Forbes- Film critic Roger Ebert says that games like Naughty Dog’s ‘The Last of Us’ leave nothing to the imagination. Why is Ebert commenting about games in the first place?
His well-distributed opinion about video games (not art!) is no less lazy, and his recent blithe agreement that Naughty Dog’s upcoming Last of Us PS3 exclusive leaves nothing to the imagination is at once preposterous (since the game has not been released) and uninformed (since Ebert doesn’t play video games) regardless of whether or not it turns out to be true.
The story in part 3 of Sony Interactive Entertainment and Naughty Dog's The Last of Us series may explore a "congregation of immune people."
Former Naughty Dog artist Gabriel Betancourt explains why the "sweet spot" for game teams is under 200 people and how AAA "factories" kill creativity.
There’s definitely some truth to this. When teams get too large, coordination starts to outweigh creativity—layers of approval, risk aversion, and tight deadlines can turn bold ideas into “safe” ones. Keeping a team under ~200 people sounds ideal for maintaining clear communication and a shared vision. That said, massive AAA projects also come with huge technical demands and expectations, so scaling up isn’t always avoidable. The real challenge is figuring out how to keep that small-team creativity alive inside big studio structures.
More than that, it's logistically untenable. Inevitably, when teams get too large, how do you keep tabs on accountability? I suspect this massive team size is a consequence of the perfectionism streak Naughty Dog has.
I wish we could have so many people working on something and it turns out great because I'm all for collaboration in spirit - the problem is too many people as part of the larger team and smaller units. Suppose for example that you have too many people in the art department; you will very often come up against fiercely competing visions for how things should look. That competitive vision will cause friction between team members, team doesn't work as a unit, the back and forth can further delay parts that the other departments are waiting for, etc etc.
A 200-person team says, to me, that we need to scale back game development. Even if it means we go back to PS2 era costs and scale, why not? Those games are still great fun, the budgets were in check, and you could literally break the 200-man team into like 10 20-man teams working on different projects.
The Last of Us Part I PS5 review covering visuals, combat feel, accessibility, performance modes, and whether it is really worth the asking price of $69.99.
Everything is art, From buying toilet paper and throwing it at moving cars yelling taco bell, to mozart paintings, we should not have to have an opinion of another person what art is.
You cared enough to type an article about it.
We don't care, we just don't understand why someone who has no interest in gaming or as even played a game is even commenting on it. I feel nasty enough tonight to make a nasty comment about Mr. Ebert's appearance but I'm not drunk enough.
He never said that. He just promoted an article from another guy who equated MW2 to the Dark Knight