By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
forevercloud3000 on 02 December 2013
Edit Thread
outlawauron said:
SxyxS said:
outlawauron said:

You're incredibly wrong. Big games with big teams equal big cost. Every Final Fantasy since the PS1 era (and I can only limit it there because lack of information about earlier entries) has cost 20 million or more to develop. FF9 was $40 million and FF12 was even more. Shenmue was the famous big budget title at $70 million. Not a chance Super Mario Galaxy, Smash bros, Mario Kart, etc. cost less than $10 million.

no chance?

maybe i'm wrong but, Mario galaxy eg is using almost the same engine as mario 64.

Similar structure as mario 64,low res textures,the same no-AI,low polygon count.It is similar to little big planet level editor pushed to HD and most time spent on fine tuning and balancing.

Mario Kart.Almost the same story,some tracks,some cars.(maybe the new mario will pass 10mio budget because of HD.

I had a similar arguement with a nintendo fanboy some weeks ago who explained me that even W101 won't be a an epic flop because of small teams low cost.And i think he was right.

btw-imo most Nintendo Titles are AAA as I use this term for high quality full prize games .But in terms of budget they aren't.There is a reason why nintendo is the most successful corporation considering number of workers and profit.

that does not work if you produce 6 50mio dollar titles a year

You're wrong. SMG is not using the same engine as Super Mario 64. SMG was a beautiful game and one of the most technicially impressive Wii titles. I really think you're trolling with these comments.

At bolded, . Wondeful 101 was a gigantic flop and financial failure. It had 1.5x the budget of Bayonetta which sold far more than W101 did. 

The reason why Nintendo is so successful is because their IPs sell so well. That's it. They have over 7,000 employees and yet people still think they're a meager company making games with small teams.

I also never said they produce 6 50 million titles a year (they could if they wanted to). It's just naive to think their big efforts cost less than $10 million.

I'm just chiming in to say this...

Nintendo has remained profitable year after year because everything they put out is at minimum breaking even out of the game and the pedigree of their franchises has their games selling millions each time. 

Pokemon: this game has been chump change for NIN to make since the second game. The biggest tech evolution came with X/Y but even that couldn't have cost them that much. Regardless they series sells 8million every release. Gold mine.

Mario *insert sur-title here* are never "big budget". No matter how crafty or fun these games are, they don't cost NIN anywhere near as much as Halo does MS or Uncharted does Sony. Honestly, less than 10million is just being marginal, I imagine they are pretty cheap to make. Once again, they will sell millions regardless.

Realistically, Smash Bros probably cost them the most because with each game they actually have to retweak game mechanics and fine tune new and old characters. Zelda might also cost a lil something but not like any other game's budget in the Adventure genre.

None of this is bad mind you, quite the opposite. The fact NIN continues to pump out heavy hitters for chump change is remarkable. Other devs could learn from them. Why does it cost devs 10s of Millions to pump out a game that is barely going to break even? Concentrate less on Graphics and Evironmental Effects, more on consistantly inventive and intuitive gameplay.



      

      

      

Greatness Awaits

PSN:Forevercloud (looking for Soul Sacrifice Partners!!!)