Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

AAA games are cheaper to make than you think

Wirdschowerdn

Ph.D. in World Saving
Patron
Joined
Nov 30, 2003
Messages
34,467
Location
Clogging the Multiverse with a Crowbar
ITT, DU does not understand the difference between game development 15 years ago versus now.
Yeah because like now, it's easier because you can google for textures of wooden boxes!

"Now think twice before you tell me, that making games is more complicated today."

So are you saying that games really are more complicated to make today - that they do need more staff? Because that's counter to a major section of his article.

Try to make an Assassins Creed with a team of 30 people. Sure, despite Internet, Texture-DVDs, ZBrush and all that cool stuff, modern games are still more time consuming and complicated to make than oldtimers.

Do I think a team of 400 is necessary for something like Assassins Creed 2? No, no way. Too much inefficiency and redundance. Do I think you can accomplish the same shit with 30 people? No, no way either.
 

MetalCraze

Arcane
Joined
Jul 3, 2007
Messages
21,104
Location
Urkanistan
Yeah and because every popamole corridor shooter had 150 people working on it. :roll:

Every $100 mln popamole corridor shooter has 150 people and that's the whole point.

His point: Games are actually easier to make today, and therefore you can do a lot more with less people.
Exactly. That's the whole point man. But our dear shooters coming every november have 150 half of which are producers producing some shit and 6 writers with hollywood ones asking for 6 digit salaries writing awesomely complex plots about how muslims gonna muslim and how you must kill them before they start shitting out C4 in public places.

So if games are easier to make then they were 15 years ago - Look at me! I found a box texture online! That's totally why things are simpler! - and 15 years ago 30 people was a big team, why is he calling 40+ people a small team?
Because in the world of today's AAAs it is indeed small?

Do I think a team of 400 is necessary for something like Assassins Creed 2? No, no way. Too much inefficiency and redundance. Do I think you can accomplish the same shit with 30 people? No, no way either.

ArmA3 is being developed by 30 people FYI - and it has much more than 3.5 same textures put on 20 buildings which are called a "huge city" in Ass Creed

And here are credits for Risen
http://www.mobygames.com/game/windows/risen/credits

Only 1/4 are devs and 3/4 are "special thanks" basically

Production values that Risen has are no different from generic consoel AAAs.

http://www.mobygames.com/game/windows/stalker-call-of-pripyat/credits

CoP credits. Many names are repeated. The game is no different from AAAs.


Ass Creed has 15 engine programmers and the same amount of "AI/Gameplay" programmers. The fuck? Why the fuck an engine where civilians don't even react to you killing them in any way needs so many people? Fucking "AI" relaxes as you kill their AI bros just 20m away. Do they need 20 people for "ZOMG you are gonna desync now buddy" message when you step out of magical corridor or something?

And look at all the fucking producers

http://www.mobygames.com/game/xbox360/assassins-creed/credits
 

DarkUnderlord

Professional Throne Sitter
Staff Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2002
Messages
28,344
ITT, DU does not understand the difference between game development 15 years ago versus now.
Yeah because like now, it's easier because you can google for textures of wooden boxes!

"Now think twice before you tell me, that making games is more complicated today."

So are you saying that games really are more complicated to make today - that they do need more staff? Because that's counter to a major section of his article.

Try to make an Assassins Creed with a team of 30 people. Sure, despite Internet, Texture-DVDs, ZBrush and all that cool stuff, modern games are still more time consuming and complicated to make than oldtimers.
So like I said, a major part of his article is complete bullshit.

But it's easier 'cause I can like find textures and stuff on teh internets! :roll:

Do I think a team of 400 is necessary for something like Assassins Creed 2? No, no way. Too much inefficiency and redundance. Do I think you can accomplish the same shit with 30 people? No, no way either.
Yes, and how many of those 400 are this supposed "army" that modern games need these days, according to our esteemed article writer?

From the looks at Moby Games, the vast majority are in fact level designers (because let's face it, making a fully 3d level with the detail required in a modern game is much more time consuming than connecting some vertices together in the Doom editor) and artists (because again, making those highly detailed fully 3d models is a little more time consuming than drawing Pinky).

