....... You don`t understand what "scope" means regarding videogames, it isn`t necessarily about map size. All those details you just mentioned are "scope". These things don`t implement themselves, it takes manhours, and exponentially so the higher quality/density you want it.
It's also the same year that Sony put out Helldivers day one on PC though, right?
It's the dumbest example to use Playstation as the example. Playstation makes a small fraction of their revenue off their own first party games. They make the majority of their money through MTX and sales of third party games. Which is then followed by subscription services. First party Playstation games could financially break even and they would be completely fine. It is in PlayStation's best interest to keep selling blockbuster games as long as it drives people to their platform, even with skyrocketing budgets
Because they want investment money. If they were a private company like Valve sure. But they want to project growth, and when that becomes difficult things start getting weird.
Third party engines have limitations on what they can and can't do, and to overcome such limitations you usually have to do a lot of the dirty work yourself anyway. I'd say the only reason many devs adopt these engines at all is because there are a high number of workers with experience on them, as opposed to an in-house engine new employees would have to learn from scratch.
Guilty_AI
, changing the makeup of the games might alleviate some of the costs also. The fact that many AAA games today are basically digitally animated movies has to increase costs. The old way used to be a few minutes of cut scene to setup the next level with the majority of play time spent interacting with that world in real time (I've always preferred this approach anyway) with the story unfolding from the game play and not just the movie bits. Maybe moving back more in that direction might help things out. A bit of a hybrid between the 360 era and the X1/PS4 era.
this
Ragnarok literally just had a trailer for PC, and SQEX is also ending their focus on exclusives development. You can stop talking about this if you want, but I doubt you will be successful convincing everyone else to ignore it.
Then it becomes:
In the same industry where Minecraft and GTAV are the best selling games of all time and where Nintendo succeeds?
Like Returnal that barely sold?
Yeah like cult classic returnal whose sequel will break into the mainstream. People like you can't seem to comprehend that the more you foster a niche IP, the more you will eventually get it to mainstream status. Look at Pikmin, metroid and Animal Crossing
I fully comprehend it, but it's too risky. Also, there is no guarantee Returnal would break into mainstream.
Yes, but contrary to Disney, both Playstation and Nintendo are extremely successfull doing what they do now.
Great point, that I also have been saying. Recent example for Sony: Helldivers 2. The first game wasn't a blockbuster hit. Smaller games can and would turn into major franchises, if companies wasn't so hell bent on chasing every gaas dollar.
This too, it doesn't get mentioned often but cutscenes and set-pieces (stuff like Uncharted 2's train-sequence or that boat chase in spider-man 2) tend to be very expensive to make. Bigger focus on gameplay with consistent base mechanics that persist throughout the entire game - with less situational mechanics and systems - is a good way to save costs and streamline production.@
So was Disney. Star Wars and Marvel were literally the biggest thing in movies.
Nevermind.
Disney is going down because they have a black Ariel, Brie Larsson saying white men shouldn't watch Captain Marvel and a Mexican Snow White saying they are completely changing the story.
Sony is going this same route so i'd argue it is, somewhat.
And dumping $190m into Acolyte (lmao) and only $90m into Obi-Wan. The list goes on and on.
Based on what? Record revenue?
I mean, don't get me wrong. What I meant by this is that I support prioritizing gameplay over being expansive just for the fuck of it.
I can agree with that.
Record revenue, for now. Just like Disney and Marvel, when they were just beginning their new retarded arc.
There's an end to anything, so that's really a moot argument.
There's also a reason for these ends and we can often see it coming. Just like now.
It's really just Xbox dying. The rest is doing fine and will do so as well next-gen.
Well said indeed and so true. On top of that MS wants devs to put their games on gamepass which cannibalizes sales. They never make the money they need to produce a sequel and it effectively kills any chances of that. Good games need to sell well to recoup the cost of making them. It's basic economics.
"Death" can come in several forms for these companies.
