Because mega-publishers like EA and Activision are trying to price each other (and other devs) out of existence. They're the only ones who can take the brunt of this.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
GI Biz: A developer sees model costs double for Durango sequel to Xbox 360 title
- Thread starter subversus
- Start date
Because mega-publishers like EA and Activision are trying to price each other (and other devs) out of existence. They're the only ones who can take the brunt of this.
ahhhhh OK you can't see the comments unless you have an account.
Yeah so like those guys said, a lot of these companies make it hard on themselves because they're simply doing it wrong. Sure it's never going to be cheap to make a game, but a lot of companies are making it way worse than it has to be. And those companies rightfully are going to have trouble.
Considering how much money Sony's blown on the PS3, how many developers have been shitcanned this generation (hell just last month), and the fall from grace that we've seen with those still left (Japanese devs like Konami, etc., but even EA's seen some losses these past few years), why do you assume that the games industry knows what it's doing?
it's sort of natural selection.
do you see a lot of studios doing what Pixar do? high-profile console development will be in the same ballpark.
That's not even accounting for the amount of shaders it will have! (So many more shaders).
Pachterballs
Banned
I think its bullshit. its not going to DOUBLE costs. If they're doing PC dev development anyhow; you'd be uprezing that shit anyhow; and a lot of normal mapping techniques (gears) requred a high resolution model anyhow
This "developer" is probably small time and makes generi games anyhow.
This "developer" is probably small time and makes generi games anyhow.
they already do. look at top sellers. These are not made by Japanese devs unless they are called Nintendo.
This is horrible. If the average cost of developing HD games this generation is between $18 million to $28 million then Mr. Yves Guillemot's forecast of next gen game development cost of $60 million is likely to be true.
What this means is that the console sector of the video game industry will likely crash if indeed costs for developing next gen games double.
What this means is that the console sector of the video game industry will likely crash if indeed costs for developing next gen games double.
GraveRobberX
Platinum Trophy: Learned to Shit While Upright Again.
Care to post your credentials?
You don't have to be a fortune teller and try to read the future, you can see the writing on the wall, and most aren't course correcting, Big Fish will survive the Tsunami/Tidal Wave, the little guppers will be a-washed to the land and die, "Island of Permanent Closure"
If this was happening in any industry, everyone would "Reign it in", not like the gaming industry who only knows how to "Make it Rain/Rain it out"
SolidSnakex
Member
Or you're just going to see Nintendo (and third party devs that support them) smiling all the way to the bank.
Gemüsepizza
Member
You mean crash like the film industry with ~$200-300m films and low-budget films for $20.000? Devs are not forced to make ultra quality graphics.
Probably more than you think.
#1 traditional retail is going out the window soon anyway with digital.
#2 You're only half right about the less diversity. It will lead to less diversity in big budget mainstream heavily marketed games. You can see that happening already. There's 1st person shooters and a bunch of relatively safe, focus tested stuff that comprises those. And it will stay that way and rightfully so. Bigger budget = higher risk and those things are less of a risk.
But it will lead to more diversity with the switch to digital and tons of smaller indie companies not having to spend money getting into retailers, printing discs, etc. They'll have their XBLA and PSN to market their games, and it will be the ones that stand out the most, the most unique experiences, that will be the breakthroughs.
So less diversity on the high end, more diversity overall though.
It will be like modern Hollywood. Only a few big time publishers and a ton of indies trying to hit the big time. And really, isn't video gaming already like that now?
Of course. Sure there's a lot of companies closing now, but seriously step back and take at look at the ones closing. For the most part their output has been shit for a long period of time or they've grossly mismanaged things like having a huge budget on a game that flops, or distributing their game wrong etc. Sure let's have compassion for people who've lost their jobs, but let's be realistic and take note that if the companies didn't fuck up in one way or another those people would still have their jobs. That's this gen, next gen, all previous gens, and all time everywhere in every facet of business since forever.
Phonomezer
Banned
This by the same devs clamoring for a super powerful console which, by all accounts, is exactly what MS is delivering? lol.
If costs are raised significantly for the first 1 or 2 years, I expect MS will subsidise some key 3rd party development.
If costs are raised significantly for the first 1 or 2 years, I expect MS will subsidise some key 3rd party development.
If development costs will double and studios can't afford this doesn't it stand to reason that they simply won't double? Or are we to expect studios to knowingly run themselves into the ground because you know, costs doubled, we gotta do it? Of course I know they're not going to double, models are already made with extremely high poly counts and textures are overcompressed. If it costs more to do less work you're doing it wrong.
LightofRohan
Member
"I Don't get it! Why not just make it like dem old PS3/360 games!"
Because he said to take full advantage of the Durango. And it's 100%, higher poly models take longer in most aspects; although it frees up a lot of optimization time in the texture, lighting ect. departments.
