3 ms·
I don't think the increase in productivity in re-implementing old games lies in ease or programming. It's the fact that all the art assets already exist and all
by manfredo 7y ago
I don't think the increase in productivity in re-implementing old games lies in ease or programming. It's the fact that all the art assets already exist and all the game design is already done. And not to mention, marketing, HR, etc. are totally out of the picture. For most games, programming is far from the biggest labor cost.
- fooker 7y agoYou have contradicted yourself. >For most games, programming is far from the biggest labor cost. And as you say, the other bigger costs are out of the picture when re-implementing old games. So, programming is the largest remaining part, almost by definition of 're-implement'.
- manfredo 7y agoI'm pretty confused as to why you think I contradicted myself, and your last couple sentences don't really make sense to me. When making a game from scratch, you need to produce art assets (often 50-70% of the cost of the game is art assets alone), design gameplay mechanics, market the game, test the game, and distribute the game (which, in the old days, often meant making physical cartridges or disks). Let's say that 10% of the labor in making a game from scratch went to programming. When you're re-implementing a game, all you need recreate is that 10%. So if re-implementing a game is an order of magnitude easier than making a game from scratch, there's no reason to think that programming games has gotten any easier.