Don’t listen to the EA defenders and the Ubi-lovers – the death or triple-A is the best thing for everyone!
Lol what a stupid article. Since when we're AAA games dying? If AAA games die, gaming dies.
From my perspective they're not dying sale wise but in the sence they're dying game wise breaking immersion advertising dlc like free phone apps. I have a straightforward mindset, if I don't feel somethings worth it I don't buy it. I never bought any dlc, season pass or micro transaction ever. Now because gamers buy them devs and publishers can't wait to advertise premium editions, dlc, season passes and micro transactions in game, making it seem like I didn't pay enough of my hard earned money to enjoy the game for what it is. Games are sold of now to try sell you more stuff, they cost $60 already ($80 where I'm from) like wtf it's pure greed and gamers still support it, that's why games have become this way.
You should check out Dark souls 2 DLC, very nice. If you play Warhawk their DLC is also very nice.
they are dying in a sense. we see fewer and fewer new ip's that are aaa for example and those that do come are marketed to hell because they need to sell lots of copies. the impact of that is the lesser known titles often get neglected which could be better games. then we have the total disregard to make sure games are ready to go when they launch. broken games, bugs, connectivity issues. how many smooth launches do we have now on high profile aaa games? we have also seen a huge rise in reboots and remasters. why? less risk. the aaa game is going through growing pains because it has to. development costs have come to a point where they have sunk studios, they feel the need to charge for dlc and/or seasons passes, and are at times rushed to market to meet a certain date for optimum exposure. the good thing is we have seen a huge rise in indie games. those usually cost less and many times also come with more innovation and originality. people often say to themselves it's not like it used to be where games were intact. sure it is. go buy the game shovel knight. great game and would have felt right at home on the nes system. you know, when games cost $50 and looked like shovel knight which only cost $15 now. so tell me again how the consumer is getting ripped off with aaa games that now cost $60 but the development investment is a hell a lot more than it used to be?
How are is there less new ips when four came out this year already
The cost of marketing the games is ridiculous. That's where most of the game's budget goes for most if not all AAA games. So I don't agree that game development on it's own has increased by that much but when you add the marketing budget into the equation as well it spirals out of control. The reason AAA games aren't that innovative and publishers play it safe is because of greed and lack of confidence for their products. They go on marketing research and limited opinion polls instead of taking a risk of an innovative idea and developing it into something great. Look at Star Citizen and Pillars of Eternity. No publisher would touch them but they are successes with the gamers and that's what matters.
There are plenty of new IP's. People just don't pay attention to them most of the time. People hype up sequels to no end though. The author needs to consider if AAA dying is a good thing or not, because from what I've seen, there is still a lot of people who would never look at an indie title. Should AAA die, the industry would go through another collapse, and given how much games cost to make, it may be very difficult to recover as investment dries up. That being said, AAA games are not failing, and no one would wish for a game to fail. That's just selfish and hurtful to the industry. They should wish for better games, and better practices by publishers, but hoping games fail is not the way to achieve those goals.
In my opinion indies are reviving the gaming industry. Those developers are bringing creative games to the market which is what it needs at the moment. The problem I have with AAA games is that many times the sticker price doesn't match the quality or quantity of the content offered. An indie game that doesn't turn out to be good for 10$ is a lot easier to deal with than a crappy 60$ AAA game. The industry needs both but since AAA cost a lot more they should be a lot better than cheaper games. Which isn't always the case.
