Support NeoGAF

[Kerotan]

For a game that will bring in over a billion in revenue that's a pretty good return.

 

[Melfice7]

I figured it was around 100M, it was probably the excellent writers that cost the extra 100M

 

[ReBurn]

Maybe not but I do think GoWR is the better game in terms of production values

But I also don’t believe that 100M number for horizon

Do you believe the 200m number for Ragnarok despite it not actually being an official number?

 

[GymWolf]

...which is largely procedurally generated. That's not trying to be dismissive, the procedural generation of vegetation, animal life and even ambient sounds in Decima is pretty incredible tech. But it certainly speeds up development/reduces costs. 100M for Forbidden West does seem low though, granted.

Pretty sure that animals are hand made, they look to good to be procedurally generated, whatever you meant.

And the enemies in horizon are on a whole other level of complicacy compared to the enemies of gow.

I don't know, it sound absurd to me that gow costed double the money.

 

[Captain Toad]

Good grief. AAA game development is super risky.

 

[rhodesianshepard]

I actually think the bloat is the good part of the game. It's the main quest that was disappointing.

SSM was put in a difficult position. They knew Ragnarok needed 2 games to properly tell the story. At the same time, they wanted to move on to a new IP with Barlog's next game. SSM probably felt like they wouldn't be able to move on from a God of War part 3 if they didn't conclude the story in Ragnarok. From that perspective, I think they made the right decision

And I agree, I wish the game had even more side content. I rarely 100% games, but Ragnarok's combat only got better as the game went on. Never became boring to me

 

[nowhat]

Pretty sure that animals are hand made, they look to good to be procedurally generated, whatever you meant.

Yeah, I used an incorrect term, I meant procedurally placed. Of course all the assets (whether vegetation or wildlife, and audio obviously) are hand crafted. But where they appear in whatever biome is all procedural. So the designers can just "paint" with different "brushes" in the editor and the engine does the rest. It's really neat tech. (video timestamped to relevent part)

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

I don't believe I'm the first person to say this in this thread....

I am seeing people take about how this 10M+ selling game sucks or isn't s good and whatnot... ok, that could be a problem. But I see GOW cost $200M to make and the first thing that comes to mind is that for the money MS wanted to use and buy on Publisher, they could have made 350 GOW-type/budget games.

I don't know, but I would rather have Sony's problem than have MS own.

 

[AngelMuffin]

Most expensive DLC of all time!

Ok, that’s a bit harsh but damn did it feel incredibly derivative at times, if not most of the time during my play through. I finished it and enjoyed a good amount of it, and respect the work that went into it but have no desire to play it again.

 

[DenchDeckard]

And people are worried about this?

Do you know how much movies cost?



Love how people invest in this topic as if there’s a risk here. Sony and other publishers spending money on their games is bad. What the fuck. Ahahahaha

It’s just so weird.

It's like you cant understand that creating these massive blockbuster games, that quite frankly are weak from a gameplay perspective might win over quite a large number of people, but ultimately they are vapid and the sequels do not live up to the oiginal games...so now we have a homogenised level of game design, where everything feels the same....and a level of quality for stupid shit like cutscenes, facial animations and things to that extent are required over the core game play and loop of the game.

Ubisoft open world design etc is rolled out in most of the games....and by the looks of it, less people are buying the sequels over the originals. How can costs of games keep ballooning when your fan base and potential customer base is less than what you had originally.

Last of us 2
Horizon FW
Ragnarok

All look to be selling less than their previous installments and games like LOU2 have been like £4.99 / £9.99 in the uk as soon as they hit 1 years old. I picked up Horizon FW for £15 in November and sold it sealed once it came to PS plus Extra. (still not played it)

So, the concern is warranted when Sony themselves are seeing that their fan base is not buying their first party games and sales are declining.

