^ your right anyone using surfer girls numbers is unreliable...

"remember this story? that figure was actually â?¬21 million ($30 million) and it has only gone up from there (by gone up i mean it has doubled to â?¬42 million/$60 million). by the time killzone 2 comes out it will dethrone shenmue as the most expensive video game ever made. the game should have cost the former figure but guerrilla?s managerial lacks any sort of financial or work allocation skills, the studio has high turnover and a few other things. because of this incapacity a nice portion of the team at studio cambridge is assisting in development. to top this off the game may be pretty but it?s barely mediocre and past the point of no return. the september release date floating around will without doubt be missed if guerrilla sticks to their intention of not releasing the game until its done which will be early next year."

And that story was from whom?

http://www.killzoneunit.com/kz/?cat=10

http://www.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=26184028

http://www.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=26821637

http://ps3.qj.net/2008-01

it was from surfer girl in jan of 08. the first one to report the supposed 60mil budget

So a KZ2 blog site quoted Surfer Girl's blog site?  And somehow this put's GamesIndustry.biz into question?

http://www.vg247.com/2008/02/27/killzone-2-budget-balloons-says-rumour/

this figure all started from surfer girl. these 'news' articles are quoting each other. thats where this 60mil comes from. not any data. not any analyse

http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=62130

these people might have deleted their articles but people posted them in forums

That just quotes right back to the same stupid Surfer Girl story. Are you insinuating that a credible news organization like GI.biz would get their development budget from Surfer Girl?

Let me say this one more time. It's an industry figure that HE quoted. He didn't quote Surfer Girls numbers, did he? Compare them. This figure is derived from analysts and is used by investors. What part of this are you having difficulty understanding?

^ the part where anyone used these numbers before Jan. 08.

The part where any of them show their breakdowns.

^ the part where any of them quote a source.

the part where you think they work at sony to know any of these figures because if the year is off by .5 and the number of employeess is off by 10 and the salaries is off by 10,000 you get a jumble fuck thats inaccurate