42 réponses à ce sujet

[TheChris92]

"This game is good despite a few flaws" and "these games are worthless trash made by simpletons" are not even remotely similar.

Where did all of that come from all of a sudden? Is it supposed to summarize my post or your own? The way I see it; We were agreeing in regards to Indie and AAA development bearing both pros and cons, or at the very least on the former, unless you're seeking to argue for the sake of arguing.

 

The real point I wanted to make is despite everything, Indie development has the advantage of breathing room that allows for more original ideas/IPs to be brought to life. They don't always work out either -- Amnesia was my example in regards to how indie titles can be good while at the same their indie heritage are shining through their apparent limited budget reflected in the game's design. The cons, from my experience, were its repetitive design that made the game feel samey and predictable in the long run while still being a solid enough game.

 

EDIT: Having re-read your post, I think I can start see where you're coming from, how we differ, so I'll just respectfully disagree on those points.

[Cunning Villain]

No.

[Cyonan]

Do you play on the U.S. servers? 

 

Actually, I think it's just "The Americas" instead of U.S. servers, the way Blizzard has their infrastructure set up.

 

Yeah, I'm on the Americas server.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Seeing as AAA games are rapidly approaching $100 in price here, I'd be a fool not to view the entire AAA arena with intense distrust and skepticism. Seeing as production values are the one thing that AAA games consistency have over Indie games, and that I'm not too concerned with production values, then I prefer Indie most of the time. Particularly because the rise of Indie has given way to many new contenders in the RPG genre.

Granted, the overwhelming majority of Indie games released now are pretty bad, the fact that I've played more Darkest Dungeon than pretty much any AAA released this year kind of says it all for me.

[Fast Jimmy]

Seeing as AAA games are rapidly approaching $100 in price here, I'd be a fool not to view the entire AAA arena with intense distrust and skepticism. Seeing as production values are the one thing that AAA games consistency have over Indie games, and that I'm not too concerned with production values, then I prefer Indie most of the time. Particularly because the rise of Indie has given way to many new contenders in the RPG genre.

Granted, the overwhelming majority of Indie games released now are pretty bad, the fact that I've played more Darkest Dungeon than pretty much any AAA released this year kind of says it all for me.

Depending on how you define AAA gaming, I may not even have a AAA game on my Steam library. Maybe the closest that could come to it is South Park: Stick of Truth or Wolf Among Us. Granted, I've only had Steam for about 18 months and prior to that, played many AAA titles on console, but that was one of my primary motivations to move to PC - there were just more games coming oit on PC only that I was interested in.

And, in this day and age, "PC only" is pretty much synonymous with "indie."

Interestingly enough, here is an article reviewing some of the lessons learned from a few of the indie/Kickstarter biggest games so far. Superficial, but a good read.

http://www.pcgamer.c...s-and-failures/

[Reezus Christ]

No.

Hold this Meek lol

[Ridwan]

No. Witcher 3

[Jstatham1227]

I really hate indie games, like with a passion. More or less because of PlayStation plus and their obsession with making them like the only games they give away for free. But even besides that, not a huge fan of them, I consider then to "artsy" for my taste frankly

[SlottsMachine]

Games are games yo, why we gotta put labels on them and ****.

[The Love Runner]

Games are games yo, why we gotta put labels on them and ****.

Games are friends, not food.

[In Exile]

I've always bought very few games. You're probably still more excited about a greater number of titles this year than I am. Ultimately I don't see much value coming out of the non-AAA market. Really all we've gotten that's worthwhile are talented developers making what would have been AAA games 10-15 years ago on AAA budgets from 10-15 years ago.

[Fast Jimmy]

I've always bought very few games. You're probably still more excited about a greater number of titles this year than I am. Ultimately I don't see much value coming out of the non-AAA market. Really all we've gotten that's worthwhile are talented developers making what would have been AAA games 10-15 years ago on AAA budgets from 10-15 years ago.

Are you saying that is a bad thing?

[Akrabra]

Aslong as the game is good i don't really care if its a big budget production or not. Do i prefer AAA titles? Yes i do, mostly atleast. There are also quite a few games out there that has so much replay value for me that they will probably last my entire life. 

[cdizzle2k3]

I'm not so much "tired" of AAA games, but I'm annoyed that it's considered acceptable to release buggy games nowadays. Of course you could not do that in the days of offline consoles, because there was no possible way to fix a gamebreaking bug. It's just a corporate practice of pushing to meet deadlines and timing things to reflect on quarterly earnings reports. As a developer, you're pressured to produce a deliverable by certain(usually, unreasonably short) deadlines for your corporate overlords. If it's considered workable, the mindset is, "Let's go ahead and release it and we'll patch it up post-production". Sad thing is, with Arkham Knight, apparently they were aware of the issues but underestimated the complexity of the fix. 

