Support NeoGAF

[Crayon]

These days, those smaller games regularly come out at all scales. In fact, the publisher capable of making AAA games put out smaller games, as well. I'm getting things like armored core, stellar blade, yakuza, robocop, behemoth, in AA. No problem, here.

 

[Wildebeest]

People who think this is done because of shareholders or greed are just wrong IMO. It is done because that is the way it has been done, and it is hard to turn the ship around. But the business model is breaking left and right. It doesn't work at all on younger gamers, so has zero long term future.

 

[tmlDan]

That is not the point. Even if so the question remains. I can rephrase it. Why the hell did Sony invest 200 millions in one Concord if they can make 5 games with a budget of 40 million with a smaller scale, but if even a one of them is successful, it will still make them more.

The same can be said about Spider Man 2. The first game's budget was one third of the second's, and SPIDER MAN 2 is basically just a big expansion for the first game (same city, same mechanics, same everything, just a new part of town, activities and story - that is WoW expansion tier content). Why spend 300 million on a Spider Man expansion when they could have spent half that amount - 150 million on Spider Man 2, and the other 150 million on three smaller games for 50 million each.

Something is broken in their planning. They clearly need to change something.

thats how much games cost, devs make a lot of money because its a specialized expertise in the west, unless you want them to outsource all jobs from china or japan and every game will be similar

 

[MagusMajul]

I feel u, OP, some games we consider AA made great profit and still look very good, but the dev studios were smart with budgeting them, fairy recent example is latest Robocop:Rogue City game from polish dev:

RoboCop: Rogue City - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It only got metascore in 70s but thx to only 3years of dev time, in poland(no dei, relatively low salaries) it was very profitable from the get go despite not having crazy sales

CD projekt red has DEI but I love poland never the less I would like to travel there in the spring some time

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Big studios.

Once you you go big, you almost never go small. Too low brow. It's better to bet on a big project hoping it becomes the next COD, then two or more smaller cheaper projects.

It's like stocks. Some people with a pile of money bet the farm on a big bet. Some dont and spread it out.

 

[TropicanaTwista]

I don't really get it either. I don't even think a single studio needs to do that either, it could just be the way publishers handle dead zones. Just using Sony as an example, yes it sucks that first party AAA games take 4 years min, usually longer. But why can't someone like media Molecule just come out with a smaller budget title every year or 2. Feels like the industry has been there for too long but we basically killed AA type of games and just replaced with Indies. Would prefer to have Indies, AA and AAA games. So many times I'll beat a long game, then won't have motivation to play something for a couple weeks, just because I know the time sink I'm gonna need for a new game.

 

[Generic]

Gaming studios today are massive, with hundreds of employees and budgets in the tens of millions. Why don’t these studios focus on releasing two or three great games every year on a consistent basis?

These games wouldn’t need cutting-edge graphics AA or single A titles like Trepang2 or Mad Jack Mullet prove that quality doesn’t require a massive budget. They should focus on fun and, affordable-to-produce games. Studios could reliably recoup costs rather than risking $200 million on a single game every decade that might flop or be quickly forgotten.

Look at Astrobot low sales.

 

[Zacfoldor]

This is actually a very good question and even though I think I know the answer, I can't state it simply and with certainty.

Good question OP.

Just thinking about this outside of the industry, usually when you start to sell lower quality widgets in higher quantity that can begin a race to the bottom.

Games are not fungible, so if the quality goes down the price will need to go down too or it won't sell(again, just basic business concepts), or the games need to offer a competitive advantage.

Again, good question OP. If I(or anyone) pretend to know the whole answer I will just look dumb. Good one. There may not be a perfect answer and the premise of the question may be slightly flawed, but I'll keep reading and try to learn something on this one.

 

[ConkerTheSquirrel.]

I'm okay with indie devs occupying this space as it gives them more exposure if their games ever succeed. Let AAA devs fail in their lofty games.

 

[Zacfoldor]

Look at Astrobot low sales.

Astro is(imho) actually an evergreen title and will have a different sales curve compared to the traditional game. It'll have long legs. It is too early to tell how the game has sold or will sell. I would expect it to eventually get a bundle as well, so I think Sony will get their money back on Astro and them some by the end of it all.

 

[Jesb]

I don’t get the industry at all. You don’t need 500 employees and these stupid budgets.

 

[Drake]

From what I understand game development requires a TON of iteration. Something that may seem simple to us was probably made and re-made a 100 times before it's put in our hands. Unless you are just putting out the next game in a series like Yakuza, Assassins Creed or COD, coming up with original ideas and turning them into something playable and fun takes a decent of amount of time.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

Gaming studios today are massive, with hundreds of employees and budgets in the tens of millions. Why don’t these studios focus on releasing two or three great games every year on a consistent basis?

These games wouldn’t need cutting-edge graphics AA or single A titles like Trepang2 or Mad Jack Mullet prove that quality doesn’t require a massive budget. They should focus on fun and, affordable-to-produce games. Studios could reliably recoup costs rather than risking $200 million on a single game every decade that might flop or be quickly forgotten.

Even small indie games take more than 2 yrs to develop and you think they can build modern AA games in 4 - 6 months?

You should try to learn more about modern games development.