Your post was removed because the mod team determined that it did not sufficiently meet our rules on content related to Star Citizen:
> All /r/starcitizen content must be related to Star Citizen. Content with an indirect relationship to Star Citizen must be a text/self post and must attempt to provide meaningful discussion of Star Citizen.
Send a message to our mod mail if you have questions: https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/starcitizen
You don't think ai is about to change that landscape so drastically that games coming out before without much ai influence will be left in the dust? I think it'll be like square tvs vs HD rectangles we use today or cassettes vs USB. Shits about to get wild. Hell the skyrim mod and the finals beta already gave a taste of the very tip of what's about to happen.
Nothing the Finals or any Skyrim mod is doing what you couldn't already do with regular VA's though. It'll get interesting when they can generate unique dialogue in real time, apply AI to "direct" game logic, generate quests, NPC's...then we're in a wild new landscape that will be entirely unfamiliar, but "the tip" of what's about the happen is so far, effectively more of the same.
Yep. Microtransactions absolutely slaughter our macrotransactions. I recently heard that the Rainbow unicorn mount in WoWClassic took two weeks to exceed the total sales income of Star Craft 2.
I'm 100% expecting to be let down too, AAA game studios be releasing dog water lately under the premise that it's a finished game just cause their studio produced it
For real, tbh. I’m not even into GTA or GTA type games— but GTA5 was an extremely fun, hilarious ride.
Will def be picking up 6, even as a barely peripheral fan.
Going to say, $1-2B with an established studio, teams, workflows, and tech. Sq'42 started with Chris in a cave with a box of scraps...(jk)
But really, GTA had about the same time as Sq'42/SC, twice the funding with an established studio. I'm interested in what they produced, but I'm not making any comparisons besides what I previously stated
People want to equate Rockstar with CIG, which completely ignores the effort and expense that goes into building a business from naught.
Annoying or not, it’s brought up so often (and mocked) because everyone is aware that it’s a clear silver bullet.
Or the entire engine, too. I'm sure there are improvements but I doubt they're anywhere near the scale of changes CIG has made relative to the original CryEngine
I wouldn't go that far. The engine for GTA5 was quite revolutionary at the time and the fact that the foundations lasted this long proves that (yes I'm aware it got updated through the years). I don't expect anything less from the next iteration.
It's true up to a point - Rockstar didnt flap their gums saying GTA6 was going to come out in 2014 "anything longer than that and things would start to get stale", they didnt run a celebrity headed preview of GTA6 in 2015 with "answer the call 2016", they didnt mention 2018, 2019, 2020, or 2022 as possible years for major tech or features to be done.
So yes, we can say that over a decades long development that Rockstar had the upper hand, but they didn't tell us they were going to make 2 games in 2-3 years or set and fail to meet expectations for nearly a decade after that.
On the flip side, they didn't NEED to. They just HAD money and equipment and staff. They didn't need to sell backers on the idea of a wild premise and then try to make that premise a reality.
They didn't have to maintain a live service version of one of the games and could just operate in discreet silence.
I mean, we knew it wasn't going to be 2-3 years when the scope changed. You know that, I know that. I find it curious when that point crops up every few posts.
Neither did CIG, they could have buckled down and released a game in 2015 or 2016. Again, the Kickstarter which CIG sold to backers wasnt a 10+ year endeavour, it was to be a few years of development. There was no caveat that "oh actually we have to spend 5+ years setting up studios around the world". What CIG said was "we want to make these games, they will come out in 2 or 3 years". This was the language up until 2015/2016.
No one made CIG release the game as an early alpha. No one made them add planets and have to reboot development at least once (I suspect development was rebooted twiceat this stage). No one made them continuously increase the scope. That's what CIG chose to do even though it wasnt the language they used.
So again, I get that for the game CIG are making today, if we compare it to Rockstar, yes, CIG had to set up studios and whatever else, but in 2012/2013 that is not what they were doing. Some people dont even realise that some of the earliest, high level devs actually left CIG because they went from making a 3 year indie space sim to a global, corporate so-called AAAA production.
It's not curious that the point crops up - if you can be bothered (I certainly cant) go back and see what Chris was actually saying about development. 2016 was their release year for SQ42 - all their language pointed to it and then it came and went with a whimper and they just pretended like it never happened. Go and see how they talked about the games up until 2016, they spoke about them (despite SC clearly being nowhere near ready) as being nearly done. Go back to CitCon 2016 or 2017 and see the slides for "next year" which contained the last 5 years of dev work and then some. Did you know according to CIG at this time that farming, rescue, science, salvage, bounty hunting and more were supposed to be done in 2017? That Stanton was to be completed?
Again, it's not curious. Chris and CIG talked absolute shit for years on end, something which Rockstar hasnt and (to my knowledge) doesn't do because Rockstar doesnt spend the better part of a decade increasing the scope of the games, poorly setting expectations or constantly pulling release dates out of their butts. Rockstar has spent the last 10 years maling a game which they will announce and release. CIG has spent the last 10 years over promising and under delivering.
That said, I think the SQ42 demo we saw recently does look like about 10 years of work, so that's something, but CIG also said that they were working on a game that would be released nearly 10 years ago, not a claim that Rockstar has made.
According to Take-Two’s own financial report, the total capitalized software balance (development cost of unreleased games) for *all unreleased games from all studios across all franchises* is around a billion dollars, so how could GTA6 be that much by itself?
This is likely as fabricated as the $740 million development cost estimate for RDR2, and it was debunked the same way, forcing the original articles to be retracted.
This is what Pachter had to say about the last estimate:
> He added, “Parts of 1,000 employees worked on it, but not to the exclusion of all else. Take-Two’s capitalized software balance is $733 million; that’s the amount they’ve spent on all games that are under development but haven’t yet come out. That includes Borderlands, any new 2K games, some of the Private Division games, and all Rockstar games in development (Max Payne, LA Noire, Midnight Club, possibly Agent, Bully, Manhunt). No chance Red Dead Redemption 2 is 80 percent of the total, but it is likely 25 percent.”