 

[AngelMuffin]

Awesome list, we need to make one for games too. Usually for box office the general rule is the multiplier needs to be 2-3x budget (some say more than 3x) to make a profit since the cut of the studio is like 70% domestic and way less in China/international

And those numbers don’t include marketing costs…which are likely equal or close to the overall budget to produce the film.

 

[GymWolf]

Yeah, I used an incorrect term, I meant procedurally placed. Of course all the assets (whether vegetation or wildlife, and audio obviously) are hand crafted. But where they appear in whatever biome is all procedural. So the designers can just "paint" with different "brushes" in the editor and the engine does the rest. It's really neat tech. (video timestamped to relevent part)

And don't you think it's the same for gow even if they don't use decima.

The game is big enough to probably have procedurally placed stuff aswell.

I think the cast of actors in gow is a big reason why it costed so much, odin and thor are basically hollywood caliber actors.
And even the smaller ones like thor's daughter are more famous than your average voice actor in horizon except for sylens (rip).

 

[Evil Calvin]

thats scary, this means we will get less new IP since the risk is higher

It's already been going on for a few years. Remakes, remasters, re-releases, compilations, sequels, spinoffs.........very little cost on the remasters and little risk to any of them.

The AAA part of the industry is dying and pretty must all that will be left is the thriving indie scene.

 

[Gone]

Bullshit.

 

[rhodesianshepard]

It's like you cant understand that creating these massive blockbuster games, that quite frankly are weak from a gameplay perspective might win over quite a large number of people, but ultimately they are vapid and the sequels do not live up to the oiginal games...so now we have a homogenised level of game design, where everything feels the same....and a level of quality for stupid shit like cutscenes, facial animations and things to that extent are required over the core game play and loop of the game.

Ubisoft open world design etc is rolled out in most of the games....and by the looks of it, less people are buying the sequels over the originals. How can costs of games keep ballooning when your fan base and potential customer base is less than what you had originally.

Last of us 2
Horizon FW
Ragnarok

All look to be selling less than their previous installments and games like LOU2 have been like £4.99 / £9.99 in the uk as soon as they hit 1 years old. I picked up Horizon FW for £15 in November and sold it sealed once it came to PS plus Extra. (still not played it)

So, the concern is warranted when Sony themselves are seeing that their fan base is not buying their first party games and sales are declining.

All 3 of those games are radically different, other than being 3rd person. All 3 of those games were nominated for GOTY, with TLOU2 winning and Ragnarok coming in 2nd. All 3 of those games turned profits, with Ragnarok selling more copies than any other Sony published game in history. And 2 of those games have direct sequels already in production. God of War 3 would easily be greenlit but the studio wants to make a new IP

Sony single player games are still a cash cow for Sony. They sell well on their own and are the #1 reason why their hardware sells so well. The concern for Sony is that single player games won't be as profitable as they once were

 

[Thirty7ven]

It's like you cant understand that creating these massive blockbuster games, that quite frankly are weak from a gameplay perspective might win over quite a large number of people, but ultimately they are vapid and the sequels do not live up to the oiginal games...so now we have a homogenised level of game design, where everything feels the same....and a level of quality for stupid shit like cutscenes, facial animations and things to that extent are required over the core game play and loop of the game.

Ubisoft open world design etc is rolled out in most of the games....and by the looks of it, less people are buying the sequels over the originals. (etc)

So you think going on a diatribe about your personal opinion around PlayStation first party, which quite frankly is completely disconnected from what the fans think or the critics think, and be completely wrong about which sequels sell less or more, would somehow support your senseless worry about game budgets or your hypocritical worry about games dropping in price or being added to cheap subs even though you’re one of the biggest gamepass fans around?

Touch grass.

 

[Dr_Ifto]

Does that 200 million include marketing?

