JazzB1987 said:
DerNebel said:
What do you think most devs/publishers financial situation would look like if they all started implementing Rockstar/Valve/Nintendo-like development cycles. It sucks but most of the Industry couldn't survive on that.
|
I can tell you what would happen.
This would happen:
 
Devs would focus on the actual games instead of using all manpower to make things more visually impressive using effects. Most of the money is wasted on visuals that will look like shit in a year or two anyway well and on marketing to promote that "visuals only" product. When the game is good it will work without maketing (Dark Souls)
You know what? I can buy PacificRim for 5 bucks on bluray and have 2hours of entertainment with better visuals than I get from 10 4h games that costs 60 bucks that try to look realistic/impressive together.
There is a reason why I decided to play games and that reason is not mediocre games with great visuals.
So again making actual games with focus on whats important and then adding sufficient visuals will be the result in taking time.
|
What we'd get from longer development cycles is fewer games, that's it. Publishers would bet their money on their biggest franchises even more, but those would then maybe only release every 3 years instead of 1 or 2. The smaller experimental games would become even more rare, because they're a financial risk and with publishers not having their save yearly income from their mega franchises, they're less likely to take such risks.
Also I don't know why you're drifting into the whole visual department, that has nothing really to do with this and I don't see how taking more time = concentrating less on visuals and why would you choose Xenoblade and SotC as examples of this, when both of those games are considered among the best looking on their platform?