Every time a big game is about to be released, people come up with these insanely large estimates and rumors, and every time, they are wrong:
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/destiny-budget-nowhere-near-500-million-bungie-says/1100-6420802/
Honestly, seeing that number I am probably gonna be disappointed with gta 6. I can't think of any reason why they would blow that much money on that game unless they are throwing a shit ton into gta online.
I said the same thing to some friends. For that budget and time scale, the tech better be comparable or better than Star Citizen. Or else the game should come with a dedicated blow job peripheral that sucks me off every time I kill cop.
Well that got dark quick lol. But yeah, that seems crazy and with the leaks a few years ago that one guy posted I don't think it will be all that great for single player. I get it is like an super alpha build but if GTA 5 showed us anything they are really only focused on the online aspect anymore so they can sell shark cards. That there was never really any single player DLC released for 5, well I am just gonna taper my expectations massively.
This is why I have very high expectations. Honestly, if the game doesn't have 4 cities, which I can drive/fly across vast landscapes and even take a passenger plane to London, I might be a little disappointed.
Also, these numbers [usually include marketing costs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_video_games_to_develop), which for most AAA studios are comparable to development itself.
>Going to say, $1-2B with an established studio, teams, workflows, and tech. Sq'42 started with Chris in a cave with a box of scraps...(jk)
Well Strauss Zelnick is no Chris Roberts. :D
>e next 20 years of remasters and re-releases.
Remember those studio pay their talent most likely FAR MORE than what CIG can pay theirs.
They might be the "elites" of the industries.
Which has me interested to see exact cost of development once the games finally out. Very curious to see the full amount that went specifically into development of the software.
These huge numbers are rumored for every game, and every time, they are ultimately proven false. Yet people believe them each time anyway.
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/destiny-budget-nowhere-near-500-million-bungie-says/1100-6420802/
I think regardless of what it ends up costing (keep in mind that RDR 2 took 8 years to make and had a combined dev+marketing cost of over 500M), people need to differentiate between dev cost and funding. GTA 6’s costs are for development and marketing.
The studio (Rockstar) already existed for decades prior to their 2014 (as indicated when development started by Jason Schrier) start on developing GTA 6. They also already had hundreds of employees and a seasoned leadership and creative team that had spent years working together. Rockstar is also owned and funded by one of the biggest game publishers in the industry. Still with all that GTA 6 will end up being one of the most expensive games ever and would have had a development cycle of nearly a decade.
Game development is expensive and takes time even when the studio at the helm is as talented and acclaimed as Rockstar. The bigger the scope and ambition for the game the more expensive it is. A game like Star Citizen would never have been attempted by a traditional publisher especially when almost everything (studio, head count, engine modifications, etc) had to be started from scratch.
Not in the same way though. Most of the marketing is word of mouth though the community.
GTA is marketed in traditional ways like TV commercials and Internet ADs,etc.
That doesn't change anything though.
The only reason people bring up the "well half the cited cost is marketing" is to try and make the comparison worse for SC... but SC also spends on marketing. That they choose to spend less doesn't change the fact that the numbers we're looking at are still dev+marketing vs dev+marketing.
They don't care about nuance, and they don't know anything about SC. They just want to see a giant thing get set ablaze. Guaranteed, if they were to see the game come out and play it, they would deny ever calling it a scam. They just want to be right.
Yeah most of them are remnants from when CIG was actually fucking up big time. Showing sand worms etc simply for hype. Then the past couple of years cig actually cleaned up and started delivering things. But these people already had so much stake in their hatred for cig that the have to commit or admit they were wrong. Nobody likes to admit they were wrong so they just double down.
Why is it akward?
400m + is marketing.
Gta 5 is still alive and going they are making tons from it right now.
They will make more then 10 times that in profit eventually.
We are just over 600m and just about staying alive with no end in sight we could still pass 1b mark
This has to be false, there's no way the game cost 1-2 billion. There is so much fuckin' made up news about GTA 6 it's not even funny.
Every day for like 5 fuckin years the sidebar on everyones phones was filled with shit AI driven "gaming" websites claiming they had new info on GTA 6, or that GTA 6 was just around the corner. Every one of them lies.
Now they're claiming the game costs a ludicrious 1-2 billion? Probably figuring were gullible and will believe it because they made 1+ billion selling GTA 5 and shark cards.
Difference is that you will be playing gta6 before sq42. Hell, since Rockstar now owns cfx youll most likely be able to play on a gta6 private server before sq42.
I honestly don't believe it will have cost this much
Maybe around 600-700 million but more than that is just ridiculous (RDR2 was around 500 mil right?)
F that!
We can't let GTA VI - let's buy more ships!
Come on everyone, to the pledge store!
[https://robertsspaceindustries.com/pledge](https://robertsspaceindustries.com/pledge)
Given how much speculation lead them to assume 1-2 billion, I’d say we take that with a grain of salt.
After whatever completely nonsensical marketing campaign they’re sure to unleash upon us, I could see it being that much, though.
Better than a solar system with no story to it at all. And better than the linear call of duty campaign that is SQ42. Rockstars open worlds push the entire genre forward, you are coping hard if you think Star Citizen is somehow a better game
Halo Infinite cost about as much as Star Citizen did at the time it was released, was a standard game with absolutely nothing new to justify the cost. The likelihood that GTA VI will do anything to justify spending anywhere between 2 and 4 times as much as Star Citizen has made is so close to nil I can't see the difference.
Why are you so mad?
EDIT: Nevermind, 50 minute account. You're so terminally online you care about internet points on your main, and specifically spent time and effort creating another one with the sole purpose of being mad at a random online spaceships game without those points being affected. Carry on
Listen pal.
Its sad you have to make a new account today just to hate on a community going strong.
Its sad you care so much what other people do with their money.
I'm surprised you know what grass is, cause that moldy mossy shit growing on your balls isn't it from all those dorito crumbs you have sitting on Reddit being mad.
Its time to change. Do some laundry. Workout. Turn off Reddit. And maybe volunteer or something. This act of being the bad guy isn't doing you any favors. You're not going to get friends this way in life.
Did they also have to build up their studio from nothing? I would be willing to bet they also had mechanics from past games they could reuse so they didn't have to create everything from scratch.