 

[Eotheod]

All 3 of those games are radically different, other than being 3rd person. All 3 of those games were nominated for GOTY, with TLOU2 winning and Ragnarok coming in 2nd. All 3 of those games turned profits, with Ragnarok selling more copies than any other Sony published game in history. And 2 of those games have direct sequels already in production. God of War 3 would easily be greenlit but the studio wants to make a new IP

Sony single player games are still a cash cow for Sony. They sell well on their own and are the #1 reason why their hardware sells so well. The concern for Sony is that single player games won't be as profitable as they once were

I believe the issue is that the increase in budgets between these large AAA releases would garner hesitation from studios/publishers despite the clear outline of profit. There is no guarantee the new God of War 3 would sell as much as the previous one, as game development is very much a gamble on what the market wants at that time. This is despite AAA game development following somewhat rudimentary expectations of consumer interest to avoid aversion from the end product.

Yes, GoW Ragnarok sold a fuck ton and made a good amount of money back, with arguments it didn't make profit being showcased as false. This does not negate the opinion from many, including Sony themselves, that development costs of these tent pole AAA games is getting bigger and bigger due to overall timeline blowout and technological demand. COVID also truly fucked with the game industry standards, and I don't believe we will ever recover from that as game development already was struggling with the concept to delivery timeline. You just can't have games starting one year then five to six years later releasing without risk of outdated mechanics, "graphics" or story beat.

 

[iorek21]

That's basically a movie budget.

Crazy if you think about it.

 

[sloppyjoe_gamer]

$199 million for all the closeup screens to Kratos ass going through all those areas to hide things

 

[DenchDeckard]

So you think going on a diatribe about your personal opinion around PlayStation first party, which quite frankly is completely disconnected from what the fans think or the critics think, and be completely wrong about which sequels sell less or more, would somehow support your senseless worry about game budgets or your hypocritical worry about games dropping in price or being added to cheap subs even though you’re one of the biggest gamepass fans around?

Touch grass.

OK so the games are selling better than the originals and not costing magnitudes more.

God forbid any one could be genuinely concerned about these 200 million dollar 5 to 6 year developed bloatware single player games with little to no replay value and if they are sustainable....

 

[Roman Empire]

Now I want to know how much of that was spent on marketing.

 

[rhodesianshepard]

I believe the issue is that the increase in budgets between these large AAA releases would garner hesitation from studios/publishers despite the clear outline of profit. There is no guarantee the new God of War 3 would sell as much as the previous one, as game development is very much a gamble on what the market wants at that time. This is despite AAA game development following somewhat rudimentary expectations of consumer interest to avoid aversion from the end product.

Yes, GoW Ragnarok sold a fuck ton and made a good amount of money back, with arguments it didn't make profit being showcased as false. This does not negate the opinion from many, including Sony themselves, that development costs of these tent pole AAA games is getting bigger and bigger due to overall timeline blowout and technological demand. COVID also truly fucked with the game industry standards, and I don't believe we will ever recover from that as game development already was struggling with the concept to delivery timeline. You just can't have games starting one year then five to six years later releasing without risk of outdated mechanics, "graphics" or story beat.

For most publishers, I would agree the landscape for big budgeted AAA releases is concerning. But I think Sony is working with completely different economics than pretty much any other publisher. Their brand has such a high vote of confidence with gamers that any major AAA release by Sony will garner huge attention from the community. On top of that, Sony first party games don't solely rely on how much they make through sales, but also with player engagement with their hardware and subscription services. Unlike pretty much any other publisher, they don't have to pay the 30% to put games on their own consoles. In theory, Sony's first party could operate at a loss and it would still be highly profitable for Sony(assuming the games are good)

in AAA games, the mechanics played today were created 5-6 years ago. Adding an extra year to development doesn't seem too detrimental. And I don't think blockbuster AAA games are the avenue to find new innovative game mechanics. It's much more about being highly polished on existing mechanics in the industry

 

[DeltaPolarBear]

God forbid any one could be genuinely concerned about these 200 million dollar 5 to 6 year developed bloatware single player games with little to no replay value and if they are sustainable....

