EA: Game Budgets "Have Actually Peaked"

[Aug 24, 2010, 8:05 pm ET] - Share - Viewing Comments

GamesIndustry.biz (registration required) quotes EA Partners head David DeMartini saying game development budgets have peaked, and may even be declining: "I think budgets for games have actually peaked and are starting to move in the reverse direction again," he said. "I don’t think there’s any one right budget for any game. It kind of depends on how big the idea is and what the team needs to be able to make a 90 percent-rated game with the idea that they’re working on."

View

11 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >

11.

Re: EA: Game Budgets

Aug 25, 2010, 13:08

Kristian Joensen

Tumbler wrote on Aug 24, 2010, 22:58: I'd love to see game budgets drop sharply. I'd rather see shorter less expensive games that focus on gameplay above graphics. That is usually code for ugly games. NO THANKS!.

10.

Re: EA: Game Budgets

Aug 25, 2010, 05:49

StingingVelvet

Zardoz5 wrote on Aug 25, 2010, 02:23: This is what I was thinking too. Companies should be getting to know the hardware and engines pretty well also by this time. The Mass Effect to Mass Effect 2 jump in graphics, smoothness of game, etc. is an example to comes to mind, thought I don't like some of the gameplay decisions they made with all their extra time.. I recall DICE mentioning how much easier their engine is to work with from an artists perspective as the tools for Frostbite are maturing now. I didn't think Mass Effect 2 looked all that much better than 1, but maybe you meant the console version? In any case I think there is a limit to what the Xbox and PS3 can do and developers have likely hit that already for the most part. If indeed no new console comes for years then games are really going to stagnate not only visually, but in other areas.

Re: EA: Game Budgets "Have Actually Peaked"

Aug 25, 2010, 04:10

ASJD

I do think we're past a real watershed moment in game budgets. The gaming market remains too small to create many large budget games like they used to. Especially as the worldwide economic situation worsens, gamers are only going to want cheaper games, and the market may very well shrink too.

Re: EA: Game Budgets

Aug 25, 2010, 02:23

Zardoz5

Flatline wrote on Aug 25, 2010, 00:09: It makes sense. We're far enough into the development cycle of this generation that production pipelines have been streamlined enough that you actually get some artistic results for your money investment. A game designer can get a lot more done today with 100 man-hours from a team than that same team could produce 3 or 4 years ago. This is what I was thinking too. Companies should be getting to know the hardware and engines pretty well also by this time. The Mass Effect to Mass Effect 2 jump in graphics, smoothness of game, etc. is an example to comes to mind, thought I don't like some of the gameplay decisions they made with all their extra time.. I recall DICE mentioning how much easier their engine is to work with from an artists perspective as the tools for Frostbite are maturing now.

Re: EA: Game Budgets

Aug 25, 2010, 00:29

Jerykk

I'd rather see shorter less expensive games that focus on gameplay above graphics. Why would you want to see shorter games? They're short enough as it is. I'd rather see longer games with more depth and challenge.

Re: EA: Game Budgets

Aug 25, 2010, 00:09

Flatline

It makes sense. We're far enough into the development cycle of this generation that production pipelines have been streamlined enough that you actually get some artistic results for your money investment. A game designer can get a lot more done today with 100 man-hours from a team than that same team could produce 3 or 4 years ago.

Re: EA: Game Budgets "Have Actually Peaked"

Aug 24, 2010, 22:58

Tumbler

I'd love to see game budgets drop sharply. I'd rather see shorter less expensive games that focus on gameplay above graphics.




VGfive.com - Game Trading site (Steam codes too!) Kickstarter "Game Developer"!

Re: EA: Game Budgets

Aug 24, 2010, 22:45

Jedi Master

I paid $69 for F-19 from Microprose in 1988. Anyone have one of those "then years -> now years" calculators to figure out what that would cost today? Granted prices dropped to the $50 range by 1993-94, but I remember that PCs themselves cost a lot more as well. A mid-range PC now costs what, $1000? Back then $2000+ was the norm, with "high end" running you over $3500 guaranteed.

Re: EA: Game Budgets

Aug 24, 2010, 22:25

Sepharo

xXBatmanXx wrote on Aug 24, 2010, 22:21:
sooo...logically, prcies have peaked as well....nah, we will see the $100 pricetag soon as a standard.

I have an idea - cut executive pay, slash marketing in half, and make better games with those savings! What a novel idea!

sry i digress.

Hasn't it been shown that prices have mostly remained unchanged over the years? Especially when factoring in inflation and development budgets? I think the only thing we have to thank for that is the expansion of the hobby.




[I'm not trolling I'm just] tossing stuff like that in there only to get your panties all bunched up. -TrollinThundr

Re: EA: Game Budgets

Aug 24, 2010, 22:21

xXBatmanXx

sooo...logically, prcies have peaked as well....nah, we will see the $100 pricetag soon as a standard.

I have an idea - cut executive pay, slash marketing in half, and make better games with those savings! What a novel idea!

sry i digress.




In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. / Few men have virtue enough to withstand the highest bidder. Playing: RL

Re: EA: Game Budgets "Have Actually Peaked"

Aug 24, 2010, 21:03

VoodooV

Translation: We hear that these indie games are really popular right now and they're made for really cheap and sell very well, so we're jumping on the "me too" bandwagon. Granted, I've always been a believer in the idea that a good game doesn't have to be big budget. But I suspect the big companies will fuck it up somehow.

11 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >