Uncharted 2, from Sony Group Corp’s Naughty Dog, was released in 2009 and had a budget of $20 million. The studio’s latest game, The Last of Us: Part 2, cost more than $200 million.
So, uh…why can’t we do that anymore? Even if you account for salary increases and avoiding crunch and such, $40M-$50M for a game as good as Uncharted 2 sounds great!
Because graphics still sell games. You can do simplified graphics like Nintendo and still sell games, but lots of people want the photo realistic experience and the bar for that has gone way way up incrementally over the years.
I think we’re seeing that that’s no longer true. Minecraft is the best-selling game ever, for instance. If you want to build the photo realistic experience, maybe aim for a smaller scope of video game, like the more linear action games we used to get, because otherwise, the industry ends up in the state it’s in.
Yeah, maybe I’m just wrong in general … The above doesn’t look that different from say black ops 6 footage.
I definitely wish for a return to the linear format (or simi linear where there are a few concurrent linear quests going on). I think straight up open world just lends itself to making a lot of walking simulators.
Halo Infinity was one of the most boring games I ever played between the weapons sounding like toys and the spread out objectives with no clear central mission.
I don’t think you’re necessarily wrong on this. Part of the problem is new IPs are risky, and I’m sure market research is telling the big publishers that you’d better not suddenly downgrade your graphics on an established property. Nintendo’s very comfortable in this space because they haven’t really gone this route with first party. They’ve even managed to thread the needle on Mario, Metroid, and Zelda by having both 2D and 3D offerings.
Nintendo is in a very envious spot in general. Hell, I think Nintendo makes some great games, I just wish they wouldn’t force me to buy yet another computer solely for the purpose of playing their games. I haven’t owned a Mario Kart or Zelda game in years but I’d love to play if I could do so on PC/Linux.
Uncharted and Last of Us are first party Sony games. If they were to say that a game can still be enjoyable without cutting edge graphics no one would want to buy the latest PlayStation iteration.
I think they’re already running out of people who want to buy the latest PlayStation, and Sony clearly can’t afford to throw hundreds of millions of dollars after this level of graphics anymore, because it’s not resulting in equivalent growth of console sales to make up for it.
I am a pc gamer and I have the latest-ish video card. I got an expensive card so that I can play any game, but really don’t consider graphics much anymore. You are correct, some people still chase that aspect of video gaming. I think if you have been around for a while, that desire fades. I have lots of low res games these days.
Also a PC gamer and I’ve discovered as I’ve aged, CPU has been more of a bottleneck for me than GPU. Games like Factorio or Path of Exile need a powerful CPU, but their graphics are secondary at best.
Same here. My favorite game is Kerbal Space Program, and the graphics look like they are straight out of the early 2000s, but even with a 12 core CPU I still get crazy lag during explosions, staging, and other physics interactions. Transitioning from "on rails" flight to actually modelling physics when within a few km of something else has also not ever been smooth.
There are plenty of games that don’t do high-end graphics and are still very good, even games that look intentionally low res/quality like Valheim did very well.
Graphics are only really a thing for games that aim for realistic visuals in the first place, but even then it doesn’t need to be so overly high in visual fidelity and pushing better graphics every time. The average gamer isn’t going to care about being able to see reflected objects in windows that you can see in the reflections of puddles, or that a leaf from a tree has a diffused shadow 300 meters away. Yet a lot of these big studios are pushing this tech and stuffing it in their games.
Not saying that’s a bad development, but they’re creating a lot of these budget problems for themselves by setting bars so insanely high and focusing on side-stuff that only increase the scope of the project. Where small indi developers create masterpieces on a budget barely a percentage of what those corporations are throwing at their projects.
I’m not sure this is going to directly affect that, because their deal talks mainly about financing for the Control game, and the other news is about movie adaptations, so probably it is going to be another team, lead by the newly re-hired Hector Sanchez, working on that…
But who knows, this kind of things are always hard to follow from the outside
Wow. I’ve always trusted games published by Annapurna to be something exciting, new, and high quality. I’m devastated to hear that this publishing company is floundering.
I’ve always trusted games published by Annapurna to be something exciting, new, and high quality.
That didn’t make them good either, though. Companies like them and Devolver Digital have had a bad habit of, for lack of a better term, using up developers and throwing them to the curb after. You’ll notice that a lot of stuff they publish get marketed as though Annapurna made them, which ends up hiding the actual developers behind the curtain, thereby robbing them of fans and thus seriously hurting their long-term prospects.
That’s a great point. I suppose one could tell how healthy the relationship is between developer and publisher by looking at how many dev companies on the roster have created a second great game. Of course, that’s tough even with a great publisher, so maybe that’s not realistic.
Every single time I have played an Annapurna published game, I had a fantastic time. I won’t say that everything they did was equal, but everything they did was entertaining, and thought-provoking.
I can’t quite follow the legalese required to parse EXACTLY what this means going forward, but I am sure it is not good, and that is disappointing.
Ahh fuck, stuff being published by them was usually a decent sign that it'd be interesting in some way. Best of luck to the actual team, I hope they can put something new together
Yes, they’re a publisher. They supposedly have/had a small team working on a Blade Runner game, but they have yet to release a game they developed on their own. Publishing is their thing, so Annapurna Interactive is kinda fucked. I mean, jeez, it looks bad, I mean they all walked out.
They likely had some outlandish request or policy that was anathema to the department’s mission, and just assumed that they would cave. Seems like good leadership stuck to their principles, and the good leaders were followed by teams who weren’t willing to lose that.
If the owner is smart, they’ll backtrack, make concessions when hiring everyone back, and learn from their fuckup. In reality, I hope the new company that forms from the exodus finds fast success.
LOL, they say they’ll replace the staff and honor existing contracts. It’s gonna be shit quality. All their partners will be better off severing ties, reclaiming paid funds, and going with the new company that inevitably forms from the department previously known as Annapurna Interactive.
This is true! But I think the “good” (?) news there is Annapurna Studios is not going anywhere, and they retained all the IP their subsidiary holds. Sucks for the former Annapurna Interactive folks that they can’t bring the IP with them, but c’est la vie.
bloomberg.com
Gorące