Single player games are sustainable. New gamers are born every minute and they all could potentially play the game for the first time. And guess what? You don't need a population of players to sustain the playability of single player titles. A game can be forgotten for years only to be rediscovered as a gem and being played again.

The only games that need to worry about sustainability are online multiplayer games that have definite and permanent deaths.

 

[diffusionx]

Seems like every time a dev or exec says how much a game costs, people are surprised. Yet they are still anchored to the numbers from 10-15 years ago. A modern "AAA" type game made in the west costs at least nine figures, period, and likely much more. That is just how much they cost. They're super expensive. You're not making a game for $50 million anymore, that was like, a PS3 multiplatform budget.

Just wait until the GTA6 number comes out and it is $600-$700 million total.

 

[DenchDeckard]

Single player games are sustainable. New gamers are born every minute and they all could potentially play the game for the first time. And guess what? You don't need a population of players to sustain the playability of single player titles. A game can be forgotten for years only to be rediscovered as a gem and being played again.

The only games that need to worry about sustainability are online multiplayer games that have definite and permanent deaths.

I do agree, I just don't think games need to be this expensive bloated and years of dev time.

Would no one take a 25 hour god of war game that takes 2 and a half to 3 years to make for like 80 million and then a sequel with improvements 2 to 3 years after that.

I bet they would sell more imo in the long run and get games out more frequently.

 

[DeepEnigma]

They made their money back and then some, yes?

 

[anthraticus]

Modern AAA...the complete shitshow I sit back and watch from a distance. I know I shouldn't give a fuck, as I don't play these games....but just like passing a car wreck on the highway, it's tough to turn away.

 

[skit_data]

Shouldn’t be a surprise to no one, I’ve seen similar figures being thrown around for TLOU 2 and possibly even TLOU 1

 

[Eotheod]

For most publishers, I would agree the landscape for big budgeted AAA releases is concerning. But I think Sony is working with completely different economics than pretty much any other publisher. Their brand has such a high vote of confidence with gamers that any major AAA release by Sony will garner huge attention from the community. On top of that, Sony first party games don't solely rely on how much they make through sales, but also with player engagement with their hardware and subscription services. Unlike pretty much any other publisher, they don't have to pay the 30% to put games on their own consoles. In theory, Sony's first party could operate at a loss and it would still be highly profitable for Sony(assuming the games are good)

in AAA games, the mechanics played today were created 5-6 years ago. Adding an extra year to development doesn't seem too detrimental. And I don't think blockbuster AAA games are the avenue to find new innovative game mechanics. It's much more about being highly polished on existing mechanics in the industry

That is the same concept with Microsoft and Nintendo games, in that first party always has the benefit of not costing the 30% dev price tag. However, the issue as I pointed out is that in today's modern game development there is a very fine line that you balance when it comes to success of a title. You may have historical backing showing consumer strength due to great past deliveries, but it only takes one fuck up to be dragged down and needing to rebuild that trust. Just look at CDPR with Cyberpunk, EA with Mass Effect/Battlefield/really all their AAA games lately, Ubisoft with Ubisoft and even Sony to a point with Forspoken.

Trust is hard to build up but easy to break with consumers. Give someone a great coffee, they'll come back while spreading the message. Give them a shit coffee the next day and they may never come back again. That's a huge risk for AAA development when looking at the creeping budgets.

 

[Diddy X]

Games are pretty cheap at 70€ price if you take into account that it's all code the whole thing from the ground up it's made up unlike movies except avatar that's also entirely made up its visuals.

 

[Metnut]

These types of investments that Sony can make over and over again with no games on subscription service day 1. Definitely support the Sony model over the own nothing rent everything model.

 

[adamsapple]

Yes, game development will only get more expensive as time goes on. Expect more major motion picture level budgets for AAA games and an even increased risk factor.

