Do games need to be "AAA"?

[Legend]

I wouldn't consider Uncharted 2 paint by the numbers. It was a huge upgrade over the first.

Paint by the numbers is stuff like sports games where it feels like it was made on autopilot.

[kitler53]

I wouldn't consider Uncharted 2 paint by the numbers. It was a huge upgrade over the first.

Paint by the numbers is stuff like sports games where it feels like it was made on autopilot.

you're not wrong about U1 to U2,.. but U2 to U3 wasn't much of a change.    there are other examples they may be better examples,.. it's just the franchise we were talking about.

[Legend]

you're not wrong about U1 to U2,.. but U2 to U3 wasn't much of a change.    there are other examples they may be better examples,.. it's just the franchise we were talking about.

Well I want more of whatever U2 and U3 were, regardless of how we describe them.

[the-pi-guy]

This will be a whole lot of random stuff. Hopefully it makes a little bit of sense, as I'm going to bed now.

I think it's difficult to do good analysis on the industry. Someone tweeted it would be nice if there were more 10-20 hour linear games, and the NPD guy said something like there are, people just aren't buying them. And it kind of bugged me.

I think analysis is difficult, for a lot of different reasons.

A lot of games are somewhat unique. There aren't that many big games like Dark Souls or Uncharted or Skyrim. Even if someone tried to make two of the exact same game, you would probably find that they did different things better. So if you're trying to compare trends, I think it's difficult to do because you're not really comparing the same games.

Like someone brought up Uncharted TLL as an example that people didn't want smaller budget games. But I would argue that Uncharted TLL isn't just like Uncharted 4 or Uncharted 3 or 2 or 1. It's its own thing and it has its own flaws and high points. I think there's a very good chance that Uncharted TLL could have been better received if it was just handled differently. Maybe even with the same budget, it could have been received better with different design choices. The crux of my point here though is that we don't really know how that would have turned out, because ND doesn't/didn't make that alternative game. Naughty Dog isn't going to try to make Uncharted 2, but in 2025/whatever year, any time soon.

Marketing and trends are another big challenge. No one in their right mind would have said Among Us would be a huge game. And yet the right circumstances made it huge. Same with other games like Minecraft and Helldivers 2.

There was a similar exchange, where someone said if people wanted AA games, they should buy Banishers, but they're not. It was literally the first time I recall hearing the game.

A major challenge I think is that what people buy isn't necessarily their own preference. If the entire industry went exclusively live service, a lot of people that hate live service titles would likely start playing/buying into live service games.
That's kind of how I feel about a lot of AAA stuff. A lot of the developers that I grew up loving are now making bigger and more expensive games, and a lot of them are making more open world games. So of course I'm buying more open world games that are bigger and more expensive.

To me it feels like a lot of the industry has issues with self fulfilling prophecies. Like the entire industry is collectively going "well we need to make bigger games, we need more open world, we need more live service games, the market loves those." Then you have your favorite developers making those kinds of games, so of course you buy them.

I would argue it is a big reason why the Xbox One flopped. The expectations of what the market really wanted were wrong, and Sony was there to give it to them. "People are becoming less interested in gaming on consoles, so Sony is not going to try with their handheld, they're going to push PS4 with mobile support, and we're going to make the Xbox One have a lot of TV integration."

[kitler53]

Like someone brought up Uncharted TLL as an example that people didn't want smaller budget games. But I would argue that Uncharted TLL isn't just like Uncharted 4 or Uncharted 3 or 2 or 1. It's its own thing and it has its own flaws and high points. I think there's a very good chance that Uncharted TLL could have been better received if it was just handled differently. Maybe even with the same budget, it could have been received better with different design choices. The crux of my point here though is that we don't really know how that would have turned out, because ND doesn't/didn't make that alternative game. Naughty Dog isn't going to try to make Uncharted 2, but in 2025/whatever year, any time soon.

