Why? (sh.itjust.works)
submitted 3 months ago by to c/gaming@lemmy.world
 

all 33 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 104 points 3 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 47 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Well, making the graphics look realistic is expensive and time consuming. Modern people have developed a really good eye for spotting imperfections so if you want them to believe what they are seeing is real, it takes years of development and high end computers.

    As for GTA 6, I don't know, bloat I guess.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    While sure that may be the case, nobody is asking for realistic graphics, people are happy with pixel art games and good looking games, if the story and gameplay is there the graphics are secondary.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 3 months ago

    2bn is a fuckload of gamedev salaries.

    Its barely enough to wake the finance department at raytheon. They need fatter margins to embezzel with.

  • source
  • [+] 19 points 3 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 child)
  • [–] 27 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    The difference is that if you don't want GTA 6 then your money doesn't go to it. We didn't have that choice for the flying dorito.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    That's true. I wanted my money to go to a flying Dorito but Mom said no :(

    Something aboit how i need to be 12 before I am allowed to fly weponized aircrafts :(

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    No game is worth a $2bn development cost; most games I play nowadays are indie and AA anyways.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 3 months ago

    Serious answer: it's comparing apples to oranges. For the B-2 the total cost of the program was about $45 billion and about double that in today's dollars. You get that two billion figure if you divide the total program cost by the 21 B-2s built, but you could've never developed and built a singular B-2 for just the unit price. And that's still double of GTA after adjusting for inflation

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    In 2025 USD the bombers cost more than 4 billion per unit btw:

    "By 1996, the program produced 21 B-2s at a total cost of $44.7 billion (equivalent to $91,820,000,000 in 2025) or average cost of $2.13 billion (equivalent to $4,370,000,000 in 2025) per aircraft, including procurement, development, testing, and production"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_B-2_Spirit

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 8 points 3 months ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago

    I still to this day can't understand where this fact of them using 2 billion dollars for a fucking video game has come from.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago

    Time and wages.
    Remember how long it is in development and how many work on it

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago

    I mean GTA 5 online still makes them nearly a billion a year and they never planned for that. I think they're going to have a hard time getting people to leave FiveM servers for GTA6 and that's why PC isn't a focus

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    cant wait for gta 6 to be 1000 euros

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    I bet there including the development cost of the other games as well to inflate this price.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago*

    I was already convinced that GTA VI was the better value, even before all the detailed comments about how much more expensive the first bomber was than the lastest.

    Any time someone acts out any violent fantasies in a video games, rather than as a head of state, that's a win.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    Aeron chairs aren't free, bro.

  • source
  • [+] 1 point 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)
    [removed by mod]
  • source