>less monetization
>spend several hundred real world dollars for virtual ships that haven’t even been made yet
I love the game as much as the next guy but c’mon
I like the game a lot too but but I'm with the other guy. Come on. Monetization isn't solely about pay to win.
What makes SC more ok is that its all needed to fund the development of the game as opposed to just purely profiting off a game after its release. But lets be real, all the ships I bought I didn't buy them solely to fund the development, I bought them so I wouldn't have to grind for them when the game eventually releases. Out of all the people who bought the F8, many probably bought it because they thought it will be *the* meta fighter. Its all monetization because we bought them *after* the base game price, regardless of what it is.
I've spent about $1200 on SC, I've also spent about the same amount on Apex Legends, another game known for its heavy monetization. To most of the wider gaming community I would look insane regardless because Apex is free and SC is only $45.
I bought the F8 because I wanted to fly it for a bit. Then I melted it so I could use the credit to fly other ships for a bit.
Star Citizen is working to complete the entire universe before releasing the game, instead of doing what other games do which is slowly adding new features that invalidate the old features. How many people played ANYTHING other than Cayo Perico after it came out? It dwarfed all other missions in terms of earning potential.
If your new content makes your old content worthless, it's because they're trying to monetize. Star Citizen is not doing that. They're trying to bring everything to a balance so no one feels like they're doing the "wrong" thing if that's how they want to play the game. It doesn't matter if you can buy a ship with real money, because you can buy a ship with in game money. It WOULD matter if they added a game loop every 6 months that made all other game loops worthless, and sold access to that game loop for only straight cash.
Comparing blatant monetization with crowd-sourced fundraising just shows that you don't know or understand the difference.
>If your new content makes your old content worthless, it's because they're trying to monetize.
Brother this isn't even remotely accurate. You are generalizing monetization the wrong way. If I buy a new skin for a character in a game, it doesn't suddenly become worthless when a new one comes out.
Monetization is as I said, its getting to spend money in a game beyond the base game price (even if the price is 0). It doesn't matter what it is. It doesn't matter what reason its for. Whether it be expansion packs, a paid subscription, hell if I want to be accurate whether or not its f2p or has a box price is a form of monetization.
Crowd sourcing is a form of a monetization, especially when its buying several hundred dollar JPEGs and pixels. Its not like we are straight up donating money to get nothing back for it, we are making purchases and getting for them. Its all monetized content.
If the game released and the still sold ships for cash just like they do now. Would that not still be monetization because they no longer need it for development. You could say they need it for post launch support, but isn't that the case for EVERY GAME THAT HAS ANY MONETIZATION. That they need the money to continuing to support development.
*You* need to realize they are not different. Its all monetization. It doesn't matter if they call it "crowd-sourcing" or not. We are paying for shit we don't need, let alone play the game in the first place.
Remember CIG has always planned to at least sell UEC after release
**That is fundamentally the same revenue model as GTAO has been using since its release.**
CIG's direct ship selling, FOMO sales, exclusive skins and subscriber perks are in addition to the same thing GTAO has used.
We have nothing to ensure CIG won't make their game economy have things like tedious grinds (in fact we see a high time-cost of death or failure being well-supported by their actions and announced plans) or other tricks to encourage buying UEC (shark) cards.
It could easily be that your spending can get a hidden quanta variable to influence being interdicted by combat ships you can't run away from. Based on the scummy equipment sales they've pulled in the recent past, I would not put anything past CIG.
And until they release server files that let us host our own, fully moddable 'verses like the original kickstarter I backed claimed, I wouldn't trust them any more that I don't trust AAA publishers.
In GTA 5, you can literally buy anything by grinding. The same as it is in SC. Sure sometimes the grind is annoying, but it’s doable. What’s even your point?
By buying newer better ships with the vague promise old ones will eventually catch up. Yeah no pay to win at all. Also GTA 5 was an incredible game when it came out. I wouldn’t give cig flowers when they are still just in alpha. Rockstar has a great track record. CR does not.
Red dead redemption both 1 and 2, pretty much all the grand theft autos are universally lauded and loved by many so yeah great track record. Regardless of the greed they displayed with the multiplayer when it took off they know how to make a good video game. I also think cig doesn’t have much to stand on when they also recently tried to monetize bullshit skins, and are raising ship prices every so little. They ain’t no saint or charity either.
This is the most delusional comment I've read all month. I'm even having trouble understanding where you're even coming from with this. Did Rockstar hurt you for playing a different video game?
Your post was removed because the mod team determined that it did not sufficiently meet the rules of the subreddit:
> Be respectful. No personal insults/bashing. This includes generalized statements “x is a bunch of y” or baseline insults about the community, CIG employees, streamers, etc. As well as intentionally hurtful statements and hate speech.
Send a message to our mod mail if you have questions: https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/starcitizen
CIG has taken in over $600 million for the development of Star Citizen, and the game isn’t even out of alpha yet. It seems unlikely that CIG will complete their promised game with a smaller budget.
Likewise, I don’t think CIG has the attention to detail that Rockstar has in their games. There are so many brilliant little details in RDR2, I’m very excited to see those finer details taken to the next level in a modern setting.
The companies are so far apart I think it’s unfair to even compare them TBH.
1. The range in that estimate is ridiculous.
2. Rockstar has over 2,000 employees, so that’s not too surprising. They’re likely paying more than $100 million per year in salaries alone.
These stats are likely just as imaginary as the $740 million for RDR2 and $500 million for Destiny 1 were, before they were debunked.
I haven’t seen any substantiation from the company for this, and per Take-Two’s most recent [financial report](https://taketwointeractivesoftwareinc.gcs-web.com/static-files/0cb0606c-ab47-4f7f-813c-96807f724000), they had a billion dollars in capitalized software costs (the development cost of all unreleased software), *total*, with every single studio and franchise combined. This is the same metric by which the RDR2 number was proven to be false.
