I think people maybe want to generalize?
There are good games and there are bad games.
Indie games are relevant, in as much as they offer either innovation or something which is otherwise not offered any longer. Else, they're just low-budget games.
AAA games is more and more a dead end, since the decision makers only understand a very small part of the potential market for games.
I would like indie game more frankly if they weren't like the only free monthly games for playstaion plus apparently.
I was referring more to the overall costs of AAA game development and how it keeps going up. They can't raise the price of games past $60, or at least that's what their data leads them to believe. This is why we see micro-transactions in $60 AAA titles these days; they simply aren't making enough money off of the current model to make a profit.
I've heard people say that micro-transactions are only in games because people keep using them. To an extent I agree, but I also think these developers and publishers are simply doing whatever they can to try to turn the usual $60 customer into a $100 customer or $200 customer. Pre-orders and pre-order bonuses exist as another way to try to guarantee sales and to judge a game's demand before release. We know that content is either being cut or being developed exclusively for pre-orders. Then you have the season passes which range from $20-$50.
The thing is, none of this appears to be working because it doesn't solve the problem of rising costs. So, I think we're going to get to a point where we only have a handful of games in the AAA space that are successful enough to continue to exist. By the time we get to that point, there will be no creativity or innovation in the AAA space. We're already seeing how publishers want to duplicate their last great success, and that usually means not doing anything that may alienate fans.
You should try some Japanese games. It's all about teenage boys that look like girls saving the universe...for variety.
Solid Snake and Big Boss would like to have a word with you.
But he looks like a girl and he's doing it to "save the world" right? Otherwise some kind of tentacle monster would deflower them anyway?
Actually I just finished a Japanese game with the main character is a couple and a woman accompanied by a robot I am controlling saving the entire multiverse from a soul-collecting false god while looking for a way to a new planet, trying not to kill the male of the couple by simply controlling him too long, and ending a war between species being orchestrated by someone stolen from this dimension.
To the sound of music being sung in 5 different languages, 3 of which are made for the game series and fully functional.
With AAA games being so bloated, expensive, buggy, incomplete, and full of fluff lately
As opposed to the indie games being so cheap, buggy, incomplete, and devoid of any merit?
I was referring more to the overall costs of AAA game development and how it keeps going up. They can't raise the price of games past $60, or at least that's what their data leads them to believe. This is why we see micro-transactions in $60 AAA titles these days; they simply aren't making enough money off of the current model to make a profit.
Is that really the case though? Or is it just another case of a corporation wanting to make more and more money without actually coming up with something of merit. Just raise prices, charge more for less, god forbid they try to be more efficient financially. Not saying this is what is happening here but with most companies if they don't have that earnings growth every year it is seen as a failure.
Rule number one for every consumer of the industry based on luxury goods, rather than on basic necessities
If you don't like the product, don't want to invest money on it, don't want the product at all: don't buy it.
It's an underrated but fundamental form of freedom.
Is that really the case though? Or is it just another case of a corporation wanting to make more and more money without actually coming up with something of merit. Just raise prices, charge more for less, god forbid they try to be more efficient financially. Not saying this is what is happening here but with most companies if they don't have that earnings growth every year it is seen as a failure.
Is that really the case though? Or is it just another case of a corporation wanting to make more and more money without actually coming up with something of merit. Just raise prices, charge more for less, god forbid they try to be more efficient financially. Not saying this is what is happening here but with most companies if they don't have that earnings growth every year it is seen as a failure.
That IS actually the case. Anyone with a cursory knowledge of the prices and budgets of games should know this. the prices of purchasing a game have remained more or less stagnant while the price to make a game has gone up astronomically. It's not uncommon to see AAA games with budgets with upwards of $300 million. Assuming video games take a similar approach to movies (where it needs to earn back around 3 times its budget to be profitable), a AAA game would need to sell an immense number of copies.
Guest_Puddi III_*
But he looks like a girl and he's doing it to "save the world" right? Otherwise some kind of tentacle monster would deflower them anyway?
That IS actually the case. Anyone with a cursory knowledge of the prices and budgets of games should know this.
Yes, because sales have not skyrocketed over that same time frame. Anyways, I was only offering a counter argument, as no one on the outside has any concrete knowledge regarding financial records and such.
As opposed to the indie games being so cheap, buggy, incomplete, and devoid of any merit?
Of course. I know that the grass isn't always greener on the other side. But I think the indie games that are good focus more on the fun factor, where as AAA focuses on how much stuff they can cram into their games in an attempt to add value. Not everyone is bothered by this approach, but I see it as unnecessary fluff that bogs down the experience.
What If I don't want either Gigantic budget games nor cheapass ones?
What If I don't want either Gigantic budget games nor cheapass ones?
If you primarily play games on a console, the middle is dead. But PC still has some games that belong in the middle and are priced accordingly.
What If I don't want either Gigantic budget games nor cheapass ones?
Uhhh Divinity Original Sin / Pillars of Etenity?
There are AAA games that aren't open world addled buggy mess, (and all of them called Starcraft 2) but originality is long gone...
What If I don't want either Gigantic budget games nor cheapass ones?
Don't buy blindly.
Yes, because sales have not skyrocketed over that same time frame. Anyways, I was only offering a counter argument, as no one on the outside has any concrete knowledge regarding financial records and such.
They actually haven't when compared to the sheer amount of money that goes into making a game. Not for anything that isn't a mega ubernational brand name like Call of Duty or World of Warcraft. The growing budget of game development coupled with the relatively level prices has led to diminishing returns as far as profits go. Games cost more, and each sale is worth less than it did in years past because of it. Instead of having to sell only 5 million copies to turn a profit, now it's having to sell 15 million. Instead of having to sell 15 million, now it's having to sell 25 million.
He is a girl and she only saves the world if she chooses Okosan to become God of Pudding and engulf the world in pudding.
Retour en haut
