By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Hardstuck-Platinum on 17 August 2025
Edit Thread
EricHiggin said:
Hardstuck-Platinum said:

Increasing costs has little to do with better hardware and more to do with a very competitive industry. Do you think Rockstar chose to spend 1 billion on GTA6 just for funsies? No. They did it because they know they can't make a game like GTA 1 today and be successful. Standards go up and over time people expect better and better experiences that cost more and more to make. Rockstar spent 1 billion to out compete everyone else in the industry, and I think it's going to work out for them.  

An example sure, but not a great one really.

GTA is basically guaranteed profit. Even if GTAVI was more comparable to GTAV, as long as the gameplay was there, with just enough extra, it would profit. Now it wouldn't profit like GTAVI will in the end, with being leaps and bounds above GTAV with tons extra, but Rockstar can do that because they would have to screw up so bad it would seem impossible. We're talking like PS3+WiiU+XB1 combined bad in order for GTAVI to fail. Especially with GTA Online now, Rockstar doesn't really have to worry much. When was the last time GTA or Rockstar failed big or screwed up royally?

SNY doesn't quite have that same luxury at the moment. Gamers aren't happy because of a lack of games, and we've all seen what that did to MS with XB1 leading to Series X/S. SNY also wasn't able to create massive growth with TLOU2 or HFW, and perhaps even did some damage to those franchises and their brand. On top of that, SNY has been focusing on GAAS and their first real shot at it tanked hard. So hard they've shut some games down or delayed them to make what would seem considerable changes based on the timeline. Even Bungie's next game is looking shaky at the moment.

SNY doesn't just like to go big, they like to go big from the start. How much of their new IP's ending up a huge success was pure talent vs luck isn't exactly as clear anymore, and as of now, it doesn't seem like they can solely rely on that same method of game creation. At the very least, they need to keep the pipeline somewhat full. Having longer and longer droughts, only to eventually drop banger after banger after banger, then another even longer drought, isn't sustainable and will eventually cause massive backlash. If the GAAS games caught on, and were liked by the majority, that would certainly help the problem, but you need them to end up a hit, yet you also need to be aware there is a hardcore group who also want nothing to do with GAAS period. So something has to be there that interests them, often enough, or you're going to start to lose those hardcore players once the droughts get long enough.

A giant AAAA title every now and then can totally work, but pumping them out yearly, even if they're AAA, doesn't seem to be working. Buying even more studios probably isn't going to fix the problem either based on what's been happening. More smaller, cheaper, AAA and AA games, would seem like a rather simple and easy way to solve at least some of the problem.

I disagree with this. GTA5 was designed on consoles with very extreme bottlenecks as the PS3 literally had about 180mb of usable System Ram and only 256 VRAM. Difference between that and PS5 is extreme with 14GB usable unified RAM. The impact that would have on a games development would be completely transformative. If you saying you can make another game comparable to GTA5 and that would be enough, you're saying that you could design the game on PS3 again and still have it be a massive success? 

With regards to the rest, I don't really feel the need to comment about Sony anymore. They're so so far ahead of the competition is doesn't matter what they do with any future decisions. They could literally close all their first party studios now and it wouldn't matter. MS has brought over about 8 games this year and you've also got all the other publishers too.