There's no need for games outside of AAA to take longer than they used to, considering it's easier now to make games and add assets than ever before.
Games cost more because they sell more than ever, to a bigger audience than ever, which means they cost more and are more risky?
Economies of scale makes it cheaper to create a product for more people. What the difference is between now and the 90s is quality and quantity. In the 90s you had fewer games but higher quality, which is the opposite today. To solve this problem, the industry needs to be cleansed.
Sony do pretty well at selling games for 70 quid a pop. And some maybe new franchises but TLoU and Uncharted were new only a gen ago. GoW got a remake and blew people away. Horizon came from nowhere and sold gangbusters.
The only company saying gaming is unsustainable at 70 per game, is the company who is trying to redefine an industry almost half a century old.
"There's no need for games outside of AAA to take longer than they used to, considering it's easier now to make games and add assets than ever before.
Economies of scale makes it cheaper to create a product for more people. What the difference is between now and the 90s is quality and quantity. In the 90s you had fewer games but higher quality, which is the opposite today. To solve this problem, the industry needs to be cleansed."
No offense but I don't think you understand how game development works. Progressively games got more and more advanced. 3D assets are extremely expensive now days. Your not dealing with small polygons anymore. Games are starting to blend between Game and Cinematic quality.
Higher resolution models, textures and sculpting takes a ton of talent and money. It doesn't matter if you are AAA or not. This is why a lot of indie devs rely on more cartoon visual art styles or even 2D art because it's cheaper to produce but can still look good.
There is a massive difference between 90s and now. Game standards have astronomically risen. A good looking platforming game is not good enough anymore. People want more advanced AI, more dynamic eco systems , better visuals. Back in the day, you could get away easy with a lot of stuff, because gaming wasn't as prominent as it is now.
It was a lot easier to set the standard for a FPS games, RTS or anything else. Now? Not so much.
I don't know why you are telling me Sony is doing well at $70. I already made that point to you as well. You are acting as if I am disagreeing about Sony. Very few publishers ca get away with it. Sony is doing well cause of reputation and being around since the 90s, just like Nintendo thst hsve existed since the 80s and csn sell you the same product over and over at full price. They don't need to prove much.
But for any other 3rd party developer or publisher $70 is an issue, and not very sustainable.
I highly suggest you look up the costs game art assets, voice actors and among other 10x million things. Don't forget the insane marketing budgets and advertising. With the power of social media platforms publishers now spend more money on ads than they did ever ever. There were no influences, youtube, Facebook or anything like that in the 90s. Open up your mind a bit dude, you sre thinking very narrowly and not looking at the whole picture. Hope this helps.
www.engadget.com
www.dbltap.com
