Gears of War 2 only cost $12 million to make. Middleware to the rescue!!!

And Gears 1 cost less than $10 million and they are among the best looking games of this generation.

Just proof that you can work SMARTER not HARDER and achieve all your goals.

And since we have seen with Shadow Complex and Mirror’s Edge the UE3 engine is VERY flexible and can do alot of different looking games. That is if you can effectively read an understand english (Japan go talk to Capcom about MT Framework 2.0)

So any dev complaining about ramping costs this gen needs to take a visit to Epic studios and see how they get the job done :slight_smile:

[quote=“sbf717”]

And Gears 1 cost less than $10 million and they are among the best looking games of this generation.

Just proof that you can work SMARTER not HARDER and achieve all your goals.

And since we have seen with Shadow Complex and Mirror’s Edge the UE3 engine is VERY flexible and can do alot of different looking games. That is if you can effectively read an understand english (Japan go talk to Capcom about MT Framework 2.0)

So any dev complaining about ramping costs this gen needs to take a visit to Epic studios and see how they get the job done :slight_smile:[/quote]

Yes when you create the engine sure you can make games that cheap. 12 million looks great but they are just about the only company able to do that not to mention being funded by Microsoft. Again what other game makers are saying is nearly 20 million or so killzone 2 is over that and its published by Sony even if Gears really does cost that much and its not hiding anything its not the norm. Ubisoft says next gen is going to 60 million so I’m sure we aren’t hearing the end of how expensive a game was. Also look at their incredibly low amount of programers thats pretty low for something like Gears. Really they probably paid the 12 million for the 45 artists and the 15 programers.

Well they made the engine and I’m sure they spent a boatload on Gears 2 but wrote off most of it as “engine work and not game work”.

Doesn’t really break it down for you does it? Either way Ubisoft thinks next gen is going to cost $60 million. Better call Mark Rein I guess anyways if gears is really costing them that then they must be charging like crazy for that engine or something for peoples budgets to be that high because I don’t think they are that genius compared to every other developer. I am supprised they were able to make this game with a staff of 65 though at least that’s what it claims.

Coolio. Where did you find this?

Well not mention in that slide is that they also outsourced art to Epic China which reduces the costs. Quantic Dream is doing the same with Heavy Rain and Turn 10 with Forza 3 just to India instead.

But I’m sure that all of Epic’s engine work is funded by reinvesting the money they make from their games and the money they get from the one time royalty and license fee of the engine and all that falls in it’s own profit/loss.

But still even though the engine is theres you have fantastic compotent devs who make great games that don’t costs all that much with UE3 so I believe them.

Tim Sweeny gave a presentation at High Preformance Graphics 2009

http://graphics.cs.williams.edu/archive/SweeneyHPG2009/TimHPG2009.pdf

[quote=“sbf717”]Tim Sweeny gave a presentation at High Preformance Graphics 2009

http://graphics.cs.williams.edu/archive/SweeneyHPG2009/TimHPG2009.pdf[/quote]

I lol that you bring this up because I just read it and it says PS3 is uneconomical. They seem to think next gen starts in 2014 apparently. At least its good to know hardware is getting 20x faster according to this.

Hes not saying anything about PS3 that hasn’t been said b4 or isnt well known looking at that slide.

Does anyone know how much Megaman 9 cost to make?

I know its off topic, but I’m curious, and I tried google, and I keep getting “1000 Wii Points”

Doesn’t matter if the game costs $10 million or $20 million to make…

…I still pay $60…

[quote=“Kumiko”]Doesn’t matter if the game costs $10 million or $20 million to make…

…I still pay $60…[/quote]

…For now.

So am I one of the few people who doesn’t believe that video game prices are going to skyrocket?

I’m curious as to why you think they are going to have more and more work yet cost the same? Logic says if you spend more money you expect more money. As it is devs aren’t exactly happy and ubisoft assumes 60 million for PS4, Xbox 720 games also sorry for calling it the 720 but its the most sensible thing for me to call it currently. A 60 million investment means they have to expect at least an 100 million return average. I mean currently they raised the price of Xbox 360 and PS3 games already whats going to stop them from doing it again beyond the threat of Nintendo slaughtering them.

I assume you expect to get paid for 15 days of work instead of 5 for those 15 days. Its why you see crazy DLC now because they must think that $60 isn’t enough. As much as I like Starcraft, Starcraft II is essentially a $150 game that one is somewhat justified by the fact they’ve essentially expanded the campaign to about 3 times as much but it still amounts to me to a $150 game.

I wish current technology and next-gen consoles can stay in sync with eachother so we don’t have to spend upwards of $70 for every game in the next few years. >_>

According to ubisoft not going to happen at least I don’t think $60 million is a very nice number for that.

Because the production costs and game costs have honestly been about the same this whole time.

For example, Final Fantasy VII’s production was $30 million and the price of the average PlayStation game back in the day was in the $40-$60, depending on it was. Productions for today’s games are within the price range, just as the price of the games themselves. However, games today sure do look hell of a lot better than they did back in the mid and lae 90s.

The glorious thing about technology is that it advances quickly and the prices of that technology can drop just as fast. (Look at how quickly PC parts drop whenever a better model is released the following year?) I’m sure that by the time developers jump over to these better programs and engines, something that’s even better will be in develop. Thus slashing those prices a bit since they will be “outdated” thus balancing out the production costs of the game with the cost spent to get that technology. Thus allowing the retail price to stay the same.

[quote=“Kumiko”]Because the production costs and game costs have honestly been about the same this whole time.

For example, Final Fantasy VII’s production was $30 million and the price of the average PlayStation game back in the day was in the $40-$60, depending on it was. Productions for today’s games are within the price range, just as the price of the games themselves. However, games today sure do look hell of a lot better than they did back in the mid and lae 90s.

The glorious thing about technology is that it advances quickly and the prices of that technology can drop just as fast. (Look at how quickly PC parts drop whenever a better model is released the following year?) I’m sure that by the time developers jump over to these better programs and engines, something that’s even better will be in develop. Thus slashing those prices a bit since they will be “outdated” thus balancing out the production costs of the game with the cost spent to get that technology. Thus allowing the retail price to stay the same.[/quote]

If dev costs have been the same why did the raise the price on PS3, Xbox 360 games and why have dev’s been saying prices are high? Its clear that the prices are getting quite a bit higher I’m not sure about FF VII but I’m pretty sure that’s not considered normal for that era then again I don’t know what the numbers are for the newer FF’s but I’m sure they’d be higher. Why are devs concerned about the raising prices of development costs for next generation? Again I’ll go back to the work example I don’t think you’d appreciate if I somehow paid you for 1 days work when I made you do 5. I don’t think the difficulty of work is the same nor is the amount of time needed to make games. Remember how some developers were talking about how it took them week to model something instead of days or whatever and the longer it takes to do the more expensive it is. If its really that cheap to make those games why did Nintendo not put in the graphics? I’ll give you the answer its not cheap.

MS and Sony are more demanding with their take in every game shipped from the publishers than ever, which is why the prices to are more higher. That would take in account why games are more expensive than last gen.

Plus, the dollar always keeps diminishing over time and again. so by 2030-40, it’s a safe guess that the games of that generation would be over $100.

Even if production costs stay the same, the fees would be more brutal at that time and devs/publishers should be going alright if the economy stays good.