Anthem did not cost 400-500m USD at all lol
The only games that can surpass 100m in budget are Rockstar titles and some occasional overbudgeted game like Shadow of The Tomb Raider.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Half-Life: Alyx Announced
- Thread starter Nzyme32
- Start date
Anthem did not cost 400-500m USD at all lol
The only games that can surpass 100m in budget are Rockstar titles and some occasional overbudgeted game like Shadow of The Tomb Raider.
Nice catch :D sorry about my bad math there.
The announcement has turned my brain to swiss cheese.
High interactivity is why is love immersive sims like Dishonored, Prey and DX. It's nice when it makes its way into other genres though. Loved that about BotW.
Lol I know that would be hilarious though. Definitely cost at least around 200m.
Haha ok obviously not upto speed on the leaks / info on this one. Heres hoping it lives upto the expectations!
Yeah absolutely. I feel like BotW is the best we've seen to date - not only did it incorporate the physics sandbox, but like Half-Life 2, it pushed it to the next level by building a game capable of utilizing it to the maximum. It's definitely very, very Valve-esque the way the game plays out, teaches you and lets you experiment with the tools at your disposal, all of which feel naturally intuitive.
Yeah, the Great Plateau definitely gave me vibes of Ravenholm in terms of how it was a playground and organic tutorial area for your powers.
I really don't think that's true anymore.
The rule of thumb as set out in Blood Sweat and Pixels was 10k / month / person to average the cost of salaries, taxes, desk space etc.
300 developers working for 3 years is ~108 million USD in costs. Not counting marketing budgets. There's no way that Assassin's Creed type games are under 100 million budgets even with the tax incentives and lower cost of development. They're huge undertakings. 3 year dev cycles are the norm, sometimes longer, and team sizes for some of the AAA games are huge.
For more examples of the crazy possibilities that could be available in this game...
These guys are just messing about doing cool shit entirely organically - stuff like John Wick gunplay stuff, leg sweeps, grappling with enemies in various ways, headbutting enemies to death, etc. There probably won't be quite as much variety in terms of weapons to fool around with as Boneworks, but I want to gun kata Combine soldiers and kick some ass with my bare hands on the side.
These guys are just messing about doing cool shit entirely organically - stuff like John Wick gunplay stuff, leg sweeps, grappling with enemies in various ways, headbutting enemies to death, etc. There probably won't be quite as much variety in terms of weapons to fool around with as Boneworks, but I want to gun kata Combine soldiers and kick some ass with my bare hands on the side.
Why are people afraid of change like this?
VR is a logical step forward in gaming.
they all have the mindset that VR games aren't "real games". they can be just as bad as all the #gamers they write about.
Its because its currently quite expensive to get into. Its not the norm for gaming at all. Its going to take time for it to go mainstream. Unless this tweet is pointing at the usual 'its a vr experience and not a fully fledged AAA game' excuse, these types of reactions are totally ok. Not having a full fledged non VR version bums a lot of people out.
Hardly a vitriolic comment, that Denny guy seems a little over the top.
My take is, the halflife generation is more likely closer to their 30s and more crystalized on what gaming is and isnt. People are incredibly resistant to change at this point.
People don't like change period, but VR's slow progression rate has been an issue as well, games like this one and Asgard's Wrath, Stormlands etc etc, will help in the long run, games like Boneworks should have been the launch titles for VR, but instead they're here 3 years after it.
This is not being afraid of change, thats such a silly thing to say. VR is a completely seperate experience from TV gaming. Its not the next logical step forward.
Hmm, just over 1% of steam users are using VR headsets and I wouldn't have thought the number of headset owners is much higher than that. I can see why they went with a prequel. If they'd made the next chapter in the story unplayable to such a huge number of people I could see them having to deal with quite a PR shitstorm.
That's just like one, easy to ignore.
That's why I asked, didn't really see it much around.
This. people often forget that these games are made by legions of people and they all get paid salaries. Also anthem was in production for 6 years, obviously the amount of people working on it on a month to month basis would change drastically over the course of its development, but it costs at least close to 175 million to develop and then add another 100 mil for its marketing.
I'm in my 40s and have been there pretty much from the start and cant wait for this.
I have loved watching my hobby grow and evolve.