But I could see games being $70 next generation. I'd be ok with it.
Because he said to take full advantage of the Durango. And it's 100%, higher poly models take longer in most aspects; although it frees up a lot of optimization time in the texture, lighting ect. departments.
But I could see games being $70 next generation. I'd be ok with it.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
Yep. PC indies and iOS will be my gaming salvation.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
There is a slight difference.Gemüsepizza;36606850 said:
Movies are a passive form of entertainment. All they take is you basking in the show. Videogames are interactive, and not just interactive, generally controlled by an abstract device. Those two factors limit the possible audience. The second more than the first.
I think if it was as simple as thinking at the game to illicit a response people would be gamers to a much larger degree. Budgets increase too rapidly without the buyers to offset the increased costs of development and you end up with either a recipe for games in the hundreds of dollar region, or a complete marginalization of the market.
Imagine a market that can only serve Call of Duty, Football, and Mario Kart fans.
The smart option would be to limit budgets to a sustainable level. That means if you're going for high realism your game might only be a couple of hours long. A lot of games might be forced into that, but I hope for a leveling off period. Focus less on more detail in every model, and more on making what's there look good.
I'd love to see Fusion put to making a pristine image, more than bogging the system trying to get sweat to appear realistically dripping off of a perfectly tessellated nose.
Ninja Moomin
Banned
This.
Console markers % share of the overal games market is shrinking and yet we're about to pile on more costs....? think of how mkany studios went under this gen.... if you don't make a triple A blockbuster you're going to be completely marginalised in the mainstream game space now.
TheFLYINGManga_Ka
Member
Maybe Sony saying that the PS3 will be a ten year cycle or Nintendo sticking to current-gen tech isn't such a crazy idea after all.
Seeing all these rumors about anti-used games, no hard drive, online at all times, etc., aren't good signs either.
For me, I think the graphics are really good already. Nintendo is really the only one who needed an upgrade. As for MS/Sony, in my opinion I think they should just do a slight upgrade to the current gen systems for the next five or so years rather than making a next-gen super model. I'm not tech-savy but I would think all we really need is better framerates and anti-aliasing rather than sexier polygons. Just make it powerful enough to play Gears, BF3, or Uncharted with 60fps and less jaggies than that should be good enough, right? We don't need to see all of Nathan Drake's pimples or that piece of hair sticking out of his mole.
I maybe talking out of my ass but wouldn't a console upgrade like I described be less expensive, just make it faster for 60fps gaming? Or is that still too much.
Because if the next-gen consoles have super amazing graphics but 30fps, I wouldn't consider that a huge payoff especially with how expensive it will all be for both consumers and developers.
In other words, I'm kind of worried about next-gen. I wonder if we're moving too fast.
Seeing all these rumors about anti-used games, no hard drive, online at all times, etc., aren't good signs either.
For me, I think the graphics are really good already. Nintendo is really the only one who needed an upgrade. As for MS/Sony, in my opinion I think they should just do a slight upgrade to the current gen systems for the next five or so years rather than making a next-gen super model. I'm not tech-savy but I would think all we really need is better framerates and anti-aliasing rather than sexier polygons. Just make it powerful enough to play Gears, BF3, or Uncharted with 60fps and less jaggies than that should be good enough, right? We don't need to see all of Nathan Drake's pimples or that piece of hair sticking out of his mole.
I maybe talking out of my ass but wouldn't a console upgrade like I described be less expensive, just make it faster for 60fps gaming? Or is that still too much.
Because if the next-gen consoles have super amazing graphics but 30fps, I wouldn't consider that a huge payoff especially with how expensive it will all be for both consumers and developers.
In other words, I'm kind of worried about next-gen. I wonder if we're moving too fast.
GraveRobberX
Platinum Trophy: Learned to Shit While Upright Again.
"Remember when $40-$50 was the defacto cry, trying to save some monies, yeah, now $60 is the new $50"
Gemüsepizza;36606850 said:
They're not forced to, but doubtless a lot of the bigger companies will, because they're in an arms race to be the provider of big blockbuster Hollywood equivalents.
And this is scary, because we've seen how shitty bloated budget $200-300 million films can be, forced to dumb themselves down to the lowest common denominator while appealing to nobody. This generation has already seen a dearth of original content and way too much playing it safe. It'll only get worse with higher budgets and more emphasis on funding "surefire" hits.
Furthermore, the audience for "hardcore" gaming is not growing at a rate to properly fund these exploding budgets, unlike in the film industry where it's expanding to international markets and cultivating new audiences (who occasionally buoy shitty domestic returns). Not that these high-budgets for Hollywood films are healthy either.
EDIT: I see Thunder Monkey's already made my points, and better.
it's a site aimed at industry members, not gamers. It's business-oriented.