As for the 400, I'm not certain if that's even including the voice-over artists (which, to be honest, given the alternative is using the same five recycled voices ala Oblivion, is probably a good thing).

So a game like Mount & Blade might be great, but the level design is shit. And the models aren't that crash-hot. They certainly don't flip-out like the protaganist in AC2 does. And given Bethesda can't animate for shit, I'd say model animation seems to be a highly specialised talent in-and-of-itself these days. Long gone are the days of the artist also being the animation guy...

Unless it's that mythical "special forces" guy these guys can't seem to afford to hire.

Yeah and because every popamole corridor shooter had 150 people working on it. :roll:
Every $100 mln popamole corridor shooter has 150 people and that's the whole point.
150 people.
4 year development time-frame.
Average salary of $50,000 USD each.
= $30,000,000 in salaries.

Throw in office space and equipment and you're still barely scraping $40 million. That's still a AAA game for a lot cheaper than $100 million.

Guess where most of the money goes? Marketing.

His point: Games are actually easier to make today, and therefore you can do a lot more with less people.
Exactly. That's the whole point man.
I think you missed the point actually. He was making a comparison to the days of yore, when you had "15 guys in the basement surrounded by pizza".

Now either games are easier to make today than that (which given his flippant texture remark, seems to be what he's saying) - in which case why has he got 40+ people doing the work of 5 - or they're not, in which case why is half the article irrelevant comparisons to "the games of yore" where one person literally did everything? Is he really saying he expects to be doing everything on this project? And if not, why not? As not doing so would be counter to his article.

Comparing games today to the games of yore is bullshit. Despite all those fancy tools (and abundant textures to be found on google), games did in fact get more time consuming to make. You therefore do need more people.

He even makes bullshit examples like this:

Harry Potter is huge and a very expensive project, but it was directed by one director, written by one screenwriter and based on a book written by one writer. Not a department of fifty people, directed by a board of executives, sitting behind the screenwriter and telling him what to do.​

Harry Potter (and the Deathly Hallows Part 2) had:
9 Producers.
13 people on "Art Direction".
Something like 100+ people in make-up.
5 under "production management".
22 Second Unit Directors or Assistant Directors.
Another 60 odd people in the Art Department (probably the reason why they needed all that Art Direction).
50+ for sound.
20 for special effects.
And what looks like 500 names for visual effects.
Not to mention the actors, stuntmen and everyone else.

We're talking something like 2,000+ people in total. And this is the comparison he uses.

You really think it was all done with just one "Director"? Sure, there was one guy who was "THE" Director but all those people had directors and others they reported to. As for there not being a "board of executives sitting behind everyone", what does he think all those producers did (one of which incidentally, was JK Rowling)?
 

Shadenuat

Arcane
Joined
Dec 9, 2011
Messages
11,955
Location
Russia
I remember watching how LoTR trilogy was made, and there was a person there whos job was to supply people with walkie-talkies (like a supply manager). She was almost fired my other manager because... I did't really get why, I think because there were't enough walkie-talkies? Other worker woman gave her her own part of payment or something so the dude would shut up.
But, really, that's the thing. Developers seem to work with Hollywood standarts, managment and planning in mind. Maybe games are very different. Maybe using less to make more is a better way of doing things. Not that I know anything of it (though I certanly can do more than "boss at second level, minigun and red and blue shirts guys" in a year), just a thought.

Maybe, one can actually make more money not by throwing enormous budget into "play-and-forget" game, but concentrating on large world to explore/mechanics/else instead. When game is highly replayable, everyone plays it for long periods of time, so you want to buy that game too, buy a CD, loose one, buy another one... I bought, overall, 4 copies of Planescape: Torment, and "lost" three of them to different people in my life. If only every penny, err, ruble from this went to MCA :roll:

People continue to buy cards, dice, or say, Monopolia. Because these are constantly replayable. Shitty comparison I know, but duh.
 

MetalCraze

Arcane
Joined
Jul 3, 2007
Messages
21,104
Location
Urkanistan
DarkUnderlord said:
Throw in office space and equipment and you're still barely scraping $40 million. That's still a AAA game for a lot cheaper than $100 million.
They take 2 years to develop. But that wasn't the point man, which you kinda miss.

