66 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 ] Older >
 |
| 66. |
Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M |
Jul 21, 2010, 19:50 |
Eldaron Imotholin |
|
|
Did you guys know developing StarCraft II cost more than 100.000.000 dollars? Awfully lot for futuristic Warcraft III expansion with aliens!  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Playing: Skyrim, World of Warcraft.
Future: Dead Space 3. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 65. |
Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M |
Jul 21, 2010, 12:47 |
Mr. Tact |
|
|
| Exactly, Verno. This is true for a VERY LARGE majority of the cases. There might be the rare exception here and there, but generally people who can't lose weight simply can't/won't stop eating. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Truth is brutal. Prepare for pain. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 64. |
Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M |
Jul 21, 2010, 11:32 |
Verno |
|
|
Weight loss is simple caloric math, exercise just helps burn calories. Other than that the two aren't really related unless you examine metabolic rate and other factors.
People who struggle with weight always amuse me because they're often over complicating what is a very simple process. They will do insane diets, try pills and many other nonsense scenarios instead of simply limiting their portions and diet appropriately. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Playing: Animal Crossing, Sleeping Dogs, Tales of Graces F
Watching: Survivorman, Justified, Silent Running |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 63. |
Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M |
Jul 21, 2010, 10:38 |
Mr. Tact |
|
|
BobBob wrote on Jul 18, 2010, 07:33:
Someone should do a study and find that non hand-held consoles and desktop gaming correlate with obesity. Obesity has little to do with activity and is mostly about intake vs. output. Which I properly demonstrated by losing weight despite continuing to be a lazy couch potato. Activity increases fitness. Fitness and weight loss are often related, however they are not directly linked. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Truth is brutal. Prepare for pain. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 62. |
Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M |
Jul 20, 2010, 13:46 |
Prez |
|
|
Verno wrote on Jul 20, 2010, 11:14:
No that's pretty dumb. People aren't exercising with their laptop while playing Crysis. You generally put your laptop down and game.
WRONG! I am jogging when I play Quake Live on my Dell Laptop. That's why my ranking is so low. Yeah, that's it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 61. |
Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M |
Jul 20, 2010, 11:14 |
Verno |
|
|
BobBob wrote on Jul 18, 2010, 07:33:
Someone should do a study and find that non hand-held consoles and desktop gaming correlate with obesity. Sitting on your ass all day in front of a TV or monitor can't be healthy.
Laptops and netbooks aren't so bad because at least you are encouraged to be sort of mobile.
No that's pretty dumb. People aren't exercising with their laptop while playing Crysis. You generally put your laptop down and game. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Playing: Animal Crossing, Sleeping Dogs, Tales of Graces F
Watching: Survivorman, Justified, Silent Running |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 60. |
Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M |
Jul 18, 2010, 19:28 |
Sepharo |
|
|
Tumbler wrote on Jul 17, 2010, 11:21:
Console gamers don't hate PC games. PC gamers however... QFT. Console games don't have time to get jealous of pc games, too many games to play.
I've been out all weekend, so sorry for the late reply.
Somehow my comment about GameStop employees being conditioned to hate PC games got misconstrued as console gamers hating PC games.
GameStop does hate PC games, because they don't sell and you can't sell them used. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| [I'm not trolling I'm just] tossing stuff like that in there only to get your panties all bunched up. -TrollinThundr |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 59. |
Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M |
Jul 18, 2010, 11:23 |
JohnnyRotten |
|
|
Maybe they could save money by paying everyone who would have bought it $10 instead of making the game. Just saying...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 58. |
Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M |
Jul 18, 2010, 10:33 |
Eldaron Imotholin |
|
|
BobBob wrote on Jul 18, 2010, 07:33:
Someone should do a study and find that non hand-held consoles and desktop gaming correlate with obesity. Sitting on your ass all day in front of a TV or monitor can't be healthy.
Laptops and netbooks aren't so bad because at least you are encouraged to be sort of mobile.
Where did that come from? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Playing: Skyrim, World of Warcraft.
Future: Dead Space 3. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 57. |
Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M |
Jul 18, 2010, 07:33 |
BobBob |
|
|
Someone should do a study and find that non hand-held consoles and desktop gaming correlate with obesity. Sitting on your ass all day in front of a TV or monitor can't be healthy.