Hell I spent loads of money on this as a teenager in the Trocadero in London:
That was my first experience of VR and it's amazing to see how far we have come. So to see people dismissing this without seeing anything blows my mind.
Steam prints money.
They can make a game that they know will be a loss in order to push forward technology they like to play with just like Oculus did with Asgard's Wrath. Plus Valve games tend to have long legs. They don't need to make money with it in the next year. They just need it to help drive more people to get into VR.
which is a fully featured RPG.
Imagine being the clown at Gamespot that clearly has a bone to pick with advances in the gaming industry.
It's stuff like this that damages the reputation of VR, and it's just honestly pathetic journalism. People are very easily influenced to adopt the general mindset floating around, so it ends up like a domino effect.
I've actually noticed GameSpot basically never cover VR. They probably cover it the least of any well known game journalist, which I'd say destroys some of their integrity. It's weird to say but IGN are simply much better than GameSpot these days.
It's playing off of the fan reaction. It's not journalism, it's just a joke.
lmao, calm down, it's literally just a light hearted twitter post, not journalism, jesus
I love VR. I think its the future of games that I want to play personally.
There are a lot of problems with VR though. I see why theres a lot of hate.
Expensive. Better hardware to run higher res and better framerates which increase the impressiveness of VR.
Isolation. Some people need to be aware of their surroundings. Also being touched unexpectedly by someone in VR scares the shit out of you.
Sweaty. The headset is hot to wear, produces heat and on a hot day can make you sweat and then fog up the lens.
Screen door effect. Need a really high res screen as users eyes are so close to it. This then pushes up the required hardware the run the games at an acceptable frame rate.
Cables. Wireless headsets are a thing but still not able to support resolutions that reduce the screen door effect.
Space. Both for the device and to use it. Thats why they collect dust in closets because people are lazy and won't drag it out and bother to set it up.
However, technology improves. As these barriers get reduced or removed, the entry to the experience becomes easier. Hopefully as fast as possible.
There are a lot of problems with VR though. I see why theres a lot of hate.
Expensive. Better hardware to run higher res and better framerates which increase the impressiveness of VR.
Isolation. Some people need to be aware of their surroundings. Also being touched unexpectedly by someone in VR scares the shit out of you.
Sweaty. The headset is hot to wear, produces heat and on a hot day can make you sweat and then fog up the lens.
Screen door effect. Need a really high res screen as users eyes are so close to it. This then pushes up the required hardware the run the games at an acceptable frame rate.
Cables. Wireless headsets are a thing but still not able to support resolutions that reduce the screen door effect.
Space. Both for the device and to use it. Thats why they collect dust in closets because people are lazy and won't drag it out and bother to set it up.
However, technology improves. As these barriers get reduced or removed, the entry to the experience becomes easier. Hopefully as fast as possible.
People are just scared VR will REPLACE normal gaming, which won't happen.
Also, people need to play new games ASAP. They can't fathom a thought that they can just wait a year or two for more accessible VR headsets and then play, when more AAA games will be on VR anyways. We just starting to see some bigger games like Asgard's Wrath, the stealthy Espire something, Boneworks. And Half Life will be the biggest one.
I really hope that Valve will do Portal VR next and I don't even own a VR yet.
Also, people need to play new games ASAP. They can't fathom a thought that they can just wait a year or two for more accessible VR headsets and then play, when more AAA games will be on VR anyways. We just starting to see some bigger games like Asgard's Wrath, the stealthy Espire something, Boneworks. And Half Life will be the biggest one.
I really hope that Valve will do Portal VR next and I don't even own a VR yet.
If they release the Source 2 VR SDK, I'm gonna make a game with it for sure.
Which is damaging to VR because people start to adopt the same mindset. There are going to be people using this tweet as validation, spreading it to other people and pointing a finger at the medium.
If you were a teen when Half-Life 1 came out, you're in your 30's now. If you were an adult, you're probably in your 40's or higher. At that point, you probably know what kinds of games you like and might be not too excited about a favorite series turning into a different genre (and it's obvious that a made-for-VR Half-Life is going to play very differently than the previous Half-Life games).
As an adult playing video games for decades, you've probably had bad VR experiences in the past.
VR is an expensive investment & unlike buying a new console or new computer, it's not clear exactly what you're getting until you have it unless you know someone who already has a VR setup that lets you try it. If you pay $500 for a PS5 (or new Xbox or whatever), you have a good idea what you're getting into.
