Support NeoGAF

[Dunkley]

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

I think a lot of publishers would wish they could be in the same position as them with Take2, but sadly not every developer/franchise holds the reputation as Rockstar/GTA.

I think the only other dev like them would be Valve and Blizzard, and even then I don't feel entirely confident in stating that.

 

[Matt]

Yeah to sum up what I mean, have Ubisoft take an original or profound IP, Treat it like a 1st party IP, polish it to their hearts content, then release it when it's complete on all stages. They could continue releasing games at the same rate with bloated schedules to balance the budget. This one IP could be like their console life cycle defiant project. One that the creatives run wild with

...but what would be the point of such a thing?

 

[More_Badass]

Games dont need years in realtime, they need total manhours. There is little reason to give a 50 person team 7 years when you could give a 100 person team 3.5 years.

Obviously there is a balance to be struck between large teams and length of development. However with how rapidly tech can change over 7 years you would just be releasing an outdated game, or constantly be battling feature/scope creep.

It seems like 3-4 years with a large team is closer to the ideal length for AAA games for that very reason.

More people don't make a project develop faster. It's not some exponential formula

 

[gafneo]

That's a pretty good reason not to do this......

Then why do anything if dealing with money is putting lives at stake every second of the day? You think running the butter wheel will continue to thrive in the long run? What if the butter starts to taste bitter after awhile and there is no return coming back? That's always an every day risk.

 

[Steverulez]

That game was cancelled and rebooted 3 times. Different story all together

What do you think would happen to an ea/Ubisoft game in development for 7 years?

This is such a terrible idea 🤣

 

[Arnie]

(Genuine) Question for OP:

Have you ever worked at one company on one project for seven years?

Forgetting the financial black hole that this would likely become it seems a wholly irresponsible plan from a developer churn perspective. The team finishing the grandiose seven year project would mostly be entirely different to that which started it. People change, circumstances change, people have families, want progression in their careers, need new challenges.

 

[Eumi]

I'm pretty sure OP is trolling now.

 

[gafneo]

...but what would be the point of such a thing?

Hmmm what would be the point of having a quality game with tons of love put into it? Hmm, so hard to imagine why that would be a pay off.

 

[Markoman]

Too tired to even reply to this, so I'm just gonna say that I'm too tired to reply to this and leave a short and simple "No".

 

[sackninja]

Then why do anything if dealing with money is putting lives at stake every second of the day? You think running the butter wheel will continue to thrive in the long run? What if the butter starts to taste bitter after awhile and there is no return coming back? That's always an every day risk.

I can't really fully understand what you are saying here, but why would these companies take such a big risk when they are being super successful doing what they are already doing.

 

[OldMan]

Nah bro, like it or not EA got their formula down.

 

[ClosingADoor]

Or it could flop and cost them everything. Did I say every shot they take would be lightning in a bottle?

And how are you going to justify spending hundreds of millions on something that could very well be a flop?

 

[Steroyd]

1. That a quality product will make a ton of money
2. Then Battleborn would have been groundbreaking if it had that love
3. Because you could have a bunch of heads messing up the product rather than have a dream team of creators who have brainstorming freedom under their own creative will. All those mans hours would need to be accounted for and would be deadline heavy like all their other products.

You think Battleborn is a cynical game made by a board of directors? I thought Battleborn was considered an okay game launched less than 1 month before Overwatch, no amount of passion and rainbows is going to fix that.

While I do agree that creative artistic freedom should shine through the corporate bullshit, George Lucas and the Star Wars prequel trilogy shows what happens when the visionary has nothing but yes men and a blank cheque.

 

[gafneo]

(Genuine) Question for OP:

Have you ever worked at one company on one project for seven years?

Forgetting the financial black hole that this would likely become it seems a wholly irresponsible plan from a developer churn perspective. The team finishing the grandiose seven year project would mostly be entirely different to that which started it. People change, circumstances change, people have families, want progression in their careers, need new challenges.

I'm not making this up, it's been done. People survived in the end. With it good games came.

 

[Nabbis]

Id rather companies developed better tools to shrink the timescale. Another option would be to develop a proper framework for a game and let the community develop the assets or mods to widen the experience. Something like Skyrim and CS but brainstormed to take advantage of the community even more. Sure, you won't get AAA mocap or set pieces but it's basically the game development version of putting makeup on a pig.

 

[Steverulez]

Nah bro, like it or not EA got their formula down.

They do well with their staple sports and FPS titles (MP shooters BF/SWBF) but they do seem to be getting a bit of a problem with their games outside of that, MEA and Mirror's Edge Catalyst have disappointed critically, we'll see how MEA does commercially but presumably it took a hit of some sort from the scores it goes. TF2 was high quality but sales disappointed?

Ubisoft seem to have their formula down though and know how to handle the market.