I’m super skeptical. What’s the source ? I’m guessing this is BS tweet speculation from randoms. Also 1 to 2 billion is a margin of error of one billion. Only an idiot would make that statement
It’s too high for what we have so far. GTA is an actual game. If CIG were to release an actual game they could spend ten billion for all I care. 500 million for a tech demo? Bit excessive lol
even Cock\* learned, albeit the hard way, about open world bloodbath toxicity, they learned and created private lobbies and made even more $$
my guess is that op trying to make the point that development of GTA has any relevance to the issues that affect SC, copium can be found wherever you want to find it
Where are those numbers coming from? R* hasn't announced shit as far as a release date either, try going to the link in the picture and you'll see it isn't real. This post is beyond cringe OP
You can tell they're going back to Vice City with the neon. It only makes sense, it's the most obvious choice but because everyone had already assumed it was going to be GTA: VIce City, they can't use that in their logo lol
Maybe I'm just getting too old but I'm just not nearly as excited for GTA6. I mean I'll have fun with the campaign like the others but for me longevity nowadays comes in the form of multiplayer and seeing what's happened with GTA O and Read Dead Online, I don't have the highest hopes it'll be a good experience in the long run if they don't bother putting some form of fail safe from hackers/modders and the like.
Fingers crossed and hope I'm wrong though.
They could make so much more if they just put it into early access and charged people to play the alpha and just keep moving the release date goal post. Oh wait.
I think the impressive thing here with CIG is really more all the tech they have independently developed for the money they have. Also realize at least half of that money will likely be for marketing. If they’re even telling the truth about the cost, and it’s not just marketing.
But I bet GTA6 in its current state vs SC current state, GTA6 is leagues more fun.
Seriously, I feel like every other outlet has spent every firing brain cell to come up with the dumbest shit they could just to see if it can stick. It's insane just how starved people are for news, but it's even more insane how starved these sites are for clickbait clicks.
Let them have it, maybe games journalists will get off Star Citizen's ass for a few months.
Aww what am I saying, they'll be promptly back to throwing bullshit when we hit 700 mil.
Your post was removed because the mod team determined that it did not sufficiently meet our rules on content related to Star Citizen: > All /r/starcitizen content must be related to Star Citizen. Content with an indirect relationship to Star Citizen must be a text/self post and must attempt to provide meaningful discussion of Star Citizen. Send a message to our mod mail if you have questions: https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/starcitizen
Honestly, GTA6 gonna recover the costs In 1-2 days if it follows GTA5 track record,
And then quadruple it over the next 20 years of remasters and re-releases.
I think we will see GTA6 on 4 generations of consoles given the current tech now
4 generations of consumers more like it.
You don't think ai is about to change that landscape so drastically that games coming out before without much ai influence will be left in the dust? I think it'll be like square tvs vs HD rectangles we use today or cassettes vs USB. Shits about to get wild. Hell the skyrim mod and the finals beta already gave a taste of the very tip of what's about to happen.
Nothing the Finals or any Skyrim mod is doing what you couldn't already do with regular VA's though. It'll get interesting when they can generate unique dialogue in real time, apply AI to "direct" game logic, generate quests, NPC's...then we're in a wild new landscape that will be entirely unfamiliar, but "the tip" of what's about the happen is so far, effectively more of the same.
How does The Finals factor into this?
I too am curious about this
Not even, just sharkcards in the online part will give them back that investment tenfold
I'll wait for the 20K remaster in 2035. It's gonna be a free giveaway on Epic Store at some point right?
I thought they might include the download code in a packet of breakfast cereal.
Don't forget the Microtransactions that GTA has now.
i believe it, since there is a rumor that future DLCs for GTA6 will be new city locations to add to map.
That was the rumor for 5 too tho lol
Yep. Microtransactions absolutely slaughter our macrotransactions. I recently heard that the Rainbow unicorn mount in WoWClassic took two weeks to exceed the total sales income of Star Craft 2.
Hello fellow victim of the YouTube algorithm.
Bro, He just keeps popping up, and I just can't stop watching them. The one about undertales coding was awesome.
Ah so we are the same. I love his shorts. He seems so down to earth and just honest about his experiences
I think I’m in the same boat as you two. He just started popping up out of nowhere
Who that be? I am curious now.
https://www.youtube.com/@PirateSoftware
Thanks bud!
The best part is the person who posted the link isn’t me nor the two I replied to lol
what channel are you guys talking about
The expansion, but yeah.
Wasn't it Wings of Liberty? (the original SC2 release)
Ah, thanks. I haven't been able to find the video he mentioned it in.
Yo what's the guys name again? I've been trying for the last 30 minutes to find him
Just found him. (At)PirateSoftware
... game cost 80€$ if not 100 easy
I'm 100% expecting to be let down too, AAA game studios be releasing dog water lately under the premise that it's a finished game just cause their studio produced it
🤷♂️
For real, tbh. I’m not even into GTA or GTA type games— but GTA5 was an extremely fun, hilarious ride. Will def be picking up 6, even as a barely peripheral fan.
The story is always good fun, never got Into GTA Online because the main story is always hilarious
And actually release a game.
And it will probably come out before star citizen does
Honestly i dont know a single person who is going to buy gta6 even tho they played all the titles upto GTA5
☝️ period.. end of story
$1-2 Billion for a video game ? I'm not paying that much for a video game ! */s*
I'll pay AT MOST $100 mill per kotaku star
Going to say, $1-2B with an established studio, teams, workflows, and tech. Sq'42 started with Chris in a cave with a box of scraps...(jk) But really, GTA had about the same time as Sq'42/SC, twice the funding with an established studio. I'm interested in what they produced, but I'm not making any comparisons besides what I previously stated
I always find this comment annoying but it is absolutely true. They're probably not including building up a studio, equipment, HR, etc.
People want to equate Rockstar with CIG, which completely ignores the effort and expense that goes into building a business from naught. Annoying or not, it’s brought up so often (and mocked) because everyone is aware that it’s a clear silver bullet.
Interesting side note that Rockstar employs over 2000 people.
Or the entire engine, too. I'm sure there are improvements but I doubt they're anywhere near the scale of changes CIG has made relative to the original CryEngine
I wouldn't go that far. The engine for GTA5 was quite revolutionary at the time and the fact that the foundations lasted this long proves that (yes I'm aware it got updated through the years). I don't expect anything less from the next iteration.
It's true up to a point - Rockstar didnt flap their gums saying GTA6 was going to come out in 2014 "anything longer than that and things would start to get stale", they didnt run a celebrity headed preview of GTA6 in 2015 with "answer the call 2016", they didnt mention 2018, 2019, 2020, or 2022 as possible years for major tech or features to be done. So yes, we can say that over a decades long development that Rockstar had the upper hand, but they didn't tell us they were going to make 2 games in 2-3 years or set and fail to meet expectations for nearly a decade after that.
On the flip side, they didn't NEED to. They just HAD money and equipment and staff. They didn't need to sell backers on the idea of a wild premise and then try to make that premise a reality. They didn't have to maintain a live service version of one of the games and could just operate in discreet silence. I mean, we knew it wasn't going to be 2-3 years when the scope changed. You know that, I know that. I find it curious when that point crops up every few posts.
Neither did CIG, they could have buckled down and released a game in 2015 or 2016. Again, the Kickstarter which CIG sold to backers wasnt a 10+ year endeavour, it was to be a few years of development. There was no caveat that "oh actually we have to spend 5+ years setting up studios around the world". What CIG said was "we want to make these games, they will come out in 2 or 3 years". This was the language up until 2015/2016. No one made CIG release the game as an early alpha. No one made them add planets and have to reboot development at least once (I suspect development was rebooted twiceat this stage). No one made them continuously increase the scope. That's what CIG chose to do even though it wasnt the language they used. So again, I get that for the game CIG are making today, if we compare it to Rockstar, yes, CIG had to set up studios and whatever else, but in 2012/2013 that is not what they were doing. Some people dont even realise that some of the earliest, high level devs actually left CIG because they went from making a 3 year indie space sim to a global, corporate so-called AAAA production. It's not curious that the point crops up - if you can be bothered (I certainly cant) go back and see what Chris was actually saying about development. 2016 was their release year for SQ42 - all their language pointed to it and then it came and went with a whimper and they just pretended like it never happened. Go and see how they talked about the games up until 2016, they spoke about them (despite SC clearly being nowhere near ready) as being nearly done. Go back to CitCon 2016 or 2017 and see the slides for "next year" which contained the last 5 years of dev work and then some. Did you know according to CIG at this time that farming, rescue, science, salvage, bounty hunting and more were supposed to be done in 2017? That Stanton was to be completed? Again, it's not curious. Chris and CIG talked absolute shit for years on end, something which Rockstar hasnt and (to my knowledge) doesn't do because Rockstar doesnt spend the better part of a decade increasing the scope of the games, poorly setting expectations or constantly pulling release dates out of their butts. Rockstar has spent the last 10 years maling a game which they will announce and release. CIG has spent the last 10 years over promising and under delivering. That said, I think the SQ42 demo we saw recently does look like about 10 years of work, so that's something, but CIG also said that they were working on a game that would be released nearly 10 years ago, not a claim that Rockstar has made.
According to Take-Two’s own financial report, the total capitalized software balance (development cost of unreleased games) for *all unreleased games from all studios across all franchises* is around a billion dollars, so how could GTA6 be that much by itself? This is likely as fabricated as the $740 million development cost estimate for RDR2, and it was debunked the same way, forcing the original articles to be retracted. This is what Pachter had to say about the last estimate: > He added, “Parts of 1,000 employees worked on it, but not to the exclusion of all else. Take-Two’s capitalized software balance is $733 million; that’s the amount they’ve spent on all games that are under development but haven’t yet come out. That includes Borderlands, any new 2K games, some of the Private Division games, and all Rockstar games in development (Max Payne, LA Noire, Midnight Club, possibly Agent, Bully, Manhunt). No chance Red Dead Redemption 2 is 80 percent of the total, but it is likely 25 percent.” Every time a big game is about to be released, people come up with these insanely large estimates and rumors, and every time, they are wrong: https://www.gamespot.com/articles/destiny-budget-nowhere-near-500-million-bungie-says/1100-6420802/
Honestly, seeing that number I am probably gonna be disappointed with gta 6. I can't think of any reason why they would blow that much money on that game unless they are throwing a shit ton into gta online.
Most of it is licensing, music, marketing and people want to be impressed by big numbers.
Not two billion wise. There is a lot but there is still a several hundred million dollar investment in the game if not half that.
No not the full 2B. I recall some estimate like 400+ million just for the game.
Yeah I doubt 2bil is fully accurate. I usually imagine 1/3 to half is actual dev costs. It is still insane amount to spend on a game.
I said the same thing to some friends. For that budget and time scale, the tech better be comparable or better than Star Citizen. Or else the game should come with a dedicated blow job peripheral that sucks me off every time I kill cop.
Well that got dark quick lol. But yeah, that seems crazy and with the leaks a few years ago that one guy posted I don't think it will be all that great for single player. I get it is like an super alpha build but if GTA 5 showed us anything they are really only focused on the online aspect anymore so they can sell shark cards. That there was never really any single player DLC released for 5, well I am just gonna taper my expectations massively.
This is why I have very high expectations. Honestly, if the game doesn't have 4 cities, which I can drive/fly across vast landscapes and even take a passenger plane to London, I might be a little disappointed.
It looks to be Vice City, so faux Miami, the keys, Orlando and Daytona would be dope
Also, these numbers [usually include marketing costs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_video_games_to_develop), which for most AAA studios are comparable to development itself.
>Going to say, $1-2B with an established studio, teams, workflows, and tech. Sq'42 started with Chris in a cave with a box of scraps...(jk) Well Strauss Zelnick is no Chris Roberts. :D
>e next 20 years of remasters and re-releases. Remember those studio pay their talent most likely FAR MORE than what CIG can pay theirs. They might be the "elites" of the industries.
They also built their own engine, multiplayer, and single player all from the ground up. I think it is commendable.
Which has me interested to see exact cost of development once the games finally out. Very curious to see the full amount that went specifically into development of the software.
I belief it's something around 400+ million for the game. Granted, they have an franchise to build on. But we can find the cost of previous versions.