New control schemes mean that you have to start over and don't start from a position of mastery which can be hard for someone who is used to being good at games.
As an adult with responsibilities & probably a spouse & children, strapping on a helmet to play a game doesn't really fit in with my life. I'm much more likely to get game time pulling out a Switch when I'm waiting out on an errand.
Also a lot of people get motion sickness from VR.
This has been their general attitude on VR for a while. If you've seen some of their articles, as rare as they are, they tend to attach a certain tone as if "Ughh... VR, yay... but we need to cover it for you guys." Even Game Informer was like that at one point.
As I said in another post, this just ends up hurting VR. There's probably people that don't have VR on their mind at all and come into this post thinking how much of a joke it must be, because people are just like that.
Do you think it's more damaging than GameSpot's constant coverage of VR devices and games is helpful?
It's an innocuous comment on the reaction to a VR Half-Life.
And still, first time I played Windlands on my OG Vive, I was giggling like a 5 year old for hours, VR, in it's current state, has amazing qualities, Valve is smart to push to that direction, if they can pull it off it will pay off greatly in the long run.
Negativity sticks in people's minds more and spreads more easily, so I would say so yes. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see people use the tweet as some kind of fact that VR sucks or something. People will go to any extreme to make a point.
This is still true if people are stupid about things (aka jumping right into a movement heavy game), but there are more and more games that are doing better about not making people sick. I played around with some of the older VR games and felt ill pretty quickly, but a lot of the more recent games have no effect on me even though I'm prone to motion sickness. Stuff like Beat Saber and Super hot in general I haven't run into people getting sick off of because all the movement is one to one. I'm sure some people still do, but I must stress they are getting better and better at reducing motion sickness from VR and will continue to do so.
the above all being said, I feel motion sick just from thinking of a VR version of portal lol. it would have to be toned down quite a bit because I could get dizzy just watching some of the stuff in normal portal :P
That's a perception thing. There are plenty of full VR games out there, including AAA games.
There are already a number of fully fledged games aside from half life being shown or are already out. It's just that VR doesn't get a lot of media coverage so people don't know about them.
One of the highest rated games of the year is a fully fledged VR RPG :P
What? I'm just saying Valve is a relatively small company, and if they made a AAA game it's going to take the bulk of the company, not a small portion of it. Which is why stuff like this is basically impossible—
Yeah, but that games are still exceptions. I'm not blaming VR, but I can understand the lack of confidence. VR will be a great thing, but still needs to make a jump and be more accessible to players.
Tbh I don't think this theory is likely at all. They literally just released an expensive premium headset, and people would be pissed if they released another one. On the other hand, there are plenty of cheaper headsets so it doesn't make sense for them to do that either.Yes, current headsets.
They are supposedly working on new hardware (possible new VR headset) which may or may not be revealed alongside it!
The hints posted by finalflame who worked there suggest it.
then this in reply to my question:
New Premium VR headset with insane specs allowing for photo realistic graphics pushing the market forward and/or a cheaper VR headset option for those wanting to enter the VR market?
It's a win-win situation for everyone!
I think this mysterious hardware project must be an add-on (like wireless), or it's something involving streaming or Steam Machines 2.0
I would object to that and say people are just picking what they want to pick to serve their agenda. I could do that too: What exactly is the definition of a real game? To be a real game you have to have GaS, have your entire gameplay loop be based around the boring WoW fetch quests I used to laugh at 15 years ago, and generally have zero depth so people can just click a button and feel like they've won?
So much this. FinalFlame had a quote a while back about why Valve hadn't unveiled the VR game yet. And it was essentially along these lines: Because maybe Valve feels it's also lauching alongside something even more important to them than VR. And that other something isn't ready yet.
People need to lower the hype levels on that hardware comment. An even more expensive HMD would move almost zero units. And certainly wouldn't have been worth hiding HL for.
And people shouldn't even read into that summary. Because he's been gone over two years. Whatever he was referencing could have very well been cancelled long ago.
Last edited:
Valve has been working on a brain interface for a few years now, maybe they'll announce something for the index (which has an unused expansion port)
Sure. But do be that "Great thing" big companies must publish big VR games. Without companies like Valve making AAA VR titles, the technology will improve of course, but not much will change.