 

[Eumi]

I'm not making this up, it's been done. People survived in the end. With it good games came.

...and so did bad games?

 

[More_Badass]

Hmmm what would be the point of having a quality game with tons of love put into it? Hmm, so hard to imagine why that would be a pay off.

"Love" doesn't sell. Neither does quality if you release at a bad time

 

[ClosingADoor]

I'm not making this up, it's been done. People survived in the end. With it good games came.

Can you list those games please? I have a hard time coming up with games in development for 7 years that have been a major succes.

 

[More_Badass]

Can you list those games please? I have a hard time coming up with games in development for over 5 years that have been a major succes.

Horizon is like the only recent AAA new IP that fits that, if I recall correctly

 

[Alessandro]

Unless they're sure the recoup costs and more if won't happen.

Look at mgs5, they even built a new engine and the it bombed.

 

[gafneo]

I can't really fully understand what you are saying here, but why would these companies take such a big risk when they are being super successful doing what they are already doing.

Because you always need a constingincy. Why else?

 

[LouisaFerre]

Dude, I want auteur style AAA games a lot but that's pretty unlikely. The closest you can reasonably hope for is a game where the resources allotted and the skill of the team are enough that the vision isn't significantly constrained, and even that's kind of rare.

The only two AAA games I expect this from at the moment are FF7 Remake and Death Stranding.

 

[gafneo]

...and so did bad games?

Super man 64 maybe?

 

[jesu]

I'm not making this up, it's been done. People survived in the end. With it good games came.

When?

Because you always need a constingincy.

Contingency for what?

 

[Steroyd]

Because you always need a constingincy. Why else?

A 7 year passion project is not a contingency plan, it's friendship is magic levels of delusion that leaves a scorched uninhabitable earth if things don't work out.

 

[Matt]

Hmmm what would be the point of having a quality game with tons of love put into it? Hmm, so hard to imagine why that would be a pay off.

For the company.

Because it seems like a ton of money and a ton of time for a giant risk that, even if it produced a product people liked and it sold well, probably would never overcome the opportunity cost of making it in the first place.

So, again, what's the point of it?

 

[SmokedMeat]

Or it could flop and cost them everything. Did I say every shot they take would be lightning in a bottle?

How many shots do you think they get? This isn't a videogame where you reload the last checkpoint.

 

[sackninja]

When?

You know, great successful games that were a joy to work on, like Duke Nukem Forever and La Noire.

 

[RexNovis]

I love how sassy OP is being to literally everyone else as they laugh and tell him how absurd this is. When you're literally the only person who thinks something is a good idea chances are it's not.

 

[CaviarMeths]

Sony and Nintendo can (sort of) do this (but 7 years is an exaggeration) because they sell hardware and want you to invest in their ecosystem. This sort of thing is almost never seen outside of platform holders. When it is seen, they become infamous stories of messy, troubled production.

 

[gafneo]

How many shots do you think they get? This isn't a videogame where you reload the last checkpoint.

As many shots as they want to take. Took Sega 2 shots with Shenmue. Killed them, but that's the nature of our world. We win some, and lose. Don't be afraid of losing. Everyone does sometimes. Like does it matter if I win or lose at these arguments?

 

[Catvoca]

"Why don't companies just make a perfect game with no flaws that appeals to everyone and has no budgetary limitations?"

 

[Mman235]

Your mistake is thinking development time has anything to do with the end quality (within reason). Some of the best games ever made were done in extremely short time periods, and many games with long development cycles are just giant messes.

 

[ClosingADoor]

As many shots as they want to take. Took Sega 2 shots with Shenmue. Killed them, but that's the nature of our world. We win some, and lose. Don't be afraid of losing. Everyone does sometimes. Like does it matter if I win or lose at these arguments?

And you want companies to hold SEGA as an example here? Like... you are literally asking these companies to gamble with hundreds of millions of dollars and maybe even the future of their company.

Don't be afraid of losing? I'd be a bit afraid if losing meant I need to fire hundreds of people if my gamble didn't pay off.

 

[sackninja]

As many shots as they want to take. Took Sega 2 shots with Shenmue. Killed them, but that's the nature of our world. We win some, and lose. Don't be afraid of losing. Everyone does sometimes. Like does it matter if I win or lose at these arguments?

Yeah, companies should just kill themselves making massive projects rather than just continue what they are doing and being successful.

 

[gafneo]

Sony and Nintendo can (sort of) do this (but 7 years is an exaggeration) because they sell hardware and want you to invest in their ecosystem. This sort of thing is almost never seen outside of platform holders. When it is seen, they become infamous stories of messy, troubled production.

Oh really, is 7 years an exaggeration? (Sarcasm emoji) It's more like a ballpark proposition. Let's not take everything so literal people.

