Cost of developing a video game... [Archive]

Dark Jaguar

4th May 2006, 09:34 PM

Wow, that's a loaded question. If I were you, I'd try and find developer blogs around the interwebs.

Basically, it all depends on what you want to do. If you just want to use the engine and make your own little world, it'll cost about as much as it takes to buy a compiler program and do it yourself. You say nothing about quality.

If you actually want a good game, good luck with that. Slowly, you'll realize you can't do it all alone. You may need an art department, you may need a lot more programmers, and debuggers, and producers to organize everything, and a sound department, and a server management team, and the technology to let these people do their jobs, and so on like that.

Basically, quality video games cost several million dollars these days. Sub par video games cost practicely nothing. But, that's not always the case. Sometimes very cheaply made games can actually be very good, and sometimes a game have have a lot of money behind it and suck terribly.

You are asking how much it costs to "make a movie". As such, the most accurate response you can get is "it depends".

However, if the server is actually going to be that busy, you may just be able to get an accurate answer. That answer is, provided by IBM and so on. You should check server providers and the costs they list on their site, and then the costs of paying professionals to manage said servers.

Dustin Kesselberg

4th May 2006, 10:01 PM

Do you know what "Runescape" is?

How much would it cost for a server with a game that size and type? Per month?

tygirwulf

5th May 2006, 06:47 AM

Why don't you ask the developers?

Jekyll

5th May 2006, 07:05 AM

I wanted to know how much it would cost to develope an online Role playing game with an engine similar to that of Grand Theft Auto san andreas.

I'm not even sure it's possible to make an online version of GTA. The amount of data you'd need to transfer between computers, in real time to ensure that all the crowds and cars are in the right place on both machines is fairly non-trivial.

the_gooch

5th May 2006, 08:50 AM

I'm not even sure it's possible to make an online version of GTA. The amount of data you'd need to transfer between computers, in real time to ensure that all the crowds and cars are in the right place on both machines is fairly non-trivial.

http://www.mtavc.com/

Jekyll

5th May 2006, 11:39 AM

http://www.mtavc.com/
Cool.
All the screen shots seem fairly empty though. Does it still generate crowds of people and police chases?

geni

5th May 2006, 11:56 AM

Do you know what "Runescape" is?

Which version?

How much would it cost for a server with a game that size and type? Per month?

By the time you are that size you are probably buying servers rather than renting them

UrsulaV

5th May 2006, 11:59 AM

Once your game is made, you'll also need to pay your support staff. If several thousand people are playing, you'll generate a lot of bugs and complaints and whining, which will need to be dealt with.

Assuming you locate them somewhere with a low cost of living, and figure one admin per...mm....five hundred people (a number I am pulling largely out of thin air, it may be more or less, I'm just figuring one issue per person, every two weeks, each of which takes ten minutes to resolve and record the paperwork, you can do six complaints an hour, for a forty hour work week, and throwing in an extra twenty people who never whine about anything.) For three thousand players, then, you'd require six full time employees, at $36K a year to start, or $216K a year, to take the complaints and write notes to the programmers saying "Fix this." Not including servers and guys to run the servers and guys to fix the code that went wonky and a guy to update the website so everybody knows what server's down and a guy to delete the three thousand e-mails being sent that say "Hey, the server's down!"

There's a lot of assumptions there, of course, and that probably has no relation to the actual costs. My real point is that the support staff for an MMORPG of any significant size is considerable, and not something one can run out of their own basement.

It is entirely possible to make low budget independant games of remarkable quality...but low budget independant MMORPGs of quality is another kettle of fish entirely. Those things require vast amounts of maintenance once they're up, they don't care for themselves, and if you want anybody to play it, you're talking a big initial outlay to get stuff running in the first place.

Cheap Thrills

5th May 2006, 12:16 PM

Based on these responses, you'll definitely need some deep pockets.

Jimbo07

5th May 2006, 12:37 PM

Based on these responses, you'll definitely need some deep pockets.

I have an idea for the greatest sci-fi computer game in the known universe. It has the potential to be everything to everyone.

I'll start implementing it as soon as I win the $35 MM lottery!

:D

Cheesejoff

5th May 2006, 12:43 PM

The depressing thing is that 90% of videogames do not make a profit due to publishers being unwilling to properly develop a large amount of titles due to the risk involved.

Unfortunatly making a game is not actually too expensive as long as you don't want next gen graphics.

Getting it published, on the other hand, is the problem.

Almo

5th May 2006, 03:17 PM

Many millions of dollars. Just GTA was many millions of dollars, and it's strictly single player. So I'd hazard a guess of 20-30 million just to get it running and publishable. I'm not sure about server management. But between 10 and 15 dollars a month per user seems to be pretty common, though I don't know how much of that is profit. Last I heard, Everquest was running about 50% profit on the subscription fee, but I have no idea if the information I got was correct or not.

Games are damned expensive to produce.

Dustin Kesselberg

6th May 2006, 08:08 AM

Mongrel

6th May 2006, 07:36 PM

How many years in the future will it be until one would be able to produce a MMORPG with an engine like GTA san-andreas do you think?

For instance..

-Each individual lives their own life and has a job ect...Polices,Judges,Cabbys,Lawyers..ect..ect

-No Computer players.

-Like a small society based on an engine similar to that in GTA san andreas.

-Estimating tens of thousands of players.

-Quick loading speed,No lag.

It's already possible and do-able :)

Individual lives and jobs has already been tried, Sims Online. It bombed in the Western market. Apparently there's a whole slew of games like that in the Asian market though.

Why no computer players? Having seen what player communities are capable of (Trading in SWG, most of Eves' story and any open PvP servers) it's nice to have a baseline that computer trading\stories\combat gives you.

The engine is fairly simple, take a look at Planetside - a first person shooter MMORPG. Just license and modify something like the Unreal engine, simplify the graphics a little and you're away

As for the quick loading - WoW handles that well merely by always loading in a circle around you, as you move the circle does old data get's dumped new data is loaded in the background. The player never sees the process.
Asking for no lag is impossible though IMO. You can never guarantee the servers wont have faults, the latest patch hasn't caused a few unknown problems, 400 players all decide to go to the nightclub at the same time. When you factor in 'non-game' stuff as well, poor player connections, malware, four year old graphic cards, barely enough RAM to run Windows XP and little to no knowledge of firewalls\routers - you'll still get blamed for it.

Can I just ask if you've played any MMOs and if you have what sort of experiences you've had :)

rocketdodger

7th May 2006, 02:53 PM

Dustin I am graduating with a computer science degree in 6 months and my area of interest is game programming, so (hopefully, or else I am screwed) I know what I am talking about. Here is my experience:

1)Making the "core" of a game, which is the engine, is easily a one person task.

2)You don't need to write your own engines from scratch if you can't or don't want to.

3)Developing a large game only takes tons of time (which means tons of money if you don't want to spend 10 years doing it yourself)

4)Buying and maintaining a server farm is non-trivial, which is why mmos are inherently more risky than any other type of game.

5)Current games in their totality are not an indicator of the potential of current computers/networking.

6)If you want to see a game made, you will probably need to become a developer and do it yourself. Otherwise you are going to become a bitter old man like me who is mad at the world for ruining otherwise terrific games.

I got into game programming for just this reason. A big problem with most games today is that the people with ideas don't know squat about computers and the programmers have hardly any ideas. Thus it rarely ever occurs that a game gets made exactly as it should be. Either the programmers are perfect robots and do exactly as the developers say (WoW, Eve online), or the programmers are morons and screw up everything the developers say (SWG, Anarchy online, Everquest 2), or the developers are morons and have stupid ideas in the first place, in which case if the programmers are great the game might be OK (half life 2, doom 3) or if the programmer suck the game will be atrocious (almost everything else).