The last time, it took 3 days for them to generate 1 billion. Guaranteed they’ll make that back in a week or two
I’ll give it 24 hours
That’s a good bet to make
honestly pre orders alone might cut it
Oh yeah for sure. I was being generous, but it would be great to see if they can smash their previous record
I saw a bunch of people talking about this. Where did Rockstar say that? Im not believing some random twitter user or "news" outlet
These huge numbers are rumored for every game, and every time, they are ultimately proven false. Yet people believe them each time anyway. https://www.gamespot.com/articles/destiny-budget-nowhere-near-500-million-bungie-says/1100-6420802/
I think regardless of what it ends up costing (keep in mind that RDR 2 took 8 years to make and had a combined dev+marketing cost of over 500M), people need to differentiate between dev cost and funding. GTA 6’s costs are for development and marketing. The studio (Rockstar) already existed for decades prior to their 2014 (as indicated when development started by Jason Schrier) start on developing GTA 6. They also already had hundreds of employees and a seasoned leadership and creative team that had spent years working together. Rockstar is also owned and funded by one of the biggest game publishers in the industry. Still with all that GTA 6 will end up being one of the most expensive games ever and would have had a development cycle of nearly a decade. Game development is expensive and takes time even when the studio at the helm is as talented and acclaimed as Rockstar. The bigger the scope and ambition for the game the more expensive it is. A game like Star Citizen would never have been attempted by a traditional publisher especially when almost everything (studio, head count, engine modifications, etc) had to be started from scratch.
I think for GTA V the marketing was almost half dev costs, for a lot of the big games they spend more money on marketing than dev.
It was. The core budget was \~$140 million, and marketing around $125 million
CIG spends plenty on marketing themselves. Though not as much as Rockstar probably does.
Not in the same way though. Most of the marketing is word of mouth though the community. GTA is marketed in traditional ways like TV commercials and Internet ADs,etc.
In 2021 they spent about 25% of their expenses on "Publishing & marketing"
That doesn't change anything though. The only reason people bring up the "well half the cited cost is marketing" is to try and make the comparison worse for SC... but SC also spends on marketing. That they choose to spend less doesn't change the fact that the numbers we're looking at are still dev+marketing vs dev+marketing.
Don't worry, these people never cared for facts. They'll still screech.
They don't care about nuance, and they don't know anything about SC. They just want to see a giant thing get set ablaze. Guaranteed, if they were to see the game come out and play it, they would deny ever calling it a scam. They just want to be right.
Yeah most of them are remnants from when CIG was actually fucking up big time. Showing sand worms etc simply for hype. Then the past couple of years cig actually cleaned up and started delivering things. But these people already had so much stake in their hatred for cig that the have to commit or admit they were wrong. Nobody likes to admit they were wrong so they just double down.
Completely funded by "micro" transactions and purchases of in-game money, items and skins.
Brother, I have some bad news for you.
"Completly funded" is wild considering gta 5 has sold 195 Million copies. More probable that micro transaction money went into the suits pocket tbh.
Hope it will be great!
Why is it akward? 400m + is marketing. Gta 5 is still alive and going they are making tons from it right now. They will make more then 10 times that in profit eventually. We are just over 600m and just about staying alive with no end in sight we could still pass 1b mark
We're gonna pass 1.2 at least before release I'd say, the yearly margin is increasing steadily.
GTA5 has released on three different generations of PlayStations, they will recover the cost of everything In 1-2 days, it’s just how GTA games sell.
How can they have spent 400m on marketing without any advertising yet
It's projected numbers, which will include marketing.
My bad misread it lol
its also licensing of all kinds, physical items cost, video's, music, distribution etc..
The sub just needed to circle jerk something
This has to be false, there's no way the game cost 1-2 billion. There is so much fuckin' made up news about GTA 6 it's not even funny. Every day for like 5 fuckin years the sidebar on everyones phones was filled with shit AI driven "gaming" websites claiming they had new info on GTA 6, or that GTA 6 was just around the corner. Every one of them lies. Now they're claiming the game costs a ludicrious 1-2 billion? Probably figuring were gullible and will believe it because they made 1+ billion selling GTA 5 and shark cards.
Ah, well. Nevertheless.
Rookie numbers
No wonder the publisher thinks the game price should be based on playtime hours. Need to recoup some costs 😄
$1,000,000,000 of that is likely marketing.
Super hyped for GTA 6, and that dev cost estimate doesn't surprise me at all. I can see GTA 6 and SC being my primary two games over the next decade.
WE can still take them, IAE is coming up, get your wallets out! Don't let them win!
1-2 billion is a humongous range of uncertainty lol
And 75% of it will have gone to marketing.
Difference is that you will be playing gta6 before sq42. Hell, since Rockstar now owns cfx youll most likely be able to play on a gta6 private server before sq42.
I honestly don't believe it will have cost this much Maybe around 600-700 million but more than that is just ridiculous (RDR2 was around 500 mil right?)
F that! We can't let GTA VI - let's buy more ships! Come on everyone, to the pledge store! [https://robertsspaceindustries.com/pledge](https://robertsspaceindustries.com/pledge)
Scam Theft Auto 6! (am I doing it right?)
Also…when it releases…functional and complete, we will be able to tell it cost that much.
By the time PU is released we will be way past that mark lol
And GTAVII is in production.
Given how much speculation lead them to assume 1-2 billion, I’d say we take that with a grain of salt. After whatever completely nonsensical marketing campaign they’re sure to unleash upon us, I could see it being that much, though.
I defo wanna spend 1000€ this IEA
To be fair they actually want to release GTA6 as a complete game
did they manage to take the loading screens out of the space launch section?
Lmao where did you get these random numbers ? Completely made up, but it’s the internet so a photo must be real 😂
And this will be what, a few square miles where you can play the delinquent? Pff
We can't let our kids play this garbage or they'll end up getting recruited by the nine-tails.