 

As for release dates, personally, I'm pretty interested in Fallout 4 and the Rise of the Tomb Raider. I'm also looking forward to Battlefront since I'm a huge Star Wars fan. But yeah... Original games seem to be lacking nowadays... Everything seems to be a reboot, sequel, or prequel.

[MayCaesar]

I'd say I am tired of new games in general. I cannot quite put my finger on what I dislike in them, but something feels off. While I liked Witcher 3, somehow it didn't give me the satisfaction KotoR gives with each replay. Starcraft 2 campaigns were awesome, but Warcraft 3 campaigns felt more... "right" to me? Battlefield 3 was incredibly well made, but old good Doom still gives me way more enjoyment. 

 

I think it is something about old games being simpler, having clearer rules. Sure, Neverwinter Nights or Baldur's Gate 2 might seem complicated on paper, but it doesn't take too long to learn all the things you need to know to effectively play the game. The map design is very simple; in fact, you can easily replicate most design elements in the NWN toolset. Everything is built in very simple and easy to figure out ways. Compare it to, say, Dragon Age: Inquisition with its combat with many "degrees of freedom", with each location having so many elements in it, with each rock looking uniquely, with complex dialogue animations... I used to adore the things the technology can do, but I think nowadays too much is put into technology and too little into making do with what little you have to create incredibly fun games people would play for decades. People don't play to this day Doom, Neverwinter Nights, Age of Empires 2 because those games are technologically great by modern standards, they play them because the developers managed to create brilliant games with simple low-tech tools.

 

Honestly, I even find some older games better looking than modern games. Doom 2 might have had a very low graphic fidelity, but it is the simplicity of the graphics that makes it look somehow warm and cozy even today (at least, with high-res mods). While Witcher 3 has brilliant top notch graphics, but, due to the complexity of models, things look somehow alien, unnatural. Made not by common folk but by some special researchers in a secret lab.

 

Bottom line: I must be a conservative that likes the old and dislikes the new, but I find myself going back to old games (mainly made in 1993-2003) more and more often. I bought an insanely high tech machine to play modern games at ultra settings at 4K, and after a few months of initial excitement I play games on this machine my business laptop could easily handle. 

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

Wait 15 years and indie developers may produce games like current AAA games but flawless ones.

 

*notes that 15 years from now you'll be an old fart*

[TheChris92]

I'd say I am tired of new games in general. I cannot quite put my finger on what I dislike in them, but something feels off. While I liked Witcher 3, somehow it didn't give me the satisfaction KotoR gives with each replay. Starcraft 2 campaigns were awesome, but Warcraft 3 campaigns felt more... "right" to me? Battlefield 3 was incredibly well made, but old good Doom still gives me way more enjoyment.

I think it is something about old games being simpler, having clearer rules. Sure, Neverwinter Nights or Baldur's Gate 2 might seem complicated on paper, but it doesn't take too long to learn all the things you need to know to effectively play the game. The map design is very simple; in fact, you can easily replicate most design elements in the NWN toolset. Everything is built in very simple and easy to figure out ways. Compare it to, say, Dragon Age: Inquisition with its combat with many "degrees of freedom", with each location having so many elements in it, with each rock looking uniquely, with complex dialogue animations... I used to adore the things the technology can do, but I think nowadays too much is put into technology and too little into making do with what little you have to create incredibly fun games people would play for decades. People don't play to this day Doom, Neverwinter Nights, Age of Empires 2 because those games are technologically great by modern standards, they play them because the developers managed to create brilliant games with simple low-tech tools.

Honestly, I even find some older games better looking than modern games. Doom 2 might have had a very low graphic fidelity, but it is the simplicity of the graphics that makes it look somehow warm and cozy even today (at least, with high-res mods). While Witcher 3 has brilliant top notch graphics, but, due to the complexity of models, things look somehow alien, unnatural. Made not by common folk but by some special researchers in a secret lab.

Bottom line: I must be a conservative that likes the old and dislikes the new, but I find myself going back to old games (mainly made in 1993-2003) more and more often. I bought an insanely high tech machine to play modern games at ultra settings at 4K, and after a few months of initial excitement I play games on this machine my business laptop could easily handle.

I can relate to this - I find myself more often than not gaming old titles as oppossed to new ones, lately.

[The Devlish Redhead]

I was disappointed with 2013's Tomb Raider....

 

So much hype and buildup....

 

Game was pretty damn ordinary