Comment on Video Games Can’t Afford to Look This Good
SupraMario@lemmy.world 3 weeks agoIt’s bullshit accounting, they’re not spending it on the devs or the games, they’re spending it on advertising and the c levels Paydays. There are a ton of really good looking games, that had what would be considered shoestring budgets, but these companies bitching about it aren’t actually in it for the games anymore, its just for the money.
ampersandrew@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
What are the good looking games with shoestring budgets?
SupraMario@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
vg247.com/hellblades-budget-required-ninja-theory….
10mil for Hellblade
en.m.wikipedia.org/…/Kingdom_Come:_Deliverance#:~….
36mil for KC:D one of the prettiest games of the time…which includes marketing.
The cost of some of these “AAAA” titles is a complete joke.
ampersandrew@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Alright, not like for like exactly, and at 34M, we’re stretching the definition of shoestring. I’ll bet KC:D’s sequel spent far more, for one. I’m with you that more of these studios ought to be aiming for reasonable fidelity in a game that can be made cheaply, but when each of those studios took more than 5 years to build their sequels, that becomes more and more unlikely.
SupraMario@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
34 mil is nothing when you start looking at the cost of some of these other games, even Skyrim was over 100 million. Like GTA5, with marketing, was like 250 million. Just insanely expensive, and I guarantee you the devs are not pulling in a mil or two a year.