GTA V
Yep
GTA V
Those games are tiny in scope next to GTA V, though. Not really comparable.No, it's a team larger than 1000 developers working for 5 years on a single project. I find what Naughty Dog could do in 2 years with Uncharted 2 & 3 with a team size that is probably less than 1/5th of that to be far more impressive.
It pretty much is an unprecedented number of people working on the game for longer than everyone else. That's why the budget is like 4x what most games get.Those games are tiny in scope next to GTA V, though. Not really comparable.
And there isn't that many people dedicated to a GTA game for five years. In that time Rockstar as a whole released Midnight Club games, GTA IV DLC, LA Noire, Max Payne 3, Red Dead Redemption, etc. The "main" team behind GTA is really R* North.
Uncharted is one of the most technically impressive series around, though, I agree.
No, it's a team larger than 1000 developers working for 5 years on a single project. I find what Naughty Dog could do in 2 years with Uncharted 2 & 3 with a team size that is probably less than 1/5th of that to be far more impressive.
Sure, but over 1000 people dedicated to it for all five years? That seems impossible to me with all the other games they've put out (some of them getting contributions from all of their studios).It pretty much is an unprecedented number of people working on the game for longer than everyone else. That's why the budget is like 4x what most games get.
Sure, but over 1000 people dedicated to it for all five years? That seems impossible to me with all the other games they've put out (some of them getting contributions from all of their studios).
Unless I'm misjudging just how big R* as a whole is :lol
No, it's a team larger than 1000 developers working for 5 years on a single project. I find what Naughty Dog could do in 2 years with Uncharted 2 & 3 with a team size that is probably less than 1/5th of that to be far more impressive.
I don't think 1000 people for 5 years is likely either but it is definitely an expensive formula.
Ubisoft does like 800 people on a game for 2 years. Take Two, because they're Take Two, does like lots of people for longer periods of time. But that's the difference between GTA and everything else.
Not that it isn't warranted. Obviously the game can sell as it sells.
This thread makes me want a beyond port for ps4.
Yeah, Ubisoft is monstrous as well. I haven't finished AC IV, but I can only imagine how long the credits are.I don't think 1000 people for 5 years is likely either but it is definitely an expensive formula.
Ubisoft does like 800 people on a game for 2 years. Take Two, because they're Take Two, does like lots of people for longer periods of time. But that's the difference between GTA and everything else.
Not that it isn't warranted. Obviously the game can sell as it sells.
How can games like Halo 4 be considered above par technically if their sub-720p...
Come on GAF!
How can games like Halo 4 be considered above par technically if their sub-720p...
Come on GAF!
Resolution is not all that matters.
I agree with OP about Rage. The game looked as good as BF3 on consoles while performing as well as Call of Duty. I'm convinced John Carmack is some sort of wizard.
That is exactly what I said.Resolution is a big factor considering we're talking about the "Most technically impressive game" But, it is not the only factor.
No, it's a team larger than 1000 developers working for 5 years on a single project. I find what Naughty Dog could do in 2 years with Uncharted 2 & 3 with a team size that is probably less than 1/5th of that to be far more impressive.
Some of my shots: