• SuiXi3D@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    They aren’t bad, they just aren’t doing anything out of the ordinary. Ubisoft keeps pumping out effectively the same game for every iteration of Assassins Creed and Far Cry. Activision is the CoD machine and has been for some time. EA is… EA. Microsoft refuses to make a good Halo game because they won’t leave their developers alone long enough to see what they can come up with before mandating that it has to be X, Y, and Z.

    It’s no wonder that smaller, usually indie, developers are seeing such success. Sony’s been doing well because the games they’re publishing are legitimately good experiences, but that’s only going to last so long before they get tired of spending oodles on singleplayer games and not seeing the returns they want.

    Everything’s turned into a live-service game because they’re the only thing that actually generates any kind of consistent return on investment, and everything fancy in those games is out of reach for the common person struggling to get by, so the entire game is held up by a small group spending WAY too much on them.

  • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    111
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Hey, remember when Baldur’s Gate 3 came out, was pretty excellent, mostly everyone loved it, and then all the AAA studios started whining that it was an unrealistic standard to be held to?

    Pepperidge Farm remembers.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Best early access ever.

      Act 1 was released like 18 months before the game actually released, and they legitimately listened to feedback from players.

      Early access is pretty much the only way to do it too. If they had gotten investors there would have been pressure to release early or cram in micro transactions to increase return.

      When the players are the early investors, they just want a good game.

      • Harvey656@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Early access might legitimately be the way to save the failing AAA market. You get a real chance to learn what players actually want, and how to appeal to them, while slotting your game into its proper niche.

        I mean sure, there’s bound to be stinkers, there always is. But Early access would kinda rock for these games. “The game runs like shit, we don’t want to play it.” Then next month you get a dedicated patch for performance and begs get squashed faster and more efficiently. Imagine if they didn’t fuck around with borderlands 4 and released as an ea title. Could have worked.

        • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Early access is more about getting revenue during development and some limited QA potential. There shouldn’t be any surprises in the feedback, that would be a sign of major problems. EA also generally comes with a discount for the player which is anathema to the AAA crowd.

          • Harvey656@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 hours ago

            That’s not all ea has to be, it can be more than that, all we have to do is make it look like more money can be made that way for AAA and we can have our cake and eat it too.

            • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 hours ago

              EA is great for small and medium sized studios to get games out that might be a bit more ambitious than they could manage with traditional models. The point of AAA is that they have the money to do big impressive things. They can already do focus groups and closed betas to get community feedback. The thing that might attract AAA attention is you could make a good amount without actually releasing anything.

              • Harvey656@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 hours ago

                Idk, id love to see it properly done from AAA. That would be a great way to prove you right or wrong.

  • teft@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    So copy what Kingdom Come: Deliverance and Baldur’s Gate did and make good replayable games.

    Also stop listening to the C suite and start listening to the gamers.

    • glups@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      9 hours ago

      I’m curious though, viewing movies as investments has made a some studios filthy rich. Why does that seem to be different for games?

      • TotallyHuman@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        On a movie set, the director has a huge amount of authority. It’s been baked into the culture for about a hundred years that the director is one step below God. A studio treats films as investments, but they also hire a director and (mostly) get out of the way. Sure, producers do meddle, but it’s nowhere close to the same amount as with games – and all the meddling is still pointed at the director, not the crew. I think this limits the damage that can be done.

        Also, the film industry has strong unions. Most of the abuses in game dev simply aren’t allowed. I suspect that the horrible culture of game dev can cause developers to stop caring, which bleeds through to the final product, and that won’t happen to the same extent for movies.

      • teft@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Why do they need to get filthy rich? Why not settle for rich and having a good game?

        • Typhoon@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          9 hours ago

          This is the problem with capitalism now. No one is happy making a good profit. They have to extract maximum profit by cutting everything else.

          • Lfrith@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            5 hours ago

            Capitalism has always been that way. Might be more accurate to say it gets worse when hobby becomes mainstream enough for more money to start flowing into it. Best balance seems to be when something is profitable but niche so corporations consider it not big enough for them to go all in on with their wealth.

            Gaming was better when it was some loser hobby in the eyes of society than accepted like it is now causing it to grow to bring in more revenue than movies and music combined. That drew the attention of the vultures.

