Would it be easier to produce games like movies?

+
Hey,
I was watching some behind-the-scenes from the production of Harry Potter movies, and what stroke me was how they described the process itself.

Some of the videos for reference:

One of the significant differences compared to making AAA games seems to be that movies are expensive to initially "set up" (locations, props, cast,...), but once that is done, you can shoot anything as many times as you want.
But with video games, that doesn't seem to be the case, as even small things may become quite expensive.

The main difference in cost may lie in the usage of the real world - movies may rely on natural light, sound, environment, actors, physics, props, etc...; while everything in games is 100% artificial and needs to be built from scratch (lighting models, particle systems, 3D sound, physics, meshes, animations,...).

Because of that, it seems that movies make a lot of content they cut and edit down in the process, while games seem to struggle through all of the phases, including even building the content up...(?)
(Although technologies like Quixel or Promethean AI seem to be having a boom.)

So, the question is - is there anything video game productions can learn from movie productions, or from any other productions on that matter?
 
Last edited:
Yeah easy, as I have said for years, Digital voice actors! You find interesting voce actors you want in the game, then pay and licenses their VOICE and then use computers to do all the voice acting. NOW you can do reshoots and futures DLC very easily! AND MAN would that be a HUGE deal for mods.

See here:
 
And that's because, while there are a lot of crossovers with certain parts of the process, making a game and making a film are as different as painting and sculpting. They're both art, but they're a totally different form.

A film is always on a tight budget and a tight time frame. Tools and techniques are mostly established, and even films that innovate will know more or less what they're getting into out the gate. I know I need a production team to set things up, have a fully drafted script that I know might still change here and there, have a clear storyboard for the cinematographers, know how many crew will be needed, what it will cost for the sound stages, equipment, costumes, and how many actors I'll need on what days. People will literally schedule multiple films at once, knowing fairly accurately how it will all pan out. Trouble arises with uncontrollable things: illnesses, accidents, on-location problems (like weather or gov't sanctions or something), actors quitting or discovering a contractual issue...all of which can be extremely problematic to a film production. But most of these things will either be very unlikely or factored into the overall equation at the very beginning. Hence, once a film get green-lit, it's pretty much months to a year, and you're done.

Making a game is much more involved in the modern world. Sure, in the 1980s, someone like Richard Garriot might single-handedly write the code for a bestselling series, copy it onto disks using his personal computer, and sell copies to people in department stores in Zip-Lock bags. Nowadays, you have all the aspects of film production coupled with the general nature of software development. Software developers are definitely a form of artist: they're like authors. Except code takes a lot more writing in order to reach a final product. Writing game code is more like hiring 5 to 10 individual authors who will all work on individual parts of their "novel", but it all needs to come out "sounding" like it's written by one person. Then you have all of the actual writers, artists, designers, actors, advertisers, and corporate folks that are needed for any other business.

The major, major difference, though, is in the time-frame. Not only does code take a hell of a lot longer to write than a script, but there's often a sort of dasiy-chain thing that needs to happen for other people to do their work. So, if Programmer A is responsible for something that Programmer B needs to do, say, level design -- there's no way that Programmer B can even begin until A's part is finished. This is the nature of code. It's a lot different when dealing with a film production, where it's often simply a matter of, "Oh, it's supposed to rain this week when we were supposed to shoot the scenes in the park. Let's go ahead and reschedule that for next week, and this week we'll do the living room and kitchen scenes at sound stage A, instead." Done. Easy. For game development...it's more like asking someone to skip baking the cupcakes for now and just put the icing on them. Or like saying not to bother putting the walls up, since the basement isn't finished -- just work on the roof instead.

Films are human art. Games are, at their core, mathematical formulas. I can't skip parts in an equation, or I get massive errors. Hence, going back to my original analogy, a film is like a painting. If I make a mistake, I can paint over it. Game development is more like sculpting something from clay. Sure, I can fix things as I go, but there are stages that can't be taken back. If I discover a mistake after the clay is fired...I can't soften it up again. I also can't "paint" the piece before it's fired. If what I have at certain stages doesn't work...I need to start all over again.
 
video game developers have been very inspired by Hollywood and the way you have described the scene being set up and then shooting film as many times as you want (although the filming is actually limited by budget) which is the Open World scenario such as GTA V, Watch Dogs Legion, and Cyberpunk 2077 where the scene is set up and your character can go through the whole frontier as many times as you want! think of the game as creating a movie scene! the only reason to re-do the whole scene is that your character got knocked down before mission completion. if take 1 didn't work out then in take 2 your character can change the scene by using different maneuvers and tactics and skills and if take 2 didn't work out then onto take 3 and so on. also it is possible to "film" other scenes other than the "main" scene which are the side missions. GTA V online is an embodidment of this kind of Hollywood matrix
 
Last edited:
I suppose theoretically you might get to the point where 3D scanning is so good that you could make costumes, sets etc and scan them without needing to make extensive corrections / add in information. But I'm not sure that wouldn't work out more expensive (although the advent of vacuform materials in physical production design has made previously unthinkable sets possible on very small budgets -- but it you've already designed those in a computer to get them made, why bother making them at all).

And other than that, programming has to be done, non physical environments would still need to be created (you can't really shoot Legend of Zelda on location and give people what they expect, for instance), so I don't think there's much crossover. Mocap is already used in the biggest games for animation but that's a fraction of what goes into making a game.
 
Last edited:
infact its the other way around... more and more commercials & movie scenes are made nearly 100% digital at least how it works in the ad-industry the last few years to lower costs. especially now where Ai generated content breaks through. f.e. its easier than ever to generate a breathing lively city backplate on buttonpress now a days. there wont be much differrences in a few years if it comes to production on video games or movies/digital assets for those.
 
They already did it. Many movie roleplaying games already exist. But I think when it comes to combat skills or something like that, it would be hard to control real actors. I am not a software engineer, but who knows, maybe this will be the future of the games?
 
Top Bottom