The point is there are teams of 40 people doing same shit as teams of 150. Because teams of 150 always have a shitton of unneeded people. Like producers. And that quadruples the costs.

Guess where most of the money goes? Marketing.
Of course but we are talking about wasting a lot of money on development itself

Comparing games today to the games of yore is bullshit. Despite all those fancy tools (and abundant textures to be found on google), games did in fact get more time consuming to make. You therefore do need more people.

But you don't need hundreds, especially when that number is such because there is a shitton of producers and other friends of Kotick's in need of some job on the team.

Therefore games are more expensive to make today only because suits think that the more people you throw at something the better result will be. Supposedly works for Hollywood after all.
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2010
Messages
3,524
> game projects working to the modern standard are inherently far more expensive, even with management costs aside
> there are almost always hordes of unnecessary people on such teams

Many development fields have become so specialised and technical that you can no longer be a "generalist" and hope to understand all the areas to the standard you need to. The response is typically to panic and then hire people to fill in the gaps, despite the fact that the person often lacks the knowledge they need in the first place to know how to fill those gaps proficiently. The solution to this bloat is to have the money filtering through a person or a few people who understand the reality of this bloat effect. Whether that means the person who controls the money is also the person running the development or the two parts have a mutual appreciation for one another that allows the person in control of the development to uphold and enact this virtue of "development by integrity" (which doesn't just apply to economics either. It also applies to creative control.).

If the person controlling the money doesn't understand it, he will most likely insist on all the unnecessary things and the project will be heavily weighed down.
If the person in charge of the development doesn't understand it, the same thing will happen, and the person with the money won't be close enough to the project to do anything about it.

If you can't get an arrangement that appreciates this stuff, then the project will be bloated, and end up much less than it could have been. This arrangement also relies on competent people who, given the broad and deep expertise needed to be competent on such projects, are going to be very rare and difficult to come across.

This is another reason why the standard publisher developer relationship is no good. The two parts are not connected well enough. The distance takes away the motivation to keep everything in check, and it means that both parties are less invested and will not need to sacrifice as much for the success of the project. Sacrifice is necessary. Distance and safety are not how you succeed at a project driven by creative ambition.
 

BLOBERT

FUCKING SLAYINGN IT BROS
Patron
Joined
Jun 12, 2007
Messages
4,236
Location
BRO
Codex 2012
BROS LISTEN TO SKYWAYS HE IS AN EXPERT ON VIDEO GAME PRODUCTION BECAUSE HE THINKS ABOUT IT ALOT
 

MetalCraze

Arcane
Joined
Jul 3, 2007
Messages
21,104
Location
Urkanistan
You don't need to be an expert to see that there's something wrong when 40 men and 150 men teams release the same shit. You just don't have to be a complete moron.
 
Joined
Nov 6, 2009
Messages
1,494
You forget something Skyway, they really need to have at least 120 actors to interpret their screenplay: "Soap, over here!", "Yuri, I need support, damn it!". Creative strategist? The guy was in fact playing Yuri in lituanian but Kotick, being the art lover that he is, didn't want to hurt his feelings and decided to give him a nice title so as to reinforce his self-image and help him in his struggle to become the next Sir Laurence Olivier. You don't understand art patronage, Kotick is a modern day Guggenheim.
 
Joined
Nov 6, 2009
Messages
1,494
Talking about AAA titles, despite me posting on this forum, it's been at least 10 years that I didn't really play video games except for the odd FO:NV, WOW raid or 2 days of Skyrim. Having 2 weeks with nothing to do, I decided that instead of going out to I don't know where and getting stoned and run around, I'd spend these two weeks in my room without drinking and for me, to stay sober, the best method was to reverse to my old teenage basement dweller self and finally PLAY all these AAA titles that everybody talks about.
And in fact, after one week, I can say that I think that I fucking LOVE most of the decline popamole trash. Sincerely, it's more fun than Dragon Wars or Jumpman Jr. I'll write a post to be retardoed for eternity in a week: "Oldfag vs the Popamole: How I fought the Law and how the Law won".
 

MetalCraze

Arcane
Joined
Jul 3, 2007
Messages
21,104
Location
Urkanistan
"How I haven't played games for 10 years and everything seems great to me - a key to enjoying gaming"
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom