The Sad Future of the Gaming Industry
- Thread starter Gardner McKay
- Start date
- Aug 24, 2011
- 27,851
- 12,522
I think fundamentally it's an investor issue. Higher ups twisted this creative medium into being a ROI machine and has sucked the passion out of it. "Make a cool game you love and hopefully it's a success" was a thing that apparently died 10-15 years ago. Once they realized they can charge people for cosmetics, card packs, weapons, etc...AND people will actually pay for that sort of thing it was game over. Dev studios also need to hire and pay for people to implement and run a micro-transaction system too.
Gamers (mostly you PC snobs) are probably too obsessed with graphics and especially framerates as well which probably adds a year or two in extra development time and bloats team size as well a drives up costs tremendously. Maybe the industry needs to downshift in scope and fidelity to pump games out a little faster. Hypothetically it could lead to more manageable cost/profit ratios.
I'll keep saying it in this sub forum but the massive success of Elden Ring and Baldur's Gate 3. Their style doesn't appeal to everyone but regardless it's clear there's huge interest in playing high-quality passion projects that aren't infused with MT's.
Gamers (mostly you PC snobs) are probably too obsessed with graphics and especially framerates as well which probably adds a year or two in extra development time and bloats team size as well a drives up costs tremendously. Maybe the industry needs to downshift in scope and fidelity to pump games out a little faster. Hypothetically it could lead to more manageable cost/profit ratios.
I'll keep saying it in this sub forum but the massive success of Elden Ring and Baldur's Gate 3. Their style doesn't appeal to everyone but regardless it's clear there's huge interest in playing high-quality passion projects that aren't infused with MT's.
Mikeaveli
Registered User
To me, right now the gold standard in AAA are the Resident Evil games. They are high quality, look good, run well for the most part, have tons of replay value, and come out regularly.
In the time it took Baldur's Gate 3 to be developed, Capcom released RE7, RE2, RE3, RE Village, and RE4 lol.
In the time it took Baldur's Gate 3 to be developed, Capcom released RE7, RE2, RE3, RE Village, and RE4 lol.
The Crypto Guy
Registered User
- Jun 26, 2017
- 27,221
- 35,038
RE games are certainly not the AAA games lol.
They have a VERY limited fan base.
They are on the same level as the AC games IMO, and those are not AAA games.
Shareefruck
Registered User
I feel like most people would consider RE7 AAA, if not all of them.
Tbh I'm thinking about loading up on Square Enix shares. Their stock price is at almost an all time low and it seems obvious to me that the loss are due to cancelling a hundred projects and writing them off for tax purposes. I feel like its free money but maybe I'm missing something.
Mikeaveli
Registered User
All AAA means is that the game has a substantial budget and is backed by a large publisher. I think most would consider Resident Evil and especially Assassin's Creed to be AAA.
Shareefruck
Registered User
Yeah, I don't think it means world-wide phenomenon with universal appeal that has become a household name.
Even something like Street Fighter 6 is a AAA game, and it/its entire genre is known for being incredibly niche, relatively speaking.
Even something like Street Fighter 6 is a AAA game, and it/its entire genre is known for being incredibly niche, relatively speaking.
Maybe they should stop giving exclusivities to Sony. It’s hurting their pockets. They could easily sell thousands of more copies if they released it for everyone.
flyersnorth
Registered User
- Oct 7, 2019
- 4,471
- 6,904
This is how I see things as well.
There will always be an audience for games like BG3 and Elden Ring. The audience may be smaller than it once was with the growth of F2P, mobile, and bite-sized games, but it’s still there.
On the topic of $80-$100 games, I don’t really understand the resistance. People will routinely blow at least that much on a nice supper out or a night at the bar with friends. That’s an experience that lasts a few hours. If I get 50+ hours of enjoyment out of a game, I see that as pretty tremendous value.
Hierso
Time to Rock
- Oct 2, 2018
- 1,324
- 1,202
The budgets for AAA-games have gone grazy so they need to nickle & dime their customers into oblivion. Just look at that Suicide Squad game, dead as shit but they need to churn out content in a vain hope that it will bring back players so they will spend more money on garbage like cosmetics or season passes.
Looking at games like Stardew Valley (i couldn't get into it, but my wife loves it) and other indie titles it goes to show that creativity triumphs over just throwing money at a project and then pray that it works.
Looking at games like Stardew Valley (i couldn't get into it, but my wife loves it) and other indie titles it goes to show that creativity triumphs over just throwing money at a project and then pray that it works.
The major thing is, outside FF XIV, Square's major attempts at large live service games have been a disaster (See Avengers). Everyone talks about the massive success of the ones that land, but then forget to look at a lot of colossal failures that become dead games fairly quickly (Anthem anyone).
