cycle.

Rockstar, Nintendo, Sony and another few creste master peices with that time frame.

There's no sweet spot for how long a game needs to be in development to be a masterpiece, it depends on the project.

 

[PatientGamer]

7 year dev time??

That's an entire generation's worth of time... They should release at least 3/4 new IP every gen in my opinion.

 

[Haunted]

I mean, I can't say I disagree. I'm happy to say I know next to nothing about game development but the amount of backseat game programming/development/problem-solving that goes on is crazy. Not to mention that this forum is probably the best out there (in my opinion), the line of thinking "Why doesn't this game developer just do X so they can win awards/make more money/make better games?" gets so out of hand in other places. Not hating on anyone, just thought it was an interesting tweet.

I mean, this thread is literally dozens of people laughing at the one guy not knowing how capitalism works, so it (and NeoGAF in general) probably aren't the best example. That said, I have no doubts that there are other communities and comment sections that would prove his point.

 

[Compsiox]

I mean, I can't say I disagree. I'm happy to say I know next to nothing about game development but the amount of backseat game programming/development/problem-solving that goes on is crazy. Not to mention that this forum is probably the best out there (in my opinion), the line of thinking "Why doesn't this game developer just do X so they can win awards/make more money/make better games?" gets so out of hand in other places. Not hating on anyone, just thought it was an interesting tweet.

Why are you acknowledging this?

He's generalizing based on one person's post.

 

[SolicitorPirate]

Why are you acknowledging this?

He's generalizing based on one person's post.

Sure, this particular instance is largely one post/thread. But the idea that gamers are largely ignorant of game development, yet weirdly passionate about the process despite their ignorance, is fairly uncontroversial

 

[SiDCrAzY]

OP is a genius.

 

[Teeth]

Hot tip: Most developers don't actually want to work on the same project for 5+ years.

 

[Heckler456]

Why are you acknowledging this?

He's generalizing based on one person's post.

He's not generalizing based on one person's post. He's stating an argument and giving an example.

 

[Compsiox]

He's not generalizing based on one person's post. He's stating an argument and giving an example.

The "example" is supposed to be a reminder that a majority don't understand. The "example" shows one post by one person.

I understand that it probably is an issue but the example is awful.

 

[Heckler456]

The "example" is supposed to be a reminder that a majority don't understand. The "example" shows one post by one person.

I understand that it probably is an issue but the example is awful.

What? That tweet isn't that guy's thesis. What are you expecting, him to deliver a preponderance of evidence? He saw some guy being ignorant, and he thought it exemplified the fact that gamers in general don't have a clue as to what goes into making a video game. Where's the rub here? If you don't agree, it's up to you to disprove his argument.

 

[Compsiox]

What? That tweet isn't that guy's thesis. What are you expecting, him to deliver a preponderance of evidence? He saw some guy being ignorant, and he thought it exemplified the fact that gamers in general don't have a clue as to what goes into making a video game. Where's the rub here? If you don't agree, it's up to you to disprove his argument.

I'm not disagreeing. I'm just being picky about his example.

 

[Syriel]

By this I mean, aside from the annual dead line projects that take a few years to produce, why not invest in one major IP that is ran off a blank check, no dead line, AAA productions through the roof. You know, like how a 1st party exclusive is suppose to be. Their catalogue would be mobile, indie, annual sports/ block buster action, MMO, and major passion product. The game would be bug free, none gender or age target specific, have no dlc, no freemiums. No busines over art. Just a present for gamers and for the love of gaming.

So you want EA and Ubi to become Blizzard?

 

[IdreamofHIME]

Time and money don't make good games, care and love do. If it was the former, then FFXV would be the greatest game if all time.

I mean, I can't say I disagree. I'm happy to say I know next to nothing about game development but the amount of backseat game programming/development/problem-solving that goes on is crazy. Not to mention that this forum is probably the best out there (in my opinion), the line of thinking "Why doesn't this game developer just do X so they can win awards/make more money/make better games?" gets so out of hand in other places. Not hating on anyone, just thought it was an interesting tweet.

Quoting a guy trolling users on twitter who just happens to be perma-banned for trolling users and mods on twitter...
...full circle.

 

[Crossing Eden]

Time and money don't make good games, care and love do. If it was the former, then FFXV would be the greatest game if all time.

Even if you have an idealised passionate team of individuals, (rarely are people working be working on games while genuinely hating the project with the scope of triple A even with the extreme crunch), you can end up with a bad game.