Not worried about this one bit, devs will just be condensed and we will see mostly big budget title and series which is fine with me. Isn't that basically what we get right now? And if costs are a concern in development the WiiU should be cheaper to develop for than PS4/720. There are plenty of avenues for devs to make games via Steam and tablets/phones etc. etc. as well. The death of the videogame industry will never happen in the United States over something like this, there are too many people out there willing to spend money on games. DLC? Seems to have done pretty well this gen as a second revenue stream for some devs.
TheFLYINGManga_Ka
Member
$70 a game isn't my worry. Not having Persona 6 or another VanillaWare game is what I'm worried about.
We're already there. EA and Activision are in a league of their own, followed by Capcom and Ubisoft. There really isn't much else.
(And I fully expect a couple of the above-mentioned to fall from grace too next-gen.)
Acheteedo
Member
So, "I'm having to double my budget for models", note he's specifically referring to models and nothing else, and naturally game development involves a lot more than modelling. I can't imagine that the cost of audio production is going to increase by much. Have we any reason to believe that this isn't the standard next gen jump that we always see?
Thunder Monkey
Banned
I wouldn't argue better.
well, everyone expects the costs to rise when a next generation arrives.
But while i'd like next gen consoles to be really powerful, i wonder how much power is necessary to run games games at 1080p with AA and in 3d for current tv sets, considering we are in a difficult economic environment that would make difficult for expensive consoles to sell a lot. Maybe those rumoured ps4 low specs are true afterall.
But while i'd like next gen consoles to be really powerful, i wonder how much power is necessary to run games games at 1080p with AA and in 3d for current tv sets, considering we are in a difficult economic environment that would make difficult for expensive consoles to sell a lot. Maybe those rumoured ps4 low specs are true afterall.
you forgot Take2.
It's also completely ignoring the fact models are often done at high poly counts in order to generate normal maps. Just check out the zBrush models for Gears of War 3, an insane level of detail there. And PC versions of console games often have much higher resolution textures, so obviously those are already being developed too. Where's the massive cost increase coming from exactly?
TheFLYINGManga_Ka
Member
Yeah, I think DLC will be a bigger nightmare next-gen.
GraveRobberX
Platinum Trophy: Learned to Shit While Upright Again.
I can't wait for the first ever funded $500,000,000"esque" this is our AVATAR for Video Games budget
Bet you it will be James Cameron related somehow, might include Holograms by then...Might! Who the Fuck am I kidding, we'll be plugged into the SEN/XBL/NIN Matrix by then
Bet you it will be James Cameron related somehow, might include Holograms by then...
dragonelite
Member
My first thought was double his budget he can spend on polygons,textures res and bones for rigging. Really if cost are going to increase because you can use more polygons then something is wrong with you. If you are used to make 15k polygon models and can now use 45k polygons doesn't mean you have to go all the way or just use a cheap shortcut called subdivide/tesselate.
I haven't read or clicked the article yet but i think once again they are taking quotes out of context so either the article author does it or the op.
Edit: Read the article and the author just throws this quote without going deeper on it. So they have my dirty click money.
That makes a lot more sense than cost in dollars doubling.
Nice catch, always forget them.
$80 for a game? Before DLC?
but you said this pleases you
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
Damn those polygon prices. Triangles are getting so expensive.
GraveRobberX
Platinum Trophy: Learned to Shit While Upright Again.
$70-$80 for a game, and the collector's edition will get mega bumped to squeeze every penny you morseled away
Can you say $99.99 Limited Editions, that give you 2 quests or 1 mod or 1 weapon (which used to be $69.99)
or
The $129.99 Collector's Edition, throw in art book/OST, + all the stuff from Limited + extra goodies (The $99.99 Edition)
or
The $199.99 Super Duper ["Are You Fucking Insane"] Edition, everything of Collector's + a toy of some sort or Statue made out of PVC piping (The $149.99 Edition)
Can you say $99.99 Limited Editions, that give you 2 quests or 1 mod or 1 weapon (which used to be $69.99)
or
The $129.99 Collector's Edition, throw in art book/OST, + all the stuff from Limited + extra goodies (The $99.99 Edition)
or
The $199.99 Super Duper ["Are You Fucking Insane"] Edition, everything of Collector's + a toy of some sort or Statue made out of PVC piping (The $149.99 Edition)
There's some truth to it. Look at the PC indie scene and games like Natural Selection 2, Overgrowth, Hawken and Amnesia. They're games that, despite not having the financing of AAA studios, hold their own as a high-end experience and have unique premises and gameplay to boot. I can see that happening with consoles as well, provided these stores are easily accessible, advertised and people ditch the mindset that that indie equals a sidescroller.
Similar threads
- Poll