 

[rhodesianshepard]

Modern AAA...the complete shitshow I sit back and watch from a distance. I know I shouldn't give a fuck, as I don't play these games....but just like passing a car wreck on the highway, it's tough to turn away.

Probably will be the best year for AAA titles in almost a decade. We eating fine

 

[TheGodfather07]

It's like you cant understand that creating these massive blockbuster games, that quite frankly are weak from a gameplay perspective might win over quite a large number of people, but ultimately they are vapid and the sequels do not live up to the oiginal games...so now we have a homogenised level of game design, where everything feels the same....and a level of quality for stupid shit like cutscenes, facial animations and things to that extent are required over the core game play and loop of the game.

Ubisoft open world design etc is rolled out in most of the games....and by the looks of it, less people are buying the sequels over the originals. How can costs of games keep ballooning when your fan base and potential customer base is less than what you had originally.

Last of us 2
Horizon FW
Ragnarok

All look to be selling less than their previous installments and games like LOU2 have been like £4.99 / £9.99 in the uk as soon as they hit 1 years old. I picked up Horizon FW for £15 in November and sold it sealed once it came to PS plus Extra. (still not played it)

So, the concern is warranted when Sony themselves are seeing that their fan base is not buying their first party games and sales are declining.

I know its been a tough time for you as an xbox fanboy, but no need to be so salty about sonys success and trying to spin it into a negative. Where did sony say first party sales are Declining? Their last first party game was their fastest selling one ever. Of course they will sell less first party games when they will release less games this fiscal year than last! Use you brain mate. It has nothing to do with game sales declining. It's about the volume of game releases in the coming year. You can't even understand simple things like that?

 

[Fbh]

And that's why AAA games will continue mostly being safe iterative games primarily based on known IP

Still crazy to me how “cheap” games are.
Most blockbuster movies cost 200+ million to make and are under 3 hours, oftentimes horrible writing and plot, and don’t even look as impressive as games do sometimes. We’re pretty lucky - game devs work for cheap

Yup, even at $200 million games still seem to offer way more for the money.
It's ridiculous to me that a movie like Thor Love and Thunder cost $250 million with terrible writing, terrible visual effects and a 2 hours runtime.

I guess the celebrities take a big chunk of the money. According to google Hemsworth alone got paid $20 million.

 

[Games of Today]

200 Million for this fucking stinker? Christ what did they spend it all on? Clearly it wasn't quality writing or pacing.

The writing was fine. I felt right in line with the first one. The pacing however. They could have cut out a ton of Angrboda and Asgard content. And the final battle should have been a lot longer and more entertaining.

 

[rhodesianshepard]

That is the same concept with Microsoft and Nintendo games, in that first party always has the benefit of not costing the 30% dev price tag. However, the issue as I pointed out is that in today's modern game development there is a very fine line that you balance when it comes to success of a title. You may have historical backing showing consumer strength due to great past deliveries, but it only takes one fuck up to be dragged down and needing to rebuild that trust. Just look at CDPR with Cyberpunk, EA with Mass Effect/Battlefield/really all their AAA games lately, Ubisoft with Ubisoft and even Sony to a point with Forspoken.

Trust is hard to build up but easy to break with consumers. Give someone a great coffee, they'll come back while spreading the message. Give them a shit coffee the next day and they may never come back again. That's a huge risk for AAA development when looking at the creeping budgets.

I don't think one fuck up drags down established entities. Cyber Punk 2077 was an unmitigated disaster on release, but CD Projekt Red had its second best year in terms of revenue in 2022 without a game being sold. Ubisoft has been making mediocre video games with zero innovative mechanics for over a decade and its why they are struggling.

Sony didn't create or publish Forspoken, so I don't know what that is about. Sony is not in the position where 1, 2, or even 3 failures in a row would sink them. They have so much cushion to push boundaries and overextend themselves with budgets compared to most publishers. That's all I'm trying to say. They are playing by different rules

 

[Ev1L AuRoN]

How many game pass subscriptions would be enough to fund that game? Even IF 1 dollar of every month of Gamepass goes to the game (unlikely)we're still talking about 8 months of the current paying base for the game to break even.

