Games now more or less are equivalent to games back then. If you factor in the technology of the time, games were mostly on the bleeding edge of technology back then. Ocarina of Time was using primitive motion capture technology, for example, and it was so big for the time Nintendo had to make a special cartridge that had the largest storage capacity up to that point (and later games got even bigger, like Resident Evil 2). The N64 was a relatively cheap home console had texture filtering that at the time was a PC only feature if you had a top of the line GPU. Mid to low tier GPUs didn’t even have that technology back then. Compare that with todays games targeting 4k or 120fps or including more detailed texture work, it is more or less equivalent.
The technology was severely limited back then, it is not now. It is more or less the same.
Development teams these days are bloated. You could probably cut more than half the marketing budget and the game would still be fine, just with like 150 less people in the credits.
Shaving 150 people off of the credits does not make up for that price differential. It’s probably a much more worthwhile discussion to ask if games truly need to be as big these days as they’re being made. Technological constraints or not, it’s always going to be way more expensive to make games so large when they might be better games if they were smaller.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
No humor/memes etc…
No affiliate links
No advertising.
No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
No self promotion.
No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
No politics.
Comments.
No personal attacks.
Obey instance rules.
No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc…)
Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Games now more or less are equivalent to games back then. If you factor in the technology of the time, games were mostly on the bleeding edge of technology back then. Ocarina of Time was using primitive motion capture technology, for example, and it was so big for the time Nintendo had to make a special cartridge that had the largest storage capacity up to that point (and later games got even bigger, like Resident Evil 2). The N64 was a relatively cheap home console had texture filtering that at the time was a PC only feature if you had a top of the line GPU. Mid to low tier GPUs didn’t even have that technology back then. Compare that with todays games targeting 4k or 120fps or including more detailed texture work, it is more or less equivalent.
Games back then took 20 people. Now, upwards of 2000 for modern AAA games. It’s nowhere near the same.
The technology was severely limited back then, it is not now. It is more or less the same.
Development teams these days are bloated. You could probably cut more than half the marketing budget and the game would still be fine, just with like 150 less people in the credits.
Shaving 150 people off of the credits does not make up for that price differential. It’s probably a much more worthwhile discussion to ask if games truly need to be as big these days as they’re being made. Technological constraints or not, it’s always going to be way more expensive to make games so large when they might be better games if they were smaller.