An explanation for why video game budgets have swelled to $300 million and more.READ:Why So Many Video Games Cost So Much to Make https://www.bloomberg.com/n...
I went to read the first comment to that video and someone plainly came out to say that the guy in the video didn’t really answer the question.
So, I think that alone spares me and others the time to waste 17 minutes on some guy who for the life of him, can’t get to the point of his headline. Much less, answer the questions that needed the answers, in his opinion.
Hey, at least he didn’t read the entire plot summary of a game from Wikipedia for no good reason. I can tell because the video isn’t 30 minutes long.
Jokes aside, I get the feeling video essays are in kind of a crisis. There’s too much bloat out there. Even among very popular uploads with tons of views. Of course there are fantastic documentaries too but it gets harder to find good new stuff with all this meaningless slop clogging the front page and search results. (As if search wasn’t terrible enough already.)
But hey, maybe it’s just me. Maybe I’ve become too picky. But as soon as I notice there’s more plot summary than insight in a video essay, I leave midway through. And I swear it’s getting more by the month.
It’s not that long of a video, and he gets to the answer fairly quickly, then outlines examples using back of the napkin math. (average cost per developer per month) * (months of development) = cost of game. And then it’s the difference between real world numbers for those in 2015 and today. Average salaries have gone up, especially in major cities in the US, as have staff sizes to make AAA games, as has time needed to develop substantially larger games than we typically made in 2015, and that number balloons very quickly.
There’s also a lot of people in game development that have no idea what they’re doing. They’re in it for the money and because gaming is bigger than cinema, TV (streaming) and music combined they’re willing to throw a lot of cash at it.
I’ve never heard of anyone taking a game job because it pays extraordinarily well compared to another job they might be able to get with the same skill set. Definitely not recently. I’ve turned down a programming job in games because my non-game job paid way better, and that job I turned down didn’t even exist a year and change later, because the industry is so volatile and competitive.
It pays extraordinary well if you own shares and are a board member and want a CEO that maximizes your profits. As a shareholder you also have no idea about the medium but you know there is a lot of money in it so you throw money at it. Most of the biggest game companies are run by c-suites who couldn’t care less about games.
I think anyone with a fairly basic understanding of economics (and that is admittedly a declining number in many places) understands the idea that “salaries and benefits are expensive”.
What he doesn’t explain that would actually be helpful is why teams are so big. Like what are all the departments that work on AAA titles, what do they do, how many people on staff relative to other departments, what does a 3D modeler make vs. a gameplay programmer?
He also doesn’t talk about anything outside of staffing, like marketing, cinematics, voice acting, localization, bribing Geoff Keighley…
This would all be more useful than the baby math lesson provided.
What he doesn’t explain that would actually be helpful is why teams are so big.
Can you not see the difference in money on the screen between Halo 1 and Destiny 2? One person can make Halo’s relatively simple models, complete with nutcracker-esque mouth syncing, much faster than you can make the likes of Destiny’s quest givers with far more complexity to them. So if you want to make more of those kinds of NPCs, you need more people making them. The same goes for any other discipline involved in making a game.
Like what are all the departments that work on AAA titles, what do they do, how many people on staff relative to other departments, what does a 3D modeler make vs. a gameplay programmer?
That all comes out in the average cost per employee, which is the same ballpark math the publishers are using to estimate, and he says that in this video.
I’m not sure why so many people are down voting this. The only part I took issue with was what kind of salary Schreier said would make one rich versus middle class in an expensive city. I live in an expensive city, I don’t make anywhere near as much as some of the high salaries he cites, and those who do around me are certainly rich.
There are for sure tiers of how rich you can be. But when you’re beyond the point of financial stress and can at any time stop working for the rest of your life and not worry about making ends meet, I think most of us would call that rich. If you’re pulling in a quarter million per year, even in an expensive city, the slightest bit of sense with your money allows you to accumulate wealth so quickly that I think you qualify.
I don’t think you are right with this. I live in one of the most affordable major cities and if a family is not running on 6 figures then your likely in the red unless you somehow have a very cheap situation. Lets assume 2 bedrooms here btw which I don’t think most people would consider high on the hog space. Now its true that technically you have all the overage to squirrel away but most folks have a hard time living on the edge of being in the red frugally. Once you have money you would like to have that lifestyle of going out once a week (especially if your job is stressful) and being able to take that once a year vacation. So yeah you have an extra 150 but 50 of that goes to taxes and the other 100 can be eaten up fast by wanting to live in a free standing house and having newer things and such. You will be able to fund your retirement well and live well wihtout concern but you won’t be able to stop working for the rest of your life unless you again live like a pauper for a few years to save enough and then live off of that like a pauper or go move to the boonies and that does not even broach if you have some sort of medical issue while your not working for the rest of your life. Its comfortable not rich. I mean I would not even consider a second home and car rich but that is because I am old enough to have seen a time when that was achievable for middle class. I would say rich is you could stop working and afford full medical insurance in the us while having a house and vacation house and new stuff.