        • glups@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 hours ago

          They absolutely don’t. I’m just wondering why it works out financially for Marvel and Mission Impossible movies but not for games

          • Lfrith@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            5 hours ago

            It is less of an effort and time commitment to passively consume tv shows or movies. You can zombie out while watching it before going to sleep or fall asleep to it.

            Games are an active medium in comparison with progression gated behind level of skill, so that makes it less accessible than something like movies or tv shows that is the equivalent of an auto clicker game.

          • MrStankov@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 hours ago

            Movies have a bigger audience, require less time commitment, are heavily marketed, and cost less to see. Easier to convince people to see a so-so movie as long as it has a couple of good scenes. Harder to do with games, and gamers are usually at least somewhat more aware of games before they buy them.

      • rumschlumpel@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Might be because you’re not just spending 2-3 hours with games, but >30h, often hundreds or even thousands of hours. Making that a compelling experience that people don’t quickly get tired of is much harder.

  • BroBot9000@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    65
    ·
    10 hours ago

    How about you stop releasing unfinished live service shit and put out something that is genuinely fun to play and not just another money trap for unsupervised children.

    • nfreak@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      59 minutes ago

      The amount of genuinely good and successful live service games is so minimal that it’s actual insanity seeing AAA execs trying to reinvent the wheel and failing every time.

    • slazer2au@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      10 hours ago

      But how will they make quarterly targets without them?

      It’s like you aren’t even thinking of the shareholders.

      • BroBot9000@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Shareholders like CEOs aren’t real people and their opinions should be tossed down the drain.

  • RonnyZittledong@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    Almost all AAA games are online live service games. I have absolutely no interest in those games. I have been surviving off of indy or lower budget games pretty well while the big guys are off trying to make all the money doing boring shit.

    • nfreak@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      56 minutes ago

      The only ones I play these days are Warframe and occasionally PoE2, both relatively smaller dev teams with large publisher backing but mostly left to their own devices to do whatever the fuck they want. Coming from the predatory FOMO hell that was Destiny 2, getting into similar games but ones that actually respect the players is refreshing.

      I have zero interest in throwaway AAA slop in general, let alone with all the usual live service shit tacked on.

    • Know_not_Scotty_does@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 hours ago

      I’ve been on a spree of buying or buying abandoned games or old console games lately and have been really happy with not being online at all, not updating anything I don’t want updated, and paying a reasonable price for the content I got. I don’t care that the graphics are outdated, if the gameplay works and is fun, its fine looking like almost anything.

      • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        8 hours ago

        And also spent by utterly incompetent management whose prime qualification is fluency in corpospeak and AAA tier ass-kissing…

        … as opposed to, you know, any kind of actual project management skills.

        They’re all self important, self righteous idiots, in leadership roles in AAA.

        … The goddamned AAAA pirate game that Ubisoft took 10 years to rework 3 or 4 times, and then shit out as basically a demo of a mobile style gacha game, that requires a fairly high end PC to run.

        How is that not just like, money laundering / tax evasion / tax fraud, with extra steps?

    • gaylord_fartmaster@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Constraints have always led to increased creativity, and now that there basically aren’t any limits with current tech and ballooning budgets in AAA there’s also basically no creativity.

      • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        There’s plenty of constraints still, they aren’t technical though. It’s about making a game good despite the monetization requirements.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Lol

        Yeah, that’s totally the problems and not vertical integration being used to churn money as a gift…

  • drosophila@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    People have been saying that AAA games suck since at least 2007, with the brown and bloom era, the rise of modern military shooters, and gameplay becoming increasingly trivial with quicktime events and so forth.

    In my opinion they weren’t wrong then and they aren’t wrong now; indie games, then and now, are where innovation comes from. Though from an aesthetic perspective I think if anything AAA games are actually a little bit better now, since at least they’re using more colors than “gunmetal grey” and “piss yellow”.

  • Typhoon@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Bring back games that you’re passionate for and gamers will love instead of designing a gamified soulless money funnel.

    There are thousands of amazing indie games created by people who have an idea and a will to make something. I’ll spend my money there instead.

  • GrindingGears@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Wholeheartedly agree. Games these past few years have been big letdowns for the most part. There’s been a couple exceptions, but for the most part it’s been disappointing.

  • itsgroundhogdayagain@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    9 hours ago

    We won’t have enough RAM for new cutting-edge AAA games anyway. System requirements will plateau for the foreseeable future while they continue to raise game prices and complain that it’s too hard.