• RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    11 hours ago

    And development teams are too big. No game should realistically be having 500+ people working on it. That’s too many people, too big a ship to steer fast enough for the changes that happen in game development. Even the biggest games have done very well with teams of 250 or less, including all staff that work on the game, how about development studios pay attention to that?

    • lepinkainen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      10 hours ago

      People expect all games to be multiplayer with online live ops and events and a steady flow of new content.

      That’s why you need to have a 500 person team. Someone needs to be designing and coding the valentine’s event for 2025 right now

      • Varyag@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Companies want all games to be multiplayer with online live ops and events and a steady flow of microtransactions money.

      • Katana314@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        10 hours ago

        I’ve heard this often, but most of the games I see people consume live updates for weren’t initially planned to get such constant updates.

        Ex: Dead by Daylight. Released as dumb party horror game with low shelf life. Now on its 8th plus year. Fortnite: Epic’s base building game that pivoted to follow the battle royale trend, then ten other trends. DOTA 2: First released as a Warcraft map. GTA V: First released as a singleplayer game before tons of expansion went into online. Same with Minecraft.

        It just doesn’t make sense to pour $500M into something before everyone agrees it’s a fun idea. There’s obviously nothing gained in planning out the “constant content cycle” before a game’s first public release.

        • Dragon "Rider"(drag)@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          16 minutes ago

          Drag can think of one counterexample: Warframe. But Warframe is also 100% free to play and free to participate in every content update and event. And Warframe is developed by an indie team from Fake London who started the game with 120 employees.

      • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Who is these people that want this? And even if they do. Creating a good game does not need 500 people. And if you want to provide content after setup several small parallel teams to make cosmetics and stuff.

        But the whole live service is something the companies want. So they can keep monetizing it and turn if off once a new iteration is done.

        • lepinkainen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          41 minutes ago

          Check out the leaks from the Sony/Microsoft trial

          There are literally tens of millions of people who ONLY use their PS5 for CoD - a live service multiplayer game.

          A whole generation of people have literally never played a single player game and don’t know how to.

          • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            13 minutes ago

            It’s like they exist in an alternate reality. But then I’m fine with that too. If there is a market for that… just a shame that the hunt for this audience eats up everything else.