[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/v/ - Video Games


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: 20251213_091611.jpg (6 KB, 250x240)
6 KB
6 KB JPG
Let's say you've 80 devs at your disposal. What would you do?

>Team A with 40 devs and team B with 40 devs = two AA games every 4~5 years
>Team A with 40 devs, team B with 20 devs and team C with 20 devs = one AA every 4~5 years and two small games every 3 years
>Team A with 20 people, team B with 20 people, team C with 20 people and team D with 20 people = 4 small games every 3 years
>>
Team A with 80 devs that'll make a slop AAA game and make me rich
>>
>>730821425
The second option is obviously the superior. One "big" game and two small ones. Be it sales or quality, that's probably the best one



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.