By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
curl-6 on 20 September 2024
Edit Thread
the-pi-guy said:
curl-6 said:

Games journalist Colin Moriarty reports he's been in contact with one of the game's developers, who says the game cost a massive $400 million to make and that internally it was viewed as Playstation's "Star Wars moment" and "the future of Playstation".

https://www.psu.com/news/concord-reportedly-cost-400-million-to-make-was-internally-believed-to-be-the-future-of-playstation/

This seems very unlikely.

Public information is that the parent company got $250 million during funding rounds. This gets spread across 3 different studios, only one of which is Firewalk. 

Colin basically claims that Sony spent another $200 million on a game that is in a laughable state, after they got acquired. So basically ~18 months. This is a tall order. Sony's most expensive games cost $200 million over 4-6 years of development. Yet, the claim is that Concord had that much spending in a fraction of that time.

I would guess based on what we know that spending was ~$150 million. Could certainly be a lot higher than that, but I would need to see an actual good source come forward for that.

I wouldn't say the game was in a "laughable state" technically speaking; it's problems were almost entirely a matter of design, not polish or production value. 

Interestingly, the report's claims of a culture of "toxic positivity" within the studio that quashed all negative feedback is being corroborated by others:

https://x.com/ethangach/status/1837163976452411510

Apparently there was a pervasive attitude that they were "too good to fail", while the company's higher ups had their "head in the sand".

""You weren't allowed to say anything internally about this game - about how something's wrong with it, character designs are not right, and so on and so forth. They really truly believed. This was Hermen Hulst's baby, apparently."