I think the issue with Live-Service or F2P focused games for studios, is you really have to frequently pull people away from communities they are involved with and sell their peer group on it too. I play 99% single player games, so I constantly move on. They get my cash, and I enjoy the product. The brief time I played GTA Online heavily (in like 2014), no other live service game was likely to pull me away. That likely applies to the whales in COD, Fortnite, WoW, FF XIV, Destiny, Fifa, Madden, NBA 2K, GTA Online etc. A great single player game I might invest 40 hours or more into, people put astronomical hours into one single live-service. So, while I never put that much money into one game, I likely will spend a decent amount on release date of games I want to play (now how MS's can justify it with lack of gamepass growth is going to get interesting and potentially troubling).
Look at WB Interactive. the one game that crushed sales was working on the Harry Potter universe for an open world game single player. Whereas their last two releases that targetted live service were absolute disasters (Gotham Knights and Suicide Squad) with a valuable IP attatched.
I think the issue with Live-Service or F2P focused games for studios, is you really have to frequently pull people away from communities they are involved with and sell their peer group on it too. I play 99% single player games, so I constantly move on. They get my cash, and I enjoy the product. The brief time I played GTA Online heavily (in like 2014), no other live service game was likely to pull me away. That likely applies to the whales in COD, Fortnite, WoW, FF XIV, Destiny, Fifa, Madden, NBA 2K, GTA Online etc. A great single player game I might invest 40 hours or more into, people put astronomical hours into one single live-service. So, while I never put that much money into one game, I likely will spend a decent amount on release date of games I want to play (now how MS's can justify it with lack of gamepass growth is going to get interesting and potentially troubling).
Look at WB Interactive. the one game that crushed sales was working on the Harry Potter universe for an open world game single player. Whereas their last two releases that targetted live service were absolute disasters (Gotham Knights and Suicide Squad) with a valuable IP attatched.
They don't even need to be backed by a large publisher for example CDPR is self published and so is Remedy, and Cyber Punk absolutely is AAA, I'd say Control and Alan Wake 2 also are. Just have a substantial budget which in most cases requires a large publisher to finance. RE and Assasins Creed/Far Cry etc absolutely are AAA even if I'm not a huge fan of any of those franchises.
- Aug 24, 2011
- 27,851
- 12,522
There’s HUT packs in the NHL 24 Ultimate team store that are for like $60 and $70! They’re shit packs too. It feels like they’re very very out of touch and shameless with their money grubbing tendencies. Let it all die for all I care. I’ve got my classics to play for a long long time.
Gardner McKay
RIP, Jimmy.
Gardner McKay
RIP, Jimmy.
If you watched the video, it would explain why exclusives make sense, especially from a risk perspective.
The Crypto Guy
Registered User
- Jun 26, 2017
- 27,221
- 35,038
I would hope so since FF games are PS5 exclusives while RE games are all on all consoles lol.
Mikeaveli
Registered User
The current executives at Square Enix don't seem to think they make sense anymore
Gardner McKay
RIP, Jimmy.
Sure. Exclusives making sense as a strategy option but no longer making sense for Sony... both can exist.
Gardner McKay
RIP, Jimmy.
It has been sad for a long time with only a few companies owning most of the industry and seeing more pay to win games coming out...not only F2P games with a pay component but games that you pay 70-100$ and there still is a season or battle pass in the game that you pay for...
They don’t make sense. I don’t really care what someone in the video says. Square Enix has already said they might be switching stances.
PK Cronin
Bailey Fan Club Prez
- Feb 11, 2013
- 34,333
- 23,751
flyersnorth
Registered User
- Oct 7, 2019
- 4,471
- 6,904
AAA games are defined as
In the video game industry, AAA (Triple-A) is an informal classification used to classify video games produced or distributed by a mid-sized or major publisher, which typically have higher development and marketing budgets than other tiers of games.[1] In the mid-2010s, the term "AAA+" was used to describe AAA type games that generated additional revenue over time, in a similar fashion to massively multiplayer online games, by using games-as-a-service methods such as season passes and expansion packs. The similar construction "III" (Triple-I) has also been used to describe high-production-value games in the indie game industry.
The article also mentions EA and UBISOFT specifically as generally producing AAA games.
It isn't linked to the fanbase. It's linked to budget, resources, and development.
Yeah, the real question here is how long it takes to unwind. It's long been rumored Sony locked up the entire FF VII trilogy shortly after the Bethesda deal. So unless Square wants to pay a ton to buy themselves out of that, it's not like they can quickly get themselves out of it.