TLL was weird.   i "pre-ordered" it by opting for the deluxe version of U4 that was promised a "DLC Expansion".    When TLL shipped the narrative was very much that it wasn't a game but just dlc.    even having access it to it day-1 and loving the franchise i "slept" on it for at least a year myself not expecting too much from the experience.   when i did finally play it i was blown away at how huuuuge it was for "just some dlc".   

Given that context and the very clear counter argument of spiderman MM,.. i think there is a good market for these follow-up releases to existing games.   it does need to be marketed clearly though.   and it does need to be "stand-alone" not an expansion.   

To me it feels like a lot of the industry has issues with self fulfilling prophecies. Like the entire industry is collectively going "well we need to make bigger games, we need more open world, we need more live service games, the market loves those." Then you have your favorite developers making those kinds of games, so of course you buy them.

imo, that is not just a video game problem.   i see it in my own company as well.   soo much talk from leadership about "the need to collect metrics to make informed decision" but then i look at the metrics they are collecting and they are biased as fudge.   ...or rely on things that will be easily manipulated by the employees.   

for instance, every quarter leadership sends out a survey to employees.  the intent is to figure out what is going well and what is not going well and to learn from that.   the catch is if for any question anyone votes anything less than 8 (out of 10) there is a mandatory meeting between yourself and your boss to discuss your feelings.   the result is the survey shows employees loves our company with every metric being rated 8 or above!.... 


so yeah. video game publishers spend too much time chasing trends.   ...and with how long games take to make by the time you release the trend is almost guaranteed to have faded.   leadership in general needs to learn to stop letting metrics lead the company.   it's fine to try and collect data but you also need to have some critical thinking about it.


okay another example.   so as a reminder i make productivity software for heavy industry like power plants.    last month leadership showed me a chart where since the "% household devices" for PCs dropped and tablets rose.    their conclusion was the new generation expects their software to be available to them on any device and all our software needs to be cross platform.   i was like,.. ffs the chart went from 100% PC when tablets didn't exist to 50/50.   well no shame sherlock,.. i have 1 of each.   the reason i have 1 of each is some things are great on PC and some things are better on a tablet.    I'm not going to use a tablet for productivity software.   the question i really wanted to ask was "so power point is available on tablets.  did you make this presentation on a tablet?   follow-up question: why not?"    oh yeah that right,.. because creating a power point on a tablet is a horrible experience...

[Legend]

Good points Pi and kit.

I wonder how much game journalists tip the scale. Lost Legacy and Miles Morales got slightly worse reviews than the main games and how much of that was from reviewers simply docking them for having less content?

[kitler53]

Good points Pi and kit.

I wonder how much game journalists tip the scale. Lost Legacy and Miles Morales got slightly worse reviews than the main games and how much of that was from reviewers simply docking them for having less content?

i will go on record with this:

digital foundry has made the video game industry worse. 


yes, games shouldn't have flagrant performance issues but DF goes into ridiculous levels of scrutiny.   the criticisms are too often not at all important but then create huge amounts of blow-back on developers.   "oh noes, this game drops to 59 fps once in a while.   developers need to stop releasing broken games..."   "oh noes,.. hi-fi rush has ever so slightly better shadows on ps5 than on PC/Series X?!?  MS has a huuuge QA problem and should have caught this".   

[Legend]

i will go on record with this:

digital foundry has made the video game industry worse.  

yes, games shouldn't have flagrant performance issues but DF goes into ridiculous levels of scrutiny.   the criticisms are too often not at all important but then create huge amounts of blow-back on developers.   "oh noes, this game drops to 59 fps once in a while.   developers need to stop releasing broken games..."   "oh noes,.. hi-fi rush has ever so slightly better shadows on ps5 than on PC/Series X?!?  MS has a huuuge QA problem and should have caught this".  

Yeah they're a great resource but they should have remained niche. The average gamer shouldn't care about these things.

I think esports is also part of the problem with people blaming their poor skills on game performance.