This isn't what you asked for in the last post -- you asked me to provide evidence of other PS3/360 games. That isn't my point. Now, you're asking me to provide evidence of games for other systems (Wii and PS2 would be the best examples).

That is my point.

http://www.nintendolife.com/articles/2006/08/12/red_steel_development_costs

Red Steel, largely assumed to be the most expensive third party Wii game yet produced (in the same way we assume MGS4 and FFXIII are the PS3's most expensive games) cost 12.75 million to produce. If the most expensive Wii game costs slightly more than half an average PS3 game (the most expensive ones, such as MGS4 and FFXIII, reportedly breach 40 million), then it's quite l likely that the Wii averages less than half -- I was just being generous.

http://tech.commongate.com/post/Wii_Development_costs_a_quarter_to_half_compared_to_PS3_360/
http://www.gamespot.com/wii/driving/cars/news.html?sid=6149154

Here, THQ's president states that Wii development is 1/4 - 1/2 the cost of PS3/360 development.

In relation to the PS2, development cost to rise 200% this generation, according to EA.
Costs on Sony/Microsoft platforms leading to "creative failure," labeled "innovation killers" due to high costs.

A few more articles, particularly one about the PS2/PS3 relative costs.

Again, I've got plenty more. I didn't immediately provide statistics because this information is pervasive, freely available all over the web. I don't mean this offensively or insultingly, by the way: you haven't posted here a lot. Let me just say that this is an issue we've been over thoroughly and repeatedly here, and after scores of discussions, I don't force the information down people's throats on every occasion anymore.

Yeah, but you're assuming you want all entirely unique content.  Seeing as to how games normally don't take place in vastly different environments for each level, most of the content like textures and models is recycled.  What little changes need to be made can probably be ground out with relative ease.  Level design is the only exception.

Also, competent programmers have to know more than artists do, so they most definitely cost more.

I never asked for statistics on development costs for anything other than the 360 or PS3.  I had 2 points:

a) Probably all consoles have been expensive by the standards of normal people.  Note that this is the only point at which I mentioned anything other than 360/PS3, and that I never asked for statistics at all.

b) If your point is that 360/PS3 development is more than everyone else, don't expect to be thought of as a genius for pointing it out, since we all know this is true.

Kinda crazy that the best looking game this generation only cost 20,000,000 to make.

And develop for the Wii if you want to make money? LOL.

Last time I check only Nintendo games sell on the Wii. But I guess if you want some quick bucks the Wii is a good place for shovelware.

ND should make like a "Daxter and Mario Go Hunting" video game and spend like 100,000 developing it, then use their earnings to fund the next PS3 game.

Because if we have learned one thing from Wii software sales, its that if you add Mario and some corny use of the Wii controller, your sure to sell over a million.

Good point weezy. Your right, follow that simple formula and make more crappy Wii games and ND, too, can make money off of you "proud Wii owners".

20 million is expensive, but those money was used to support the gaming industry. How many jobs were created with that 20 million?

If one game only cost 1 million to make and sold 1 million copies lifetime. Where will the profit go?

Then you really did miss my point. My point wasn't that Uncharted is expensive for a PS3/360 game, because the original poster wasn't making that point. I was suggesting that this only further evidences that PS3/360 games -- in general, not just Uncharted in particular -- are expensive to make relative to other platforms, which was the original poster's point. That is the point I was responding to, and the point you seem to have missed.

Which leads to the second bolded section. Apparently, it isn't obvious to everyone that 360/PS3 development is expensive, because the original poster said, in the original post:

"So all those naysayers that keep saying that PS3 games are too expensive can stop talking shit now"

Right in the original post. It got its own line, no less, to emphasize its significance. So this is a little unfair, yes? Apparently when people make stupid claims, I'm not allowed to refute them, because obviously everyone already knows that they're stupid and I should stop wasting everyone's time by proving the obvious. Clearly.

if $20 million is expensive, then what the hell is microsoft doing payin $50 million for episodic content??

I think Uncharted would cost more than the average PS3 game. It is the best looking game on the PS3 and on any console (not PC). Given that Uncharted cost $20M, I would say an average PS3 game costs $12-15M to develop.

 I've been wondering that since I first found out.  Gears only cost $10 mil. to develop.  Why not make a few more of them instead?

The amount of polish in the game means they had to have invested a lot of time testing at the end.