^ yeah im sure.. convenient for you no journalist would report on it. And if it isnt reviewable to the public how do journalists get the info... and if the journalist gets the info wouldnt they report on it? ...ya know to the public. anyway its all moot since investers wouldnt know anyway.

daro - LOL excuse excuse. not only did i say 'i believe' meaning i could be mistaken (and at least i provided source unlike some people) but uncharted had pathetic ad campaign... go ahead find an article reporting the budget like you can find with Halo, Killzone, and LBP. the best uncharted got was 'ya do you want it' octopus ad which was like 5 seconds worth.(AKA ad campaign wouldnt have much effect on total cost)

yes its dissapointing really

Yeah I said it was in development for approximately 4 years in my first post. Did you know GTA4 only took 3.5 years, but still cost $100 million to make. A game that is in development for that long will ALWAYS be expensive.

When will you get it through your thick head that Guerrilla Games are still a company that need to balance their own books. "Sony won't hold the rent towards KZ2" means nothing, whatever GG do, they need to bring in enough money to justify their existance. If they can only pay for the cost of their developers but not enough to cover the rent and other fixed costs, then they will either need a handout from Sony, or Sony will shut them down because they can't even pay their own way. How can you not understand this?

^ source on GTA4s dev cycle.

"Work on Grand Theft Auto IVbegan in November 2004, almost immediately after the release of Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas.[45]Around 150 game developers worked on Grand Theft Auto IV,[49]led by core members of the Grand Theft Auto IIIteam."

" The company is working with more than 150 developers for GTA IV"

Much larger studio. Not only do they have more than 30 employees than GG(extra 10.5 million min through dev cycle) had at the peak but GTA4 was multiplatform and considering R*N was behind GTA3, GTASA, and GTVC(all 15million plus selling games) i'm willin to bet avg worker sallery for those 150 plus employees is alot mor. not only this but GTA4 has GTA3, GTASA, and GTVC justifing its budget. Companies look at that. Killzone 2 has a 2 million seller game and whatever shell shock did (less than 1 mill i believe) 1/3rd the budget of GTA4 for a game like KZ2 is massive but your all to blind by the lets all hate KZ2 and spread rumors about its budget with nothing to support our claims bandwagon to see that... when every bit of common sense says otherwise

EDIT - "Benzies also noted that about 1,000 people pitched in on the game's development. Beyond the expected tasks of programming and design, Rockstar also set up time-lapse cameras on New York rooftops to capture the correct intensity of the rain, and took over 100,000 photographs on location to piece together Liberty City" http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/52464 (Yeah MUCH larger than GGs 120 people. the common sense light bulb should be going off in peoples head right now )

PS - ""Sony won't hold the rent towards KZ2" means nothing, whatever GG do," if you dont comprehend how this means everything in this arguement i feel soory for you. through out this whole thread KZ2 cost has been in discusion not GGs business structure and Sony profitability. Of course if GG is sucking more money than making Sony wont be happy. but that has to do with the bottom line. Something that KZ2s development costs will be considered for but obviously not the only thing

^ its quite hilarious to see ' almost immediately after the release of Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas' in there but for a smaller studio with more projects development started befor projects are finished... huh... hypocrisy at its best

100,000,000/3.5 years = 28.6 million a year/155 employees = 180k per employee per year (yeah lot higher average)(this post is kinda pointless now since GTA4 did so much more extra crap than GG had to do IE take 100,000 photographs of NY City and study it, or use cameras to watch rain. Plus the fact GTA developers are paid more than GG's and there were more employees doing the actual development than GG. Ad that GTA4 was multiplat and was coming off the success of GTASA. It baffles me how anyone can think GG could eat up 2/3rds of GTA4s buget... hell even half)

How on earth can you quantify the statement of "Plus the fact GTA developers are paid more than GG's"?

You are completely 100& making shit up, not only making it up, but from no factual basis at all. How can you ask me for sources on the GTA4 data (which you found yourself) when nothing you've said is based on anything factual at all. I shouldn't be surprised, everything you've said in this thread you've either pulled out of your ass, or made up an excuse to try and explain why it doesn't apply this time. According to you Guerrilla Games must work in a parallel universe where only what Max makes up in his mind applies to them.

If anything GG employees would be paid MORE because they are paid in Euro and the Euro is worth more than the US$. I understand that in theory they would be paid less Euro due to its increased value, but it doesn't always work like that.

Using your own equation that you started and then bailed out on by making excuses (yet again)
GTA4 = 100,000,000/3.5 years = 28.6 million a year/155 employees = 180k per employee per year
Therefore Killzone 2 = 180k per year x 120 = 21.6million x 4 years = 86 million

That's almost DOUBLE what we are trying to say is a reasonable budget for Killzone 2.

How can you possibly believe that 40 million euro is an unreasonable number after all this? You must be the thickest person on the planet.

^ Im sure they are paid fewer Euros than Dollars. Otherwise one would expect the average wage in the Netherlands to be higher than in the U.S. which it is not.

They definitely are, but it's never a true 1:1 scale, in the UK a pound is a pound, you earn in pounds and pay in pounds so it's all relative. The same goes everywhere else in the world. Take the Big Mac Index as an example, in Australia, US & Europe the Big Mac is almost exactly 3.50 of local currency. So when you take into account the exchange rate, Europe is getting screwed and Australia is getting a good deal, but you don't notice because you earn local currency. Europe is generally a more expensive continent to live in, taxes are higher, cost of living is higher, therefore wages are also higher.