 

[Nere]

As many shots as they want to take. Took Sega 2 shots with Shenmue. Killed them, but that's the nature of our world. We win some, and lose. Don't be afraid of losing. Everyone does sometimes. Like does it matter if I win or lose at these arguments?

The difference is that if you lose the argument, which by the way you have already lost this one, you don't lose hundreds of millions. I am sure if you were losing that much money per argument lost you would be far more careful and spend more time thinking your threads and posts instead of what we are getting now. I don't even know if you are trolling anymore or you are serious, I hope it is the former for your sake.

 

[george_us]

I'm pretty sure OP is trolling now.

Not really. Essentially what the OP is asking for is a AAA passion project from large third party publishers.

 

[SmokedMeat]

As many shots as they want to take. Took Sega 2 shots with Shenmue. Killed them, but that's the nature of our world. We win some, and lose. Don't be afraid of losing. Everyone does sometimes. Like does it matter if I win or lose at these arguments?

Where's the money coming from? They don't just print more money to take more shots. This is real life, with the livelihoods of real people threatened in the name of making a love letter to gamers that curse them on a daily basis.

 

[hey_it's_that_dog]

Or it could flop and cost them everything. Did I say every shot they take would be lightning in a bottle?

They should definitely risk their entire massive and successful company to make a special gift for gamers, the most grateful and reasonable audience there ever was.

 

[gafneo]

Yeah, companies should just kill themselves making massive projects rather than just continue what they are doing and being successful.

Success is only temporary. EA is old as hell. You may not notice, but they changed dramatically over the years. This isn't like Coke where they held the flavor for years and people got mad when it tasted different. The gaming industry as a whole dramatically changes every 5 years. Look back 30 years ago. Business isn't what it used to be. If you play their games you may not see the growth. Just like if you see a child grow into their 30s. Parents or the person growing don't notice much, but a lot have changed.

 

[CaviarMeths]

Oh really, is 7 years an exaggeration? (Sarcasm emoji) It's more like a ballpark proposition. Let's not take everything so literal people.

Well excuse me, princess.

 

[hey_it's_that_dog]

Success is only temporary. EA is old as hell. You may not notice, but they changed dramatically over the years. This isn't like Coke where they held the flavor for years and people got mad when it tasted different. The gaming industry as a whole dramatically changes every 5 years. Look back 30 years ago. Business isn't what it used to be. If you play their games you may not see the growth. Just like if you see a child grow into their 30s. Parents or the person growing don't notice much, but a lot have changed.

What is the thesis of this ramble?

Success is temporary so companies should fail on purpose by making big crazy business moves?

 

[SlipperyFishes]

You just answered your own question

GTA can afford to take time between releases. GTA sells well somehow even though the gap between releases can be many years.

Why would they compete against themselves?

Final Fantasy 15 is an oddity in GD terms. Because Versus 13 was announced years before it entered any kind of meaningful production cycle it can't reasonably be a game that took 7+ years. At best I'd give it fours years of generous, actual development time.

Also the development time of previous games in the series were much shorter. FF9 took less than two years from scenario writing to release and was developed in Hawaii while 8 was still wrapping up production. The only times when games took longer were due to staff or technical problems - not because they let the team take their time.

If they could they would have released these games in their intended timeframes. We really only got X-2 because XII was so far behind schedule and they had an engine ready to go.

FF13 - 5 years (development problems)
FF12 - 5 years (due to Matsuno's health reasons)
FF10-2 - 1.5 years
FF10 - 2 years
FF9 - 2 years
FF8- 2 years
FF7 - 3 years

The thing most shocking though is that while it took less than two years to develop FFX, the FFX HD remaster took longer for the team to bake. Though I guess you could fold X2 into that and it works out.

 

[RexNovis]

We win some, and lose.

I think I found OPs new motto.

 

[cooldawn]

I think a game per generation IP would be nice i.e. it doesn't have to have a 7 year cycle or cost at least X amount for £'s, for instance. As long as the developer has a clear goal and it's not changed by the suits to match business criteria.

A creators game.

For EA, Dead Space could have been the ideal opportunity.

 

[gafneo]

Where's the money coming from? They don't just print more money to take more shots. This is real life, with the livelihoods of real people threatened in the name of making a love letter to gamers that curse them on a daily basis.

They elimnate some of their successful brands. Kill off Dragon Age and Mass Effect once they start to falter. Take the money from those ips and build something much more massive in scale and ambition. Spend more money on the frost byte so it can handle newly created ai scripts and psychics based engines.

 

[Truant]

7 years? I don't even know if I'm alive in 7 years.

 

[gafneo]

What is the thesis of this ramble?

Success is temporary so companies should fail on purpose by making big crazy business moves?

Nah, it's not so crazy. They would do a lot of research. You think each Super Bowl team has to win? One must fall or become the champion. Question is, who will come out on top?