You might be wondering why robot programmers is bad. Its because computers are not holodecks (not yet anyway) and so making a game exactly as an artist envisions will result in really bad performance and a reduced experience for the player. Programmers have to find ways to improve performance while minimizing the affect of those changes on players, and robots cannot do this. Many of the flaws in otherwise great games like WoW are things that the artists might not even be aware of, so then it is really up to the programmers (and blizzard doesn't seem to have the cream of the crop in graphics programmers, they should do some team trading with valve).

Almo

8th May 2006, 09:04 AM

Dustin I am graduating with a computer science degree in 6 months and my area of interest is game programming, so (hopefully, or else I am screwed) I know what I am talking about.

...

A big problem with most games today is that the people with ideas don't know squat about computers and the programmers have hardly any ideas.

Wow man... if you get into the industy, you are in for a rude awakening.

Arkan_Wolfshade

8th May 2006, 09:24 AM

rocketdodger

8th May 2006, 02:38 PM

Wow man... if you get into the industy, you are in for a rude awakening.

That is possible, but right now I doubt it. Based on the work I have done myself, there is no excuse for the sh---- quality of most games out there.

Anti_Hypeman

8th May 2006, 03:11 PM

Is this your first game? You need to start with simple things like checkers and move on to a offline RPG or FPS. Building up your skills through experience is the only way to go.

Just peruse the game dev sites and see how many MMORPG projects are "in developement". For some reason everybody wants to make a MMORPG theses days. It never gets beyond the jawbonning stage unless you have serious capital to start.

Money does not gaurantee success just look at Daikatana, Matrix online, or countless other examples. You can dump millions in a game and end up with crap or keep it simple like Katamari and hit the big time.

Start small and simple. Build some log cabbins first before you try to build a mansion. If you come up with a hit you can raise funds for bigger things. There are people that make a living writing mahjong games you dont have to revolutionize the world to get started.

Arkan_Wolfshade

8th May 2006, 03:44 PM

That is possible, but right now I doubt it. Based on the work I have done myself, there is no excuse for the sh---- quality of most games out there.

From my personal experience, the quality failings fall into pretty distinct groups:
* Failure to predict, and build for, expansion (WoW servers come to mind)
* Marketing over-promising
* Publisher/producer/etc deciding a deadline is less costly than keeping the game in-house until all remaining bugs are squashed

The last is, by far, the biggest culprit in IMNSHO. After each testing pass there will be a list of outstanding bugs, RFEs, etc. It is up to those in charge to decide if the ROI on addressing those issues prior to release is worth it. On the extremes you end up with games like Duke Nuke'm Forever (still in development "until it's done") and (someone will have to help my memory on the name) X which, if you tried to uninstall without the patch (that came out the same day) would result in your entire harddrive becoming corrupted.

Anti_Hypeman

8th May 2006, 05:38 PM

Myth II and Pool of Radiance (the remake) could damage your system if uninstalled.

rocketdodger

8th May 2006, 08:47 PM

The last is, by far, the biggest culprit in IMNSHO.

I am not even talking about overt bugs though. I am talking about plain old crappy game design and programming. A game can be bug free but still totally suck compared to what it could have been if done right.

Dark Jaguar

8th May 2006, 08:49 PM

I'm still waiting for the Zelda MMO (active combat puzzles and completing quests to gain powerups rather than killing things for hours on end).

BlackCat

8th May 2006, 11:21 PM

I got into game programming for just this reason. A big problem with most games today is that the people with ideas don't know squat about computers and the programmers have hardly any ideas. Thus it rarely ever occurs that a game gets made exactly as it should be.
At the risk of derailing the thread, I must know: What are the qualities of a great video game? What are you planning to do to improve the quality of the games on the market?

BlackCat

rocketdodger

9th May 2006, 02:10 AM

At the risk of derailing the thread, I must know: What are the qualities of a great video game? What are you planning to do to improve the quality of the games on the market?

The answer is so simple it might surprise you. Ya know when you read game reviews in magazines or on sites and they mention things that annoy them or subtract from the game? That is what I am talking about.

If you develop a game and a review includes any lines like "We would like to have seen <fill in the blank>," you didn't do your job as well as you could.
Or if the review includes "the good thing about the game is that it ends.."