Laptops and netbooks aren't so bad because at least you are encouraged to be sort of mobile. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 56. |
Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M |
Jul 18, 2010, 07:14 |
Eldaron Imotholin |
|
|
spindoctor wrote on Jul 17, 2010, 11:05:
Sepharo wrote on Jul 17, 2010, 10:25:
Whereupon the thrashing it's likely to receive by the counter monkey conditioned to hate PC games simply for being PC games, will cause them to change their mind.
Console gamers don't hate PC games. PC gamers however...
QFBS
This comment was edited on Jul 18, 2010, 07:24. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Playing: Skyrim, World of Warcraft.
Future: Dead Space 3. |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 55. |
Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M |
Jul 17, 2010, 21:08 |
ASeven |
|
|
Jerykk wrote on Jul 17, 2010, 20:21:
Console gamers don't hate PC games. PC gamers however...
I think you need to peruse the Gametrailers boards more often.
Or most console-centric boards. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 54. |
Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M |
Jul 17, 2010, 21:05 |
Luke |
|
|
Cutter wrote on Jul 17, 2010, 20:06:
I call bullshit. There is no way in hell it cost anywhere close to 100 million to make.
If blizz says so it is the TRUTH .... many thinks  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 53. |
Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M |
Jul 17, 2010, 20:21 |
Jerykk |
|
|
Console gamers don't hate PC games. PC gamers however...
I think you need to peruse the Gametrailers boards more often. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 52. |
Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M |
Jul 17, 2010, 20:06 |
Cutter |
|
|
I call bullshit. There is no way in hell it cost anywhere close to 100 million to make.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| "Peter, breakfast for dinner is anarchy!" - Lois |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 51. |
Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M |
Jul 17, 2010, 19:36 |
Ledge |
|
|
Tumbler wrote on Jul 17, 2010, 11:21:
Console gamers don't hate PC games. PC gamers however... QFT. Console games don't have time to get jealous of pc games, too many games to play.
thats where quality vs. quantity comes into it.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 50. |
Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M |
Jul 17, 2010, 15:54 |
theyarecomingforyou |
|
|
2. Shared code-base of 3D engine with D3 - probably a bigger development budget allocated to the engine development team, since SC is coming out first most of the development costs would be allocated to SC. Depends how they categorize their costs. When you put it like that the cost actually makes a lot of sense, as it makes a more impressive headline. It becomes much less significant when you consider Starcraft II will be three separate games, in addition to Diablo III and any further expansions it has.
Still, I can't help but wonder whether they couldn't have been a bit more economical, as $100M is a lot of money for a game that doesn't seem a whole lot better than the competition. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Core i7 2600-K (4.6GHz) | 12GB DDR3 | GTX680 SLI (1215/1605) | OCZ Vertex 3 120GB SSD | Windows 8 Pro
Hazro HZ30Wie 30" | Saffire PRO 40 | Razer Mamba | Coolermaster RP1000W
SteamID: theyarecomingforyou |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 49. |
Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M |
Jul 17, 2010, 15:47 |
beaves |
|
|
simple... pay 100 people $200,000 over 5 years  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 48. |
Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M |
Jul 17, 2010, 14:46 |
Scottish Martial Arts |
|
|
ASJD wrote on Jul 16, 2010, 22:32:
At this point, I think they're really overrating how popular this game is going to be.
If this bombs I'm going to be giddy.
You can kiss what's left of PC gaming goodbye at that point.
As for the cost, it sounds about right. The game has been in development since 2003, which averages out to a little less than $15 million per year of development, which is about average for a AAA title. I think this is just an instance where costs are high because development was so long. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 47. |
Re: WSJ: StarCraft II Cost More Than $100M |
Jul 17, 2010, 14:42 |
Charlie_Six |
|
|
Sometimes I wonder if these game and movie budget costs are wildly inaccurate, and purposefully released to the public in this way so that people place more value in a property, which thus drives people to buy the game/movie.
"My game cost $100 million to make. So you know there's a lot of value in this!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
66 Replies. 4 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 ] Older >
|
|
Twitter 
