You can have just about any amount of inefficiency in game making before it's a scam. Some are both highly funded and effective, others only the former. Just look how little Zwift has achieved with a similar amount of funding. I mean sure, it's playable and and does what it's supposed to do, and played by thousands of paying users at any given moment, but the same was true when they had burnt through a tenth of that money.

That's because they're now on something like v4 (v3? v5?) of most of the technology behind the game.

They keep reworking everything over and over and over again.

And at this point why wouldn't they? Their customers have pretty much shown they'll continue to pay for all of that rework in perpetuity.

I have no interest in Star Citizen or any other MMO, and parts of its funding and development are shamelessly dishonest, but GTA V is not a fair comparison for a number of reasons:

- In a broad sense GTA V has fewer gameplay features and smaller constructed playable areas: Star Citizen is a bigger game, it is natural that it is more expensive. Your comment doesn’t really refute the point that SC spends its money on mechanics and infrastructure (though it seems to me that they spend a stupid amount of money on cosmetics).

- Star Citizen has fancier graphics and more detailed assets - RDR2 is a more relevant comparison here and that game was $500m.

- The GTA V figure is for a single-player game and (on release) a fairly middling and empty online mode. It does not include ongoing development costs for GTA Online, which has grown substantially over the years. GTA V + Online would be a more appropriate comparison: the $750m for Star Citizen includes ships added in 2023, but the GTA figure doesn’t include cars in 2023.

I would add that the $2bn estimate for GTA VI is credible based on Take-Two’s financial reports.

> RDR2 is a more relevant comparison here and that game was $500m.

I feel that comparison is flawed, seeing as most of that was for advertising.

If we go purely by development funds, one would have to combine GTA V [0], RDR2 [1] and Cyberpunk 2077's [2] budget.

That would still be $100 million short of the $750 million that RSI has as yet received purely for development. Add to that, you are comparing finished (albeit in the case of CP77 at launch at most feature complete, which is why I also included Phantom Liberty) titles to something that only approaches pre alpha state, considering it only has a limited number of core features implemented. How everything they intend to offer will interact with eachother can't even be tested and I have my personal reservations that once we get to that alpha stage, it will be smooth sailing.

I also feel that while one can argue that GTA V by itself may not have had the same amount of features and scope that have been promised with Star Citizen, I feel one equally can argue that the latter definitely will have less scope than the three named games combined, should there ever be a full release.

> the $750m for Star Citizen includes ships added in 2023, but the GTA figure doesn’t include cars in 2023

Yeah, but RSI intends to sell ships and expand the game beyond the initial full release, so I don't see how that changes things.

Fully admitting that I personally inherently dislike this approach to development. I feel that not having a somewhat fixed budget, no matter whether from the community, an investor, or (in the case of Bloodstained: Ritual of the Night) a mix of both, creates the inherent incentive to sell your most faithful supporters on an ever expanding vision, to the detriment of them, your development team, and your long-term reputation. I feel history has shown with cases such as Minecraft that a one-time sale during early development is far better at both keeping development focused and raining in overambition, as you are more interested in selling to new rather than existing customers, thus being incentivized to improve the experience for everyone by creating a finished, polished product.

I know that the community was asked each time about expansions and additional features, but emotional investment and the sunk cost fallacy always made that an unfair argument, in my opinion. Despite my misgivings, I also would not consider it a scam, at least not more so than any other (gacha or micro/macro transaction-laden) game that benefits from selling digital goods to players that dehumanizingly are called "whales". I do, however, consider this a reincarnation of DNF, the engine changes and consistent attempt to hit rapidly moving targets feels stricking, though mercifully, at least that didn't have seemingly infinite funding.

[0] estimated at $130 million to $150 million

[1] estimated at $170 million to $240 million

[2] estimated at $120 million to $140 million with an additional 275 million PLN (about $65 million) for Phantom Liberty and bug fixes