The combined income of my wife and I comes in under one of the figures he gave, and with a 2 BR apartment in NYC, we are very, very comfortable, even after splurging the past few years on a far nicer location for an extra $1k/month in rent. The rest of what you describe is what I would call lifestyle inflation, and I’m not living the life of a pauper because I don’t own a car; if anything, that’s extraordinarily wasteful around here, and it’s something that less than half of this city even bothers to do.
yeah with two incomes and no significant medical issues. believe me one income and a spouse who is sick would change your situation quick. And I get you live comfortably but can you stop working and live comfortably. Im just arguing he point of where one could be truly rich not just doing decently.
But that’s what I mean by how quickly you can accumulate wealth at a quarter million per year. Of course something could go wrong early in your career, but the average case is far better than that. Could I stop working and live comfortably? For a while. We’d have a lot of runway, far better than a 6-month emergency fund. Given a bit more time and saving into index funds, that can become indefinite, and that’s on our far-lower salaries than Schreier lists.
yeah you could potentially get rich if you saved enough and where lucky enough with investments but your not really rich until you are there. honestly I think what I have is still a bit low for rich. rich is like in town in manhattan and palatial estate somewhere else. could eat out if you want every night and likely hiring some sort of help and I would say more than two things or at least one full time position. like basically you have to start having stuff that people might not even want at all. like a yacht. I mean merely owning a yacht would not be enough. I know a guy who was super into sailing and had what is technically a yacht but the traditional type not the grandiose type.
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]
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Rules
1. Submissions have to be related to games
Video games, tabletop, or otherwise. Posts not related to games will be deleted.
This community is focused on games, of all kinds. Any news item or discussion should be related to gaming in some way.
2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil
No bigotry, hardline stance. Try not to get too heated when entering into a discussion or debate.
We are here to talk and discuss about one of our passions, not fight or be exposed to hate. Posts or responses that are hateful will be deleted to keep the atmosphere good. If repeatedly violated, not only will the comment be deleted but a ban will be handed out as well. We judge each case individually.
3. No excessive self-promotion
Try to keep it to 10% self-promotion / 90% other stuff in your post history.
This is to prevent people from posting for the sole purpose of promoting their own website or social media account.
4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
This community is mostly for discussion and news. Remember to search for the thing you’re submitting before posting to see if it’s already been posted.
We want to keep the quality of posts high. Therefore, memes, funny videos, low-effort posts and reposts are not allowed. We prohibit giveaways because we cannot be sure that the person holding the giveaway will actually do what they promise.
5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW
Make sure to mark your stuff or it may be removed.
No one wants to be spoiled. Therefore, always mark spoilers. Similarly mark NSFW, in case anyone is browsing in a public space or at work.
6. No linking to piracy
Don’t share it here, there are other places to find it. Discussion of piracy is fine.
We don’t want us moderators or the admins of lemmy.world to get in trouble for linking to piracy. Therefore, any link to piracy will be removed. Discussion of it is of course allowed.
I went to read the first comment to that video and someone plainly came out to say that the guy in the video didn’t really answer the question.
So, I think that alone spares me and others the time to waste 17 minutes on some guy who for the life of him, can’t get to the point of his headline. Much less, answer the questions that needed the answers, in his opinion.
Hey, at least he didn’t read the entire plot summary of a game from Wikipedia for no good reason. I can tell because the video isn’t 30 minutes long.
Jokes aside, I get the feeling video essays are in kind of a crisis. There’s too much bloat out there. Even among very popular uploads with tons of views. Of course there are fantastic documentaries too but it gets harder to find good new stuff with all this meaningless slop clogging the front page and search results. (As if search wasn’t terrible enough already.)
But hey, maybe it’s just me. Maybe I’ve become too picky. But as soon as I notice there’s more plot summary than insight in a video essay, I leave midway through. And I swear it’s getting more by the month.
Jason Schreier also is not just some guy. I mean, he is to you… But he does know some stuff about the industry
It’s not that long of a video, and he gets to the answer fairly quickly, then outlines examples using back of the napkin math. (average cost per developer per month) * (months of development) = cost of game. And then it’s the difference between real world numbers for those in 2015 and today. Average salaries have gone up, especially in major cities in the US, as have staff sizes to make AAA games, as has time needed to develop substantially larger games than we typically made in 2015, and that number balloons very quickly.
There’s also a lot of people in game development that have no idea what they’re doing. They’re in it for the money and because gaming is bigger than cinema, TV (streaming) and music combined they’re willing to throw a lot of cash at it.