And yes, I realize that I may be talking out of my arse. But I happen to hold games up to a very high standard, and I am upset with the amount of crap that gets pushed onto the shelves just to make money.

I know there are alot of great games. I am not so cocky that I think I could have done those better. But there is also a huge quantity of junk that, frankly, is so bad that I actually am not worried about finding a job because if these bozos got hired surely I will.

I will also be eternally pissed that DOAX didn't include some kind of a hidden nude and/or lesbian sex mode. I'm sure I wasn't the only guy that wanted this...

Arkan_Wolfshade

9th May 2006, 09:56 AM

I am not even talking about overt bugs though. I am talking about plain old crappy game design and programming. A game can be bug free but still totally suck compared to what it could have been if done right.

But, doing it right is still a balancing act of marketing, publishing, project dev'ing, programming, testing, etc.

What's your target audience? What are your projected sales? Based on those projections, how much can you afford to spend in areas X, Y, and Z? etc

Believe me, it's a real balancing act between "Doing it right", "Doing it right (now)" and "Not doing it".

Spindrift

9th May 2006, 11:58 AM

The answer is so simple it might surprise you. Ya know when you read game reviews in magazines or on sites and they mention things that annoy them or subtract from the game? That is what I am talking about.

If you develop a game and a review includes any lines like "We would like to have seen <fill in the blank>," you didn't do your job as well as you could.
Or if the review includes "the good thing about the game is that it ends.."

And yes, I realize that I may be talking out of my arse. But I happen to hold games up to a very high standard, and I am upset with the amount of crap that gets pushed onto the shelves just to make money.

I know there are alot of great games. I am not so cocky that I think I could have done those better. But there is also a huge quantity of junk that, frankly, is so bad that I actually am not worried about finding a job because if these bozos got hired surely I will.

I will also be eternally pissed that DOAX didn't include some kind of a hidden nude and/or lesbian sex mode. I'm sure I wasn't the only guy that wanted this...

There is an inherent problem with this: There will NEVER be an end to the "it should have this" or "it shouldn't do that".

Games are no different than any other computer program. At some point you have to STOP development in order to get the product to market. Notice I didn't say 'finish', because they are never finished.

Programs are never completed, they are just abandoned. (I think I'm paraphrasing a movie director there, Lucas or Coppola, maybe).

Unfortunately the world of software development is not a perfect world. It is one of constant compromise. No program is defect free, so you have to make a judgement call as to what level of defects is acceptable. Add in the fact that at least 50% of the people programming professionally suck at it and that is why we get what we get.

rocketdodger

9th May 2006, 01:50 PM

Add in the fact that at least 50% of the people programming professionally suck at it and that is why we get what we get.

Chalk this up to the "marketability" of a CS degree. More than half of the bozos in my class here at UA are in CS because they think it will pay well. Whenever someone tells me that I want to kick them in the face.

UrsulaV

11th May 2006, 10:51 AM

If you develop a game and a review includes any lines like "We would like to have seen <fill in the blank>," you didn't do your job as well as you could.
Or if the review includes "the good thing about the game is that it ends.."

*choke*

Unfortunately, you're predicating your theory on the premise that your audience is sane and makes only reasonable demands, and that they CAN be satisfied.

They aren't. They won't. Don't even think for a heartbeat that they will be. If you developed the greatest game ever, which enthralled you and enlightened you and made you think and made you cry with joy, AND gave you a foot massage while you played, somebody would write to demand to know why the game didn't also rub your temples with rose water. If the game let you meet God and fall in love and cooked you dinner, someone will write a column snarking about the fact the game did not also do your taxes.

Do not go into the game industry expecting that you will do something so amazing that no one will write a review saying "I'd have liked to see..." You'll die young of septic ulcers.

Almo

11th May 2006, 02:32 PM

That is possible, but right now I doubt it. Based on the work I have done myself, there is no excuse for the sh---- quality of most games out there.

