• 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.

Bloomberg at GDC: creativity way too risky as AAA budgets hit 300 mil, painting bleak future with mostly safe IPs

Bartski

Gold Member
via




Designers of some the top-selling video games in the world gathered this week in San Francisco but the mood at this year’s Game Developers Conference was at times dour.

Game companies have been coping with layoffs, mergers and product cancellations. And while 2023 delivered some huge hits, many executives roaming the Moscone Center said rising development costs, slow growth and the pressure to deliver winners has led to a play-it-safe approach at the biggest companies, taking some of the edginess out of the industry.

“It’s harder to take risks,” said Martin Sibille, a vice president at Tencent Games who previously spent 15 years with Electronic Arts Inc.

Top titles can cost up to $300 million to develop — the same as a blockbuster movie. And just as the film industry loaded up on superhero pictures, video-game makers are relying on well-known franchises as budgets balloon, according to executives at some of the industry’s top companies.

Slow growth explains some of the caution. Market researcher NewZoo predicts the $184 billion industry will expand by less than 1% this year. More than 6,000 workers have lost their jobs recently as the major companies reduced spending.

Under new owner Microsoft Corp., Activision Blizzard canceled its Odyssey survival game, which had been in development for six years. Tencent’s Riot Games unit, Sony Group Corp.’s PlayStation Studios, Bandai Namco Holdings Inc. and Embracer Group AB are among the firms canceling dozens of unannounced titles. Electronic Arts halted work on a new first-person shooter in the Star Wars universe as it laid off 670 workers.

Players’ increasingly high demands for graphics and game play, paired with the continued popularity of “service” titles that stick around for years, has raised the barrier for new entrants.

“The video-game industry has not grown to accommodate budgets,” said Saxs Persson, a vice president at Epic Games. “You’re going to get things that people perceive as being safe. Nobody wants to play safe. Nobody says, ‘This is a good, predictable game.’”

At some point, he said, even well-known franchises might become cost prohibitive. The studio behind the award-winning Spider-Man 2, Insomniac Games, let staffers go this year despite selling 10 million copies of the $70 game, which cost $300 million to develop.

Investors have other options, such as a platform where users can make their own games — like Roblox Corp. or Epic Games’ Unreal Editor for Fortnite — because, for big-budget games the “hit rate is too low, it’s too unpredictable, it’s too long-range, and too many things can go wrong, not right,” Persson said.

Indie publisher Devolver Digital Inc. is one of the few firms that hasn’t rethought its approach amid the pressure in the industry. The company works with game budgets in the $1 million to $5 million range, like hits Cult of the Lamb and Hotline Miami.

“Our strategy is to weather what’s going on right now,” said Chief Marketing Officer Nigel Lowrie, who says small developers haven’t failed the company yet. “The risks are still there, but they’re not so high that it’s cataclysmic.”

At the conference, one studio head’s stark diversion from the trend generated praise from peers. Larian Studios founder Swen Vincke told attendees that his company won’t make another sequel to last year’s hit Baldur’s Gate III. The Dungeons & Dragons-themed game will be the last in the series.

“We want to do big, new things,” Vincke said on a panel. “We don’t want to rehash the thing that we’ve done already.”
 

Little Mac

Member
As a gamer, I feel like AA and indie games kinda shit on AAA though ...


defend season 1 GIF by The White Princess
 

cormack12

Gold Member
Spiderman 2 hasn't even been out a year. It seems the problem is these companies want an immediate RoI and profit within a release window. While new games probably have front loaded sales, they can make money well after their initial release date and then there are streaming rights or service based revenue for putting on gamepass or psn.

Stop preaching to your core demographic;
Stop acting like you hate them;
Stop making games longer and bigger - your players don't want this;
Stop developing games you think will work, and develop games the market wants;

There's a massive disconnect here. We want to make what we want, and take the risk people might not like it. As opposed to we will make what the market wants and it will sell well.

It reminds me of the last few years before the PS4 and XB1 where a lot of games became stale because they all felt like reskins. We're back here now imo.
 

Wildebeest

Member
What is creativity and if the games industry is better without it, then what does that mean? Do we just not have any spark of desire or inner life any more? Are we just mindless consumer machines waiting for the next hit of familiar corporate intellectual property like junkies? Questions I think need to be asked at this sort of discussion. If we look at Marvel movies, they were known for having CGI made on a budget that often wasn't great and a string of B tier characters who they had to sell hard to an uncaring public. What they did have were things such as good actors and the promise of a greater narrative building up to something epic.
 
Last edited:
videogame execs making up excuses for their incompetence is quite a sight. How about removing all the dead weight (staff) not related to videogame production? How about not making so many lame open worlds? How about working out a cost-efficient marketing campaign? (See Palworld example). How about rewarding innovation instead of following trends?

All this without mentioning the blue-haired elephants in the room.

People like this can't get out of business soon enough.
 

Xtib81

Member
I wish we had some details about what costs so much ? I'd assume it's the workers' salaries?
 
Last edited:
This is just an excuse for upper level incompetence. Make good games and it'll recoup.

Studios exist that have reached the level of acclaim where they can afford this.

Rockstar gonna Rockstar.

CPDR gonna cook.

Capcom, too.

If you're not one of those studios/pubs putting up numbers, shame on you for green-lighting such expensive projects.

Unity and UE exist for a reason.
 

StereoVsn

Member
I want to see an honest breakdown of these costs, I bet there's loads of waste that can be offloaded.
Marketing costs are huge, but overall I think the whole motion cap approach with realistic graphics is very expensive.