I’ve never heard of anyone taking a game job because it pays extraordinarily well compared to another job they might be able to get with the same skill set. Definitely not recently. I’ve turned down a programming job in games because my non-game job paid way better, and that job I turned down didn’t even exist a year and change later, because the industry is so volatile and competitive.
It pays extraordinary well if you own shares and are a board member and want a CEO that maximizes your profits. As a shareholder you also have no idea about the medium but you know there is a lot of money in it so you throw money at it. Most of the biggest game companies are run by c-suites who couldn’t care less about games.
I think anyone with a fairly basic understanding of economics (and that is admittedly a declining number in many places) understands the idea that “salaries and benefits are expensive”.
What he doesn’t explain that would actually be helpful is why teams are so big. Like what are all the departments that work on AAA titles, what do they do, how many people on staff relative to other departments, what does a 3D modeler make vs. a gameplay programmer?
He also doesn’t talk about anything outside of staffing, like marketing, cinematics, voice acting, localization, bribing Geoff Keighley…
This would all be more useful than the baby math lesson provided.
Can you not see the difference in money on the screen between Halo 1 and Destiny 2? One person can make Halo’s relatively simple models, complete with nutcracker-esque mouth syncing, much faster than you can make the likes of Destiny’s quest givers with far more complexity to them. So if you want to make more of those kinds of NPCs, you need more people making them. The same goes for any other discipline involved in making a game.
That all comes out in the average cost per employee, which is the same ballpark math the publishers are using to estimate, and he says that in this video.
The commenter was wrong
I’m not sure why so many people are down voting this. The only part I took issue with was what kind of salary Schreier said would make one rich versus middle class in an expensive city. I live in an expensive city, I don’t make anywhere near as much as some of the high salaries he cites, and those who do around me are certainly rich.
People fail to realize how rich the 1% really are was his point. Even $500k per year still wouldn’t get you into that tier of rich.
Johnny Harris made a good video about how far removed from regular society the real rich people actually are. https://youtu.be/PpyPB3BF-hQ
There are for sure tiers of how rich you can be. But when you’re beyond the point of financial stress and can at any time stop working for the rest of your life and not worry about making ends meet, I think most of us would call that rich. If you’re pulling in a quarter million per year, even in an expensive city, the slightest bit of sense with your money allows you to accumulate wealth so quickly that I think you qualify.
I don’t think you are right with this. I live in one of the most affordable major cities and if a family is not running on 6 figures then your likely in the red unless you somehow have a very cheap situation. Lets assume 2 bedrooms here btw which I don’t think most people would consider high on the hog space. Now its true that technically you have all the overage to squirrel away but most folks have a hard time living on the edge of being in the red frugally. Once you have money you would like to have that lifestyle of going out once a week (especially if your job is stressful) and being able to take that once a year vacation. So yeah you have an extra 150 but 50 of that goes to taxes and the other 100 can be eaten up fast by wanting to live in a free standing house and having newer things and such. You will be able to fund your retirement well and live well wihtout concern but you won’t be able to stop working for the rest of your life unless you again live like a pauper for a few years to save enough and then live off of that like a pauper or go move to the boonies and that does not even broach if you have some sort of medical issue while your not working for the rest of your life. Its comfortable not rich. I mean I would not even consider a second home and car rich but that is because I am old enough to have seen a time when that was achievable for middle class. I would say rich is you could stop working and afford full medical insurance in the us while having a house and vacation house and new stuff.
The combined income of my wife and I comes in under one of the figures he gave, and with a 2 BR apartment in NYC, we are very, very comfortable, even after splurging the past few years on a far nicer location for an extra $1k/month in rent. The rest of what you describe is what I would call lifestyle inflation, and I’m not living the life of a pauper because I don’t own a car; if anything, that’s extraordinarily wasteful around here, and it’s something that less than half of this city even bothers to do.
yeah with two incomes and no significant medical issues. believe me one income and a spouse who is sick would change your situation quick. And I get you live comfortably but can you stop working and live comfortably. Im just arguing he point of where one could be truly rich not just doing decently.
But that’s what I mean by how quickly you can accumulate wealth at a quarter million per year. Of course something could go wrong early in your career, but the average case is far better than that. Could I stop working and live comfortably? For a while. We’d have a lot of runway, far better than a 6-month emergency fund. Given a bit more time and saving into index funds, that can become indefinite, and that’s on our far-lower salaries than Schreier lists.
yeah you could potentially get rich if you saved enough and where lucky enough with investments but your not really rich until you are there. honestly I think what I have is still a bit low for rich. rich is like in town in manhattan and palatial estate somewhere else. could eat out if you want every night and likely hiring some sort of help and I would say more than two things or at least one full time position. like basically you have to start having stuff that people might not even want at all. like a yacht. I mean merely owning a yacht would not be enough. I know a guy who was super into sailing and had what is technically a yacht but the traditional type not the grandiose type.