301
General Gaming / Re: Meanwhile, Over At The Other Developers...
« on: June 25, 2020, 02:12:09 PM »That said, I feel like games being increasingly large and complex makes the whole development cycle more taxing. Teams are larger and more spread out, and the likelihood of unexpected problems cropping up during development are much higher also. Trying to accurately scope the time and resources that a large project will need is really difficult, and when mistakes happen it can affect a lot of people depending on how much pressure the company is under to live up to early commitments.
Being in stuck in it for months on end really sucks because it takes a toll on both your physical and mental health pretty quickly. But to your last point, I think part of the answer is scoping games down. At some point, I think the $60 model is going to stop being profitable for big games, and I think we might be getting there pretty quickly.
Looks like Shawn Layden, former chairmen of Sony Interactive Entertainment Worldwide Studios, in a recent interview agrees.
https://venturebeat.com/2020/06/23/shawn-layden-interview-the-man-with-the-crash-bandicoot-t-shirt/view-all/
Quote
Layden: I still remember when games would cost $1 million to make. Those days are long gone. The cost of creating games has increased. Some studies show that’s gone up 2X every time a console generation advances. The problem with that model is it’s just not sustainable. Major triple-A games in the current generation go anywhere from $80 million to $150 million or more to build, and that’s before marketing. It’s a huge up-front cost. Extended over time, it takes three or four or five years to build a game while you’re not getting any return on the investment. You just continue to pay into it looking for the big payoff at the end.
I don’t think, in the next generation, you can take those numbers and multiply them by two and expect the industry to continue to grow. The industry as a whole needs to sit back and think, “What are we building? What’s the audience expectation? What is the best way to get our stories across, to say what we need to say?” That’s going to cause the industry to look at the kind of games we’re doing, where we go from there, and what we’re putting into them. It’s hard for every adventure game to shoot for 50 or 60 hours of gameplay. That’s going to be so much more expensive to achieve.
Quote
Layden: How can we look at that and say, “Is there another answer?” Instead of spending five years to make an 80-hour game, what does three years and a 15-hour game look like? What are the costs around that? Is that a full experience? Personally, as an older gamer now, I would welcome the return of the 12-15 hour game. I would finish more games, first of all. Just like a well-edited piece of literature or a movie — I’ve been looking at the discipline around that, the containment around that. It could get us tighter, more compelling content. It would be something I’d like to see a return to.

