By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - Over 200 devs working on MGS4...

Pk9394 on 16 October 2007
jman8 said:
I think that article title is a bit deceiving simply because budgets can vary so much between any two games. While costs are definitely a lot higher now than in the last generation, I think there are ways to keep them from spiraling out of control like some people fear. The biggest thing developers will have to do be diligent about is recycling game engines. These days I don't think you can just build a single full game from the ground up and plan on keeping a tight budget. You have to either pick an engine off the shelf like the Unreal Engine, or when you're building a game, you have to have plans for sequels and build your engine so that it is versatile enough for use in other unrelated potential titles. Also, the more and more familiar devs become with the hardware the less manpower they'll need to pull off a game. So I don't think we have to worry too much.

I'm sure the thing you suggested, everyone of those company already hired someone to manage the budget with license middle ware. company are not run by dummies, management level will find every possible way to keep cost low.

 



Around the Network
areseris on 17 October 2007
jman8 said:
areseris said:
superchunk said:

Let's see, MGS games sold historically,

1 = 5.59m
2 = 5.56m
3 = 3.96m

@http://vgchartz.com/worldtotals.php?name=metal+gear&console=&publisher=&sort=Total

those are impressive numbers... but they're based on consoles with an extremely huge install base (100Million+ for both ps2 and ps1).

there are currently only 5M PS3s in people's homes... even if you double it (and that's being generous) and say that there will be 10M by the time the game comes out, do you really think MGS4 will even approach MGS3 numbers?

I'm not saying the game will flop... I'm sure it will do very well... but it will be difficult to match MGS3 in sales if there are only 10M PS3s out there in people's homes. That's less then 10% of the install based that MGS3 had to work with.


MGS2 did not have the benefit of a 100 million PS2 install base on day 1. There were about 10 million PS2s in people's hands when MGS2 came out in Nov. '01, just one year after the launch of the PS2. By the time MGS4 comes out, there will be about 8-10 million PS3s in people's hands. You can also argue that the PS2's library was far better than the PS3's at the launch point of MGS2 and MGS4 respectively. By the time MGS2 came out, huge titles like Twisted Metal Black and Gran Turismo 3 were already out and FFX was but 2 months from being released. So, is it really that outrageous for MGS4, the final MGS, to sell similarly to MGS2?


True, but won't the PS3 have quality titles by the time MGS4 is released:
Devil May Cry 4
Gran Theft Auto 4
Call of Duty 4
The Orange Box
Gran Turismo Prolouge
Assassin's Creed
HAZE
Unreal Tournament 3
Ninja Gaiden Stigma
Oblivion

These are all games that have (or will) score 9/10 review ratings

plus there are a few decent titles that have a chance at making a splash.

Dark Sector
Army of Two
Mercenaries 2
Turok
Condemned 2

by the time MGS4 is released, there will be other quality titles on the system.  That's a way better lineup then what MGS2 originally had to deal with.  The PS2 only had 3 big quality titles by the time MGS2 was released... MGS4 will have a lot of competition.  Again, I'm not trying to make it seem doom and gloom for MGS4... but I do think there are factors (limited install base & competition) that can slow it down a bit.  Then again, maybe all these great titles help push more PS3 sales... except that only two or three of them are Sony exclusives.



HappySqurriel on 17 October 2007
jman8 said:
I think that article title is a bit deceiving simply because budgets can vary so much between any two games. While costs are definitely a lot higher now than in the last generation, I think there are ways to keep them from spiraling out of control like some people fear. The biggest thing developers will have to do be diligent about is recycling game engines. These days I don't think you can just build a single full game from the ground up and plan on keeping a tight budget. You have to either pick an engine off the shelf like the Unreal Engine, or when you're building a game, you have to have plans for sequels and build your engine so that it is versatile enough for use in other unrelated potential titles. Also, the more and more familiar devs become with the hardware the less manpower they'll need to pull off a game. So I don't think we have to worry too much.

Except that a small team of 6 to 8 people can make a decent game engine in a (reasonably) short period of time; if you include the conversion tools to get your artwork from major tools like 3D Studio or Softimage XSI your team will explode to the 12 to 14 developer range. The reason people licence an engine is more for the consistent high quality tools which reduces the ammount of work the artists have to do.

Artists are expensive and most companies are not looking to produce or licence a large library of assets to reduce development costs at the moment



jman8 on 17 October 2007
Pk9394 said:
jman8 said:
I think that article title is a bit deceiving simply because budgets can vary so much between any two games. While costs are definitely a lot higher now than in the last generation, I think there are ways to keep them from spiraling out of control like some people fear. The biggest thing developers will have to do be diligent about is recycling game engines. These days I don't think you can just build a single full game from the ground up and plan on keeping a tight budget. You have to either pick an engine off the shelf like the Unreal Engine, or when you're building a game, you have to have plans for sequels and build your engine so that it is versatile enough for use in other unrelated potential titles. Also, the more and more familiar devs become with the hardware the less manpower they'll need to pull off a game. So I don't think we have to worry too much.

I'm sure the thing you suggested, everyone of those company already hired someone to manage the budget with license middle ware. company are not run by dummies, management level will find every possible way to keep cost low.

 


Yeah I totally agree with you. But at the time that article was written one year ago, i'm not so sure that was the case. If it really took 500,000 copies to break even, there would be so many companies that have fallen so short of that goal that they would probably be in dire straits right now. And as far as I can tell, there have been very few companies that are in trouble. The only ones I can think of are Atari and SCI. Both of which are in trouble mostly because they have been making consistently crappy games (except for maybe Tomb Raider Legends)



My Top 5:

Shadow of the Colossus, Metal Gear Solid 3, Shenmue, Skies of Arcadia, Chrono Trigger

My 2 nex-gen systems: PS3 and Wii

Prediction Aug '08: We see the PSP2 released fall '09. Graphically, it's basically the same as the current system. UMD drive ditched and replaced by 4-8gb on board flash memory. Other upgrades: 2nd analog nub, touchscreen, blutooth, motion sensor. Design: Flip-style or slider. Size: Think Iphone. Cost: $199. Will be profitable on day 1.