I was idealistic once. Now I focus on my part of the project, and make it as good as I can. When I see glaring game design errors, I point them out. I can't do any more than that, because people above me with more authority may disagree.

I worked on Splinter Cell Essentials for the PSP. It turned out okay, but not great. This was due to a huge number of confounding factors, none of which could have been easily dealt with. I'll give one example. We were given existing code (Splinter Cell Pandora Tomorrow) and told to make a PSP game of it. Well, the PSP is missing an analog stick and two shoulder buttons from the consoles the game started on. It has less pixel-pushing power. The disk medium is slower. The SCPT codebase was really the Splinter Cell codebase, but since that project wasn't given enough time, it was a bit of a mess. We inherited that mess. SC is written with Unreal, so we also had to port Unreal to the PSP since there isn't a version for it. So we get a team of about 10 programmers working on a 4-year-old codebase from another platform to make a game on a new hand-held console.

It just isn't as simple as you make it out to be.

Worse, there are some EXCELLENT games that were clearly lovingly crafted line for line, pixel for pixel, sound for sound (Rez) that didn't sell. Rez is generally acknowledged by press and industry alike as a landmark in creativity in the medium; but it was a horrible financial failure. The studio that made it was closed by Sega a few years later. It's reopened as Q? Entertainment (they made Lumines and Meteos), but it illustrates the point.

By all means, join the industry, and bring your will to create with you. But make sure you bring in some pragmatism too.

God,
Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
the courage to change the things I can,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

This kind of attitude will serve you well.

Ubisoft is always looking for more programmers for the Montréal studio, so drop us an application if you're interested: http://jobs.ubisoft.ca/en/

UrsulaV

11th May 2006, 06:15 PM

Ubisoft is always looking for more programmers for the Montréal studio, so drop us an application if you're interested: http://jobs.ubisoft.ca/en/

Hey, no way! My husband works at Red Storm! Hi!

rocketdodger

11th May 2006, 11:32 PM

Ubisoft is one of the better developers. There is very little about pandora tomorrow that I can criticize. I just wish all games were as good...

Almo

12th May 2006, 09:26 AM

Ubisoft is one of the better developers. There is very little about pandora tomorrow that I can criticize. I just wish all games were as good...

It's not Pandora Tomorrow I'm saying is the problem. It's Splinter Cell Essentials that had trouble. Check reviews. It's not as bad as they say it is, but some of the problems they highlight are real.

Hey, no way! My husband works at Red Storm! Hi!

:D

kevin

12th May 2006, 12:06 PM

If you developed the greatest game ever, which enthralled you and enlightened you and made you think and made you cry with joy, AND gave you a foot massage while you played, somebody would write to demand to know why the game didn't also rub your temples with rose water.

They'll also want it for free because, hey, it's just a game.

rockoon

18th May 2006, 01:27 AM

Top level "content" based games are extremely expensive... as much as is needed for making a feature movie with a big named star... 25 million and up...

a MMORPG is exactly that.. a content based game..

you need modelers/artists... lots and lots of them..

you need musicians... good ones... working in an expensive professional recording studio..

you need sound effects experts...

and obviously.. you need programmers.. the good ones arent cheap.. the bad ones cost even more in the long run

you will also want someone with experience in designing and maintaining an MMORPG because the trick isnt a "good game" .. the trick to an MMORPG is to lock people into the never ending level-up and item hunting grind (at $30 per month or whatever)

One of the greatest MMORPG successes is mostly unheard of in the normal circles... "EVE ONLINE" is by far the most successful in terms of return on investment mostly because its only mildly a content based game and its got a non-standard level-up method as well as a low bandwidth design... cheap to produce relative to the others.. and gets people to pay without even playing... last I heard Eve Online holds the record for simulataneous users in a single persistent game world..

Molinaro

19th May 2006, 12:02 PM

I read an interview with John Carmack (created of the game Doom) recently and he touched on this very topic. According to him, a new PC game title (not a sequel) costs about $20 mil to create.

Good luck!

morningstar2651

21st May 2006, 07:29 PM