The Cost of Game Development? Where does the money go? *spawn*

3000 cooks for one enormous, bland broth.
3000 names in the credits. Ever actually watched the credits at the end of a movie? Hundreds of names, very few actual cooks. They include the secretaries and accountants and Junior Best Boys from a half-dozen different studios all involved in some small capacity. 3,000 names in the credits is not the same as a studio of 3,000 developers.

In English money, that puts management at ~£70,000 PA, and QA at ~£38,000 PA. Sorry, but there's no way that those roles are worth that money. Programmers seems about right, but not when management is paid more. Why, because they're "management?" Okay, have a crack at managing a project without a programmer who's paid well enough to shovel digital shit for hours a day
Do you not know how business works? Senior management always gets paid more. Salesmen always get paid more. The people who make the actual products always get paid less. It's economics and shouldn't surprise you unless you've just emerged from a cave!

This is an issue that I see consistently from creative industries...
The discussion of what people get paid and why is really one for the RSPCA forum.
 
How the hell do you ever break even with such a huge team?
It's not a team, but a collection of companies and studios with an input. You could do the same on plenty of games already released that out-source their art to a half-dozen different studios. If you added the productions credits of everyone involved from those studios including office staff etc, you'd get epic numbers of personnel.

The article states costs in the 'triple digit millions'. Anything over $100M then. GTAV cost $265M to release, probably involved over a thousand people, made $1 billion in three days, and has gone on to make more than $6 billion.
 
3000 names in the credits. Ever actually watched the credits at the end of a movie? Hundreds of names, very few actual cooks. They include the secretaries and accountants and Junior Best Boys from a half-dozen different studios all involved in some small capacity. 3,000 names in the credits is not the same as a studio of 3,000 developers.

True. I had a quick look at the article but I can't really be arsed. Do you happen to know if it gave any kind of breakdown?

Do you not know how business works? Senior management always gets paid more. Salesmen always get paid more. The people who make the actual products always get paid less. It's economics and shouldn't surprise you unless you've just emerged from a cave!

Ug! Ahem. You're right, it's nothing out of the ordinary, but I don’t think it's sustainable if what we hear about rising development costs is true. What works for one industry needn't be what works for another.

I won't labour the point, because I agree with the bolded below, but I will say that salesmen can all just fuck off - I've yet to meet or work with one that isn't a towering, narcissistic sociopath.

The discussion of what people get paid and why is really one for the RSPCA forum.

We have a forum for the Royal Society for the Protection of Computer Animals?
 
This seems to be coming up more often through various topics like Valve's 30% Cut or EA's financials. This may have been said in jest, but its on point:

This is a very state of affairs were the creative minds that pour all their talent and sweat to develop a game are compensated significantly less in comparison. And if the project fails they are the ones to be laid off.
 
Back
Top