 

[DenchDeckard]

I know its been a tough time for you as an xbox fanboy, but no need to be so salty about sonys success and trying to spin it into a negative. Where did sony say first party sales are Declining? Their last first party game was their fastest selling one ever. Of course they will sell less first party games when they will release less games this fiscal year than last! Use you brain mate. It has nothing to do with game sales declining. It's about the volume of game releases in the coming year. You can't even understand simple things like that?

I think ragnarok has started extremely well, maybe it continues to sell strongly.

I feel forbidden west hasn't done as well as the first.

Like I said, I'm not the only person who asks if this is sustainable. We hear it a lot.

Last of us 2 was only 3 to 4 years ago. Forbidden west and ragnarok recently.

Why would Sony be so keen to push to pc and gaas titles if the metrics they are tracking aren't showing some worrying results?

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Do you believe the 200m number for Ragnarok despite it not actually being an official number?

It’s the closest we’ve ever gotten due to the point of reference Shu was making

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Why would Sony be so keen to push to pc and gaas titles if the metrics they are tracking aren't showing some worrying results?

Pc releases are free money to them and GaaS is to fill a big hole in their lineup. They also fear MS buying the biggest GaaS third party so it’s a reaction to that

Has nothing to do with their first party sales disappointing

 

[mrmustard]

I think ragnarok has started extremely well, maybe it continues to sell strongly.

I feel forbidden west hasn't done as well as the first.

Like I said, I'm not the only person who asks if this is sustainable. We hear it a lot.

Last of us 2 was only 3 to 4 years ago. Forbidden west and ragnarok recently.

Why would Sony be so keen to push to pc and gaas titles if the metrics they are tracking aren't showing some worrying results?

Don't worry about GOW and FW. Both games have benefit enormously from bundles when there was shortage and i have no doubt that they will sell much more than 10m each and are profitable on their own.

But even if not, the main purpose of those big AAA trademark games is to lure people into your ecosystem. Why do you think there is never as much marketing for cross platform games as for Sony games? Because they must earn money with the games, Sony not.

Pc is easy money just like all the Remakes/Remasters and Gaas can be huge longterm moneymakers and Sony is lacking those games, because they focused on cinematic 3rd person action adventures.

 

[BacklashWave534]

Imagine how much money would be saved it they moved their studio out of California.

 

[kiphalfton]

Still crazy to me how “cheap” games are.
Most blockbuster movies cost 200+ million to make and are under 3 hours, oftentimes horrible writing and plot, and don’t even look as impressive as games do sometimes. We’re pretty lucky - game devs work for cheap

That's assuming they have say in their pay...

 

[BennyBlanco]

In the end probably astronomical but not in a good way. More in a "we rebooted this shit 1000 times" way.

I bet GTA6 doubles this at least

 

[SeraphJan]

I don't necessarily enjoy this game as much as the Greek trilogy, but I respected how much hard work those people that worked on the game did.

 

[CGNoire]

I bet GTA6 doubles this at least

For sure. RDR2 cost 800mil.

 

[The Fartist]

For sure. RDR2 cost 800mil.

I had to Google this, and the combined development and marketing budget was around $540mil, still an insane amount.

 

[AltogetherAndrews]

But it's a way bigger game, that looks much better, with more voice acting, etc.

I think that the 100 mil budget was just some bullshit at this point or guerrilla really are fucking wizards.

Fucking forspoken costed 100 mil...

Proceduralism vs design. And that bit about looking better, not to mention more voice acting… have you actually played both games? The materials work alone just straight up eclipses Horizon, as does the vfx. Horizon delivers an amazing world, but there’s A LOT of procedural assets, and it shows.