"This was a really tough list to make, and you probably don’t agree with most of it. We started off by picking some 30 developers, and out of those we picked 5 to include in this top-5 list. Take a look."
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.
Brandon writes: "I could find you 10 companies that have pitched a bloodborne sequel, spinoff, or remake, including my own. It's just not going to happen unless fromsoft decides they want to do it."
Everyone was criticizing Sony for not pushing for the BB remake. Turns out they gave it the green light. The original still holds up really well
Man this just fucking sucks, I respect Miyazaki and Shohida's wishes, but Bluepoint would have been the perfect studio to take on a project like a Bloodborne remake. It's still an absolute masterpiece, but the performance and frame pacing could easily be solved on the current hardware now.
Rockstar has launched an official marketplace for "every server and every player" to buy mods: Cfx Marketplace.
I wonder how much of this isn't just taken work of others who have modded for free.
Edit: Also, great way for R* to take popular ideas and build them into GTAVI based on demand.
What I see happening here is, R* is going to ban mods in GTA6 UNLESS you buy them from the marketplace and R* then gets a cut of that sale.
Ah, perfect timing with them taking down the Bully online fan mod. Greedy a$$ company.
Yep, right there with you. I'll happily donate to a mod creator if it looks really cool, or if I enjoy it. But expecting payment up front? Nope, not touching it.
I'm not entirely sure how to read this, as it doesn't seem exactly like an exact parallel to Bethesda's paid mods shenanigans.
Rather than single player stuff, this appears to be aimed solely on Cfx Servers. From what I've gleaned, apparently Rockstar bought the Cfx mod team several years ago, coming a few years after weird contentions led them to ban a few of their members. Ultimately, the question is if they plan to keep this contained to only online/servers.
I have to guess to a degree yes. It'd be pretty hard to "force" paid mods for single player when modding files locally on your own machine, but much easier for servers they'll control. So perhaps this is their soft launch ahead of GTA6 online and they'll clamp down more tightly on non-official servers going forward? Ever since they've become a 1 or 2 property studio, I haven't really cared much for Rockstar stuff, so I'm not entirely up on everything surrounding this. Sounds like it has the potential to be problematic further down the line, but right now fairly easy to ignore...I think lol.
Omitting CD Projekt Red from that list makes it void.
Telltale? Why Telltale? Aside from their first Walking Dead game, most games tend to be rather mediocre.
Naughty dog absolutely. For me Tlou is by far the most amazing game I've played in all my years of gaming and still holds the top spot my heart even today. My other personal favorite is remedy for the max paynes and Alan wakes. hopefully qb is great too.
switch out Telltale for CD Projekt Red for sure. Their engine needs a major overhaul. Their games get to be too choppy which leads to lip-syncing problems and reduced frame rate. CD not only makes great games but their games are DRM free as well. their DLC practices are pretty commendable as well.
This list is a joke for real... How is telltale on that list? I like the games myself and own all of them but they are buggy and run like sht to be honest. Kojima Productions havent even made a game but its one of the best?? I also wouldnt take From Software in a top 5 list, since they make the same game for years now. Theire are so many talented teams out theire, just open your eyes...
My list would be CD Projekt RED, Naughty Dog, Housemarque, From Software, and Hello Games or Media Molecule. Just looking at studios that are either consistent in delivering top tier quality, supportive of their audience, and/or pushing boundaries in what a game can offer as a medium for interactivity.