Video games often take so much more effort to produce compared to a movie. Why are there so many titles released every year? Do these obscure games even sell enough to break even?
In: Economics
AAA video game titles do indeed require lots of time, people, and money, but I’d argue that the MINIMUM investment to produce a passable video game is actually much lower than for a movie.
For a film to not look laughably amateurish, you need special equipment (cameras, lighting, microphones) and people who can operate it. You could try animation instead, but the prevailing styles also require a lot of specialized labor. Because you’re hiring people to work on your movie, you need to have a lot of cash on hand.
Meanwhile, indie games often have leeway to use much simpler images if the art is cohesive and the gameplay is engaging. Then it’s just code, and depending on how complicated the game is, that can be done by only a couple people. If those people own the studio, the only thing they’re really investing is their own time. Success then is more a question of “Did this make enough money to justify me quitting my job to work on it?” and less “Did this make enough money to pay the bank back for that loan?”
It’s an extreme example, but Tetris really captures this dynamic. It’s a fantastic game, but it’s also something that you personally could recreate in your spare time.
Latest Answers