this post was submitted on 22 Apr 2025
98 points (95.4% liked)
PC Gaming
10838 readers
1083 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I mean ... not really, they all but rebuilt it. New assets on a new engine.
Yes, assets and fancy graphics but the gameplay and story are still the same?
Story is relatively cheap to develop. A lion share of the cost of making a game is the coding (which with this being moved to another engine, there almost certainly was a lot of that) and art (which it seems they redid like all of that and there's a good chance a lot of the animations had to be tweaked).
Basically the only thing wouldn't have to pay for was the story writers and some level designers (people still had to touch up the maps even if there was some automated conversion that pulled most of the map into Unreal Engine 5).
https://youtu.be/1jZXzv1-CmA -- like this isn't just a texture upscale and some minor tweaks to the animations, it's a large scale remaster.
As a consumer, the costs of development are irrelevant to me.
And that's why you don't understand why it costs 50$
As I just said in the comment you just replied to, I don't care why it costs $50. I'm not paying $50 for the same game, no matter how pretty it is.