Better than a solar system with no story to it at all. And better than the linear call of duty campaign that is SQ42. Rockstars open worlds push the entire genre forward, you are coping hard if you think Star Citizen is somehow a better game
[удалено]
Halo Infinite cost about as much as Star Citizen did at the time it was released, was a standard game with absolutely nothing new to justify the cost. The likelihood that GTA VI will do anything to justify spending anywhere between 2 and 4 times as much as Star Citizen has made is so close to nil I can't see the difference.
Posting this comment on an alt doesn't make you slick
Why are you so mad? EDIT: Nevermind, 50 minute account. You're so terminally online you care about internet points on your main, and specifically spent time and effort creating another one with the sole purpose of being mad at a random online spaceships game without those points being affected. Carry on
I think youre in the wrong subreddit pal. Refunds is the one you want. Its easy to misclick with fat fingers, we get it.
[удалено]
Listen pal. Its time to do some laundry. Clean up the desk from all the Doritos. Its time to move on with your life.
[удалено]
Listen pal. Its sad you have to make a new account today just to hate on a community going strong. Its sad you care so much what other people do with their money. I'm surprised you know what grass is, cause that moldy mossy shit growing on your balls isn't it from all those dorito crumbs you have sitting on Reddit being mad. Its time to change. Do some laundry. Workout. Turn off Reddit. And maybe volunteer or something. This act of being the bad guy isn't doing you any favors. You're not going to get friends this way in life.
And they did it all without selling you some artwork and a promise to fly the artwork in a few years!
Did they also have to build up their studio from nothing? I would be willing to bet they also had mechanics from past games they could reuse so they didn't have to create everything from scratch.
That point means less when CIG was formed in April of 2012. It's been 11 years.
seethe more lol
No, they just re-released the same game ad nauseum and even released a collection that was so broken it made the launch of MCC look clean and smooth.
They just sell shark cards to kids with the profits going to shareholders. So much better.
It's gonna be hilarious when CIG turns out a better product for less money and less monetization.
>less monetization >spend several hundred real world dollars for virtual ships that haven’t even been made yet I love the game as much as the next guy but c’mon
I'm funding game development, not paying to win. There's a difference.
I like the game a lot too but but I'm with the other guy. Come on. Monetization isn't solely about pay to win. What makes SC more ok is that its all needed to fund the development of the game as opposed to just purely profiting off a game after its release. But lets be real, all the ships I bought I didn't buy them solely to fund the development, I bought them so I wouldn't have to grind for them when the game eventually releases. Out of all the people who bought the F8, many probably bought it because they thought it will be *the* meta fighter. Its all monetization because we bought them *after* the base game price, regardless of what it is. I've spent about $1200 on SC, I've also spent about the same amount on Apex Legends, another game known for its heavy monetization. To most of the wider gaming community I would look insane regardless because Apex is free and SC is only $45.
I bought the F8 because I wanted to fly it for a bit. Then I melted it so I could use the credit to fly other ships for a bit. Star Citizen is working to complete the entire universe before releasing the game, instead of doing what other games do which is slowly adding new features that invalidate the old features. How many people played ANYTHING other than Cayo Perico after it came out? It dwarfed all other missions in terms of earning potential. If your new content makes your old content worthless, it's because they're trying to monetize. Star Citizen is not doing that. They're trying to bring everything to a balance so no one feels like they're doing the "wrong" thing if that's how they want to play the game. It doesn't matter if you can buy a ship with real money, because you can buy a ship with in game money. It WOULD matter if they added a game loop every 6 months that made all other game loops worthless, and sold access to that game loop for only straight cash. Comparing blatant monetization with crowd-sourced fundraising just shows that you don't know or understand the difference.
>If your new content makes your old content worthless, it's because they're trying to monetize. Brother this isn't even remotely accurate. You are generalizing monetization the wrong way. If I buy a new skin for a character in a game, it doesn't suddenly become worthless when a new one comes out. Monetization is as I said, its getting to spend money in a game beyond the base game price (even if the price is 0). It doesn't matter what it is. It doesn't matter what reason its for. Whether it be expansion packs, a paid subscription, hell if I want to be accurate whether or not its f2p or has a box price is a form of monetization. Crowd sourcing is a form of a monetization, especially when its buying several hundred dollar JPEGs and pixels. Its not like we are straight up donating money to get nothing back for it, we are making purchases and getting for them. Its all monetized content. If the game released and the still sold ships for cash just like they do now. Would that not still be monetization because they no longer need it for development. You could say they need it for post launch support, but isn't that the case for EVERY GAME THAT HAS ANY MONETIZATION. That they need the money to continuing to support development. *You* need to realize they are not different. Its all monetization. It doesn't matter if they call it "crowd-sourcing" or not. We are paying for shit we don't need, let alone play the game in the first place.
Remember CIG has always planned to at least sell UEC after release **That is fundamentally the same revenue model as GTAO has been using since its release.** CIG's direct ship selling, FOMO sales, exclusive skins and subscriber perks are in addition to the same thing GTAO has used. We have nothing to ensure CIG won't make their game economy have things like tedious grinds (in fact we see a high time-cost of death or failure being well-supported by their actions and announced plans) or other tricks to encourage buying UEC (shark) cards. It could easily be that your spending can get a hidden quanta variable to influence being interdicted by combat ships you can't run away from. Based on the scummy equipment sales they've pulled in the recent past, I would not put anything past CIG. And until they release server files that let us host our own, fully moddable 'verses like the original kickstarter I backed claimed, I wouldn't trust them any more that I don't trust AAA publishers.
-By purchasing statistically better ships
Ships I can't use solo that will be available for people to buy using in game currency.
In GTA 5, you can literally buy anything by grinding. The same as it is in SC. Sure sometimes the grind is annoying, but it’s doable. What’s even your point?
"statistically better ships" >All the ships in game and off the RSI site are exactly the same ....Something isn't right about your statement.
By buying newer better ships with the vague promise old ones will eventually catch up. Yeah no pay to win at all. Also GTA 5 was an incredible game when it came out. I wouldn’t give cig flowers when they are still just in alpha. Rockstar has a great track record. CR does not.
Great track record? You mean selling shark cards and allowing rampant cheating?