Plus often companies can’t get their shit together early enough and change the direction on a game multiple times requiring rework. Part of that could be due to paying too much attention to variety of external consultants.
 

Fabieter

Member
This is just an excuse for upper level incompetence. Make good games and it'll recoup.

Studios exist that have reached the level of acclaim where they can afford this.

Rockstar gonna Rockstar.

CPDR gonna cook.

Capcom, too.

If you're not one of those studios/pubs putting up numbers, shame on you for green-lighting such expensive projects.

Unity and UE exist for a reason.

Lmao if you think that good game equals success. There are hundreds of good games which bombed on different levels.
 

DonkeyPunchJr

World’s Biggest Weeb
I'm long past any hype for AAA games. If one comes out and it doesn't suck Gaf will let me know and i might give it a try. Otherwise I'll just keep playing games that don't look to nickel and dime me while delivering a sub par game and story.
Exactly how I’ve been feeling lately. AAA games are like Marvel movies now. Either they’re same-y, woke, and mildly entertaining, or else they’re a massive train wreck that loses a zillion dollars.

This industry needs a shakeup so bad. I think the bloodbath of layoffs is just the beginning.
 

Edgelord79

Gold Member
AAA game costs are getting out of hand. Hard to disagree with that. On top of that, many appear to be extremely generic. Not a good combination.

As someone else mentioned AA’s and Indies really are where the good stuff seems to be now.
 

yurinka

Member
I remember reading in a computer gaming magazine of the '80s complaining about the lack of innovation and creativity, saying that almost everything were fighting, puzzle or racing games.

Since then, people kept complaining every single generation about lack of innovation and creativity. When the reality is that every new generation we got more genres, subgenres and game types, new game types, new business models or even new platform types to play games differently.

Obviously companies want to have profit, so they normally do what they think will sell more. And human beings normally reject new and different things, normally prefer things they already know. So big companies, who invest a lot of money typically bet on safer stuff, what already works. But there's always small innovations or creative mixes, plus also some kamikaze devs or people who wrongly assume their crazy new idea is going to work and even if very different new ideas normally tank, a few succed. So later they are used as reference for future games.

And we wonder why every game now has MTXs of some sort.
Because most of the top performing games have them. If most top performing games would have pink elephants, then some time later every game would feature pink elephants.
 
Last edited:

Shut0wen

Banned
Seriously if you want to make a game that appeals to graphic nob heads then make a linear game, if you want to make a deep rpg make a game as deep as witcher 3 thats alot smaller in size and not filled with random shit, its pretty fucking easy for developers to make decent small scale games just publishers keep pushing things to max and games end up becoming incredibly casual because of it
 

Loomy

Thinks Microaggressions are Real
This is not new. It's also why movies studios greenlight sequels, remakes, franchises, adaptations instead of original content at $200m
 
All the freshest IDs will come from the lower budget space, but the ones that hit will quickly move up. Either with big budget sequels or copycats.
 

Ozriel

M$FT
Poor you, and your comprehension.

The adage is, it doesn't cost a lot to make a good game.

But if you're gonna have a ballooned 300M budget, it better be good.

It costs a lot to make a good AAA game. Any AAA game, for that matter. I’m not sure where you’re going with this.

And like he’s said, we’ve seen some good AAA games fail to sell very well.
 

Mr.Phoenix

Member
I think they need to sit down and ask themselves why game budgets are as high as $300M

The math used to be simple. You have a studio, 250 employees with an average salary of $100k/year. Thats $25M/year. Throw in $5M/year for miscellaneous costs. So you are spending $30/year on a 250-strong studio. 5 year dev time for a project and that is $150M. Throw in $25M for smart marketing or $50M for excessive marketing. 5-year project cost would be $175-$200M.

I feel if any publisher has a per-studio model that is worse than what I just described above is looking for trouble. Ideally, you want a project to cost no more than $150M. That way, you can at least break even from around 3M sales in a year.

Or just take on smaller projects.

One would also think that after all this time, game engines and middleware should have focused on making the process of development much easier and faster. Time is money.
 
Last edited:

lh032

I cry about Xbox and hate PlayStation.
This is just an excuse for upper level incompetence. Make good games and it'll recoup.

Studios exist that have reached the level of acclaim where they can afford this.

Rockstar gonna Rockstar.

CPDR gonna cook.

Capcom, too.

If you're not one of those studios/pubs putting up numbers, shame on you for green-lighting such expensive projects.

Unity and UE exist for a reason.
but what is considered a "good" game?

Alot of good games dont sell.
 
Last edited:

yurinka

Member
The biggest game so far this gen (Baldur’s Gate 3) only cost 100M to make, if some are paying more than that then they should really reflect on where their money is going.
Baldur's Gate 3 budget including marketing must have been beyond $100M and isn't the biggest game of this generation.
 

nkarafo

Member
Nah, fuck them, i don't care anymore. I'm tired of their constant crying.

- Their fault trying to cater to everyone because they want to sell to 3 billion people.
- Their fault paying their CEOs half the budget of a game.
- Their fault hiring celebrities and expensive voice and sound actors, bloating the budget even further.
- Their fault hiring useless people and activists who don't produce anything.
- Their fault attacking their main audience specifically when everything fails.

These studios want everything while breaking every marketing and math rule there is.

So collapse already. This way more smaller studios can be born from your ashes as they trim the fat by keeping only the useful and talented people.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom