Icyedge said:
HappySqurriel said:
cura said:
HappySqurriel said:
Grand Turismo 3 was my last installment in the Gran Turismo series because I found it to be very pretty but shallow ... I'm not a fan of simulation racing in general because I find this is a common failing of the genre.
With that said, when you're spending (what has been rumoured to be) over 5 years and $100 Million to develop a game and your competition releases 3 $20 Million games in the same time your game better be dramatically better; and sell dramatically better too. If you spend dramatically longer and dramatically more money to achieve an incremental improvement you have really been wasteful.
|
I presume you have sources to back your statements up? Or are we just suppose to take your word for it?
|
Last I heard the development team was (roughly) 200 people working for 5 years ... Even if half of the workers were in a sweatshop in China you'rer still dealing with a $50+ Million budget. Regardless, if Rainbird is correct and it is a $60 Million game, if you spend 3 times as much and 3 times as long as your competition to produce a game your game better be dramatically better.
|
If the budget allocated for your example would be real a lot of people would go to China to work in a sweatshop...
Working in a sweatshop does not gives an income of 100 K per year.
100 persons * 100 000 per year = 10 M * 5 years = 50 M
Now if those 200 working at PD are paid 50 K per year as average, which should be reasonable, you get a budget of 50 M in 5 years in payroll. And then add the other fee like computer, local, electricity which should get you around 60 M.
I agree with your last statement tho, the game better be dramatically better.
|
An employee's salary represents 1/4 to 1/2 of the cost to employ them, so 200 people at 5 years with average earnings of $50,000 (which is remarkably low for high quality development talent) would be $100 Million to $200 Million in total budget.
Essay Pro