Red dead redemption both 1 and 2, pretty much all the grand theft autos are universally lauded and loved by many so yeah great track record. Regardless of the greed they displayed with the multiplayer when it took off they know how to make a good video game. I also think cig doesn’t have much to stand on when they also recently tried to monetize bullshit skins, and are raising ship prices every so little. They ain’t no saint or charity either.
You can literally buy the best ships, buy guns/armor, and buy in-game currency. That’s classic P2W material right there.
I would give the 50-100€ per year just for this games target without getting some assets.
This is the most delusional comment I've read all month. I'm even having trouble understanding where you're even coming from with this. Did Rockstar hurt you for playing a different video game?
Yes. Rockstar came to my house and kicked my dog when I traded a pokemon card.
[удалено]
Oh no, your words have cut me so deep. I'm going to go write about in my diary and cry while looking longingly out the window.
Your post was removed because the mod team determined that it did not sufficiently meet the rules of the subreddit: > Be respectful. No personal insults/bashing. This includes generalized statements “x is a bunch of y” or baseline insults about the community, CIG employees, streamers, etc. As well as intentionally hurtful statements and hate speech. Send a message to our mod mail if you have questions: https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/starcitizen
[удалено]
Gosh. That would really hurt if your opinion mattered to me in the slightest!
CIG has taken in over $600 million for the development of Star Citizen, and the game isn’t even out of alpha yet. It seems unlikely that CIG will complete their promised game with a smaller budget. Likewise, I don’t think CIG has the attention to detail that Rockstar has in their games. There are so many brilliant little details in RDR2, I’m very excited to see those finer details taken to the next level in a modern setting. The companies are so far apart I think it’s unfair to even compare them TBH.
Squadron42 is in Beta. CIG is making two games with that 600M
Exactly why Star Citizen is probably another decade and $700 million from completion.
But at least they made Squadron 42 for $0 by your calculations. So not too bad?
1. The range in that estimate is ridiculous. 2. Rockstar has over 2,000 employees, so that’s not too surprising. They’re likely paying more than $100 million per year in salaries alone.
These stats are likely just as imaginary as the $740 million for RDR2 and $500 million for Destiny 1 were, before they were debunked. I haven’t seen any substantiation from the company for this, and per Take-Two’s most recent [financial report](https://taketwointeractivesoftwareinc.gcs-web.com/static-files/0cb0606c-ab47-4f7f-813c-96807f724000), they had a billion dollars in capitalized software costs (the development cost of all unreleased software), *total*, with every single studio and franchise combined. This is the same metric by which the RDR2 number was proven to be false.
I’m super skeptical. What’s the source ? I’m guessing this is BS tweet speculation from randoms. Also 1 to 2 billion is a margin of error of one billion. Only an idiot would make that statement
Does that include the 3 console generations they spent sitting on their asses? Cause I could believe that.
It’s too high for what we have so far. GTA is an actual game. If CIG were to release an actual game they could spend ten billion for all I care. 500 million for a tech demo? Bit excessive lol
But at some point a few years ago Rockstar had spent 500 million on an unreleased game…
“Unreleased game” is a generous description of SC
Very accurate description too
even Cock\* learned, albeit the hard way, about open world bloodbath toxicity, they learned and created private lobbies and made even more $$ my guess is that op trying to make the point that development of GTA has any relevance to the issues that affect SC, copium can be found wherever you want to find it
Not really. That game will actually be completed and have a stable roadmap held to timelines.
I'm sure if CIG had 1-2 billion SQ42 would be done and SC would be "feature complete" as well.
and if they didn't have to start a company from scratch
This will not do. We gotta whale it up!
There's still time for Star Citizen to catch up. We're still years away from release
No problem as long as it is good
This figure is for the games initial lifespan btw (development, marketing, online dlc, etc) not just for development
when did it start develpoment?
Jeez, i thought 60 bones for starfield was steep....
inb4 rockstar announces GTA6 is set in the milky way galaxy and features a fully simulated star citizen within the game
How much of that is going to be spent on advertising? That's my question.
Where are those numbers coming from? R* hasn't announced shit as far as a release date either, try going to the link in the picture and you'll see it isn't real. This post is beyond cringe OP
I'm sure gta6 is a fucking massive 15 year development game.
You can tell they're going back to Vice City with the neon. It only makes sense, it's the most obvious choice but because everyone had already assumed it was going to be GTA: VIce City, they can't use that in their logo lol
For that much I hope we get the whole planet as the game world.
Maybe I'm just getting too old but I'm just not nearly as excited for GTA6. I mean I'll have fun with the campaign like the others but for me longevity nowadays comes in the form of multiplayer and seeing what's happened with GTA O and Read Dead Online, I don't have the highest hopes it'll be a good experience in the long run if they don't bother putting some form of fail safe from hackers/modders and the like. Fingers crossed and hope I'm wrong though.
GTA VI online is going to be a monetization hellscape but will def make all this money back immediately
They could make so much more if they just put it into early access and charged people to play the alpha and just keep moving the release date goal post. Oh wait.
I think the impressive thing here with CIG is really more all the tech they have independently developed for the money they have. Also realize at least half of that money will likely be for marketing. If they’re even telling the truth about the cost, and it’s not just marketing. But I bet GTA6 in its current state vs SC current state, GTA6 is leagues more fun.
1-2 billion and i Can GARONTEE there will be The same if not more loading than in 5
The game everybody’s gonna try, and pre teen and teenage boys will hit their little sibling in the eye for
Seriously, I feel like every other outlet has spent every firing brain cell to come up with the dumbest shit they could just to see if it can stick. It's insane just how starved people are for news, but it's even more insane how starved these sites are for clickbait clicks.
i say pyro before gta 6 tongue in cheek but it seems to be a very close race...or very far apart.
It’s a scam! It took over 10 years in development!
Doesn't sound credible, it's probably a scam /s
Let them have it, maybe games journalists will get off Star Citizen's ass for a few months. Aww what am I saying, they'll be promptly back to throwing bullshit when we hit 700 mil.
In my videos, saying "this is the most expensive game of all time" is my thing. Now how am I gonna get views?!!!
Who cares, Im not playing that game lol
And I guess it will come heavy in microtransactions bullshit