The day indie games replace aaa games is the day i quit gaming. No offense to indie games, but they have a lot of problems too, mainly the fact that the vast majority of them are 2d (usually a sidescroller). The ones that aren't, are usually either very short, have procedurally generated content disguised as gameplay longevity, or are part of either a small niche or are inherently lengthy only due to the type of game it is (like a sim, or a game with procedurally generated content). Indie games are not an acceptable replacement for aaa gaming, not unless you can rely on nes/snes/gameboy nostalgia, or don't mind spending 15 to 20 bucks for a 20 minute audio recording set on a small 3d island or house. Aaa gaming may lack creativity, but as i see it, so does indie gaming. Where's the diversity in the 3d indie gaming space? I don't see very much of it. No man's sky is a step in the right direction, even though it'll probably just end up being a "visit the procedural planet for 10 minutes, leave, do a space battle or two, rinse, repeat". Was journey considered indie? Not sure, i thought it was. Now THAT is a great example of a really good 3d indie game. Until I can play 3d indie games on par with deus ex, red dead, fallout, gta, borderlands, bioshock, there's no way i can ever take indies as seriously as big budget games. I simply cannot rely on nostalgia for my enjoyment of indies like others can.
I'm of the opinion that not all indie games are great. There are good and bad ones just like in the AAA market. Indie devs can have the same crappy policies that some big publishers have, and many indies are published by those big publishers. I'm also of the opinion that creative new games are raked over the coals, and not given the credit they deserve because the gaming press needs hits more than it needs the industry to survive, so every new game which is creative, or breaks the mold, instantly gets compared to another game, and often downvoted because it doesn't happen to be that game. When the gaming press has the power to make sure a company sees a quick demise on the release of their title, you know something is wrong. Indie nowadays is just the mid-tier of yesteryear. Mid-tier often had their gems, and often had it's crap. If real changes are to come, publishers have to get the message and the idea that indie isn't worth it needs to change, and the shining examples need to come about more often, while the AAA needs to have actual repurcussions when the game isn't good. Since that doesn't happen, Indie will stay pretty much where it's at, and AAA will continue to thrive. Neither is going anywhere though.
In the off chance that this article is right, how is it a good thing that thousands of people would lose their jobs? Also, it's pretty stupid to think that if these AAA games are losing money and failing that companies would suddenly start investing their money into more creative games. If anything, we are just going to see more generic military FPS, because that seems to be the only sure bet for these kind of games.
* What an evil perv. Getting off on things dying? really? wow... Really lowering the bar now aren't we.
If by dying you mean selling millions of copies and making the publishers large sums of money, then yes AAA games are dying...
Dying sales wise? No Dying creativity wise ? A big fat YES
And that's exactly it.
I don't know ... P.T. was very innovative and really makes me look forward to Silent Hills ... oh right ... nevermind ...
I find there to be plenty of creativity left in AAA gaming. Not often as pronounced as it once may have been, but I wouldn't say it's dying. What I do see dying is praise for that creativity that shakes things up from people and the gaming press. What I also see is the same tired tripe being praised upon every release of any sequel to a well known series, despite usually just being a reskin of the last. It's not hard to imagine why people think creativity is dead, as they simply aren't informed of where to look for it anymore, and those that are creative just aren't rewarded for their efforts as much as they would be if they turned out the yearly Assassins Creed or COD.
not even clicking on this article...
Well written article with very valid points. I have a feeling the next few years are going to be an upswing for original content.
I was surprised by the content of the article. There were interesting points made. But it is sparse and mainly made up of big ass images. Really poorly presented. The sensationalist headline does them no favours either. And I don't think it is wonderful if the fact "triple A games are failing" were true. To quote G.W. Bush "its hard to put food on your family."
The best thing for everyone...that hates AAA gaming? I have witnessed your indie revolution, and so far? I am not impressed. I'm glad fans of old-school cRPGs got Pillars of Eternity and Divinity: OS, but neither of those games looked like they were for me. TW3 does, though. I'm not terribly interested in Child of Light--but Star Ocean 5 seems like it'll be right up my alley. Look: The best thing about indie gaming is that it means options are available. The idea that AAA gaming HAS to die for that to continue to be the case though? It's toxic and unnecessary.
Have you tried Pillars of Eternity or Divinity:OS? If not how do you know they aren't for you? Divinity:OS is an amazing game especially played coop with a friend. Well greed has to die in AAA gaming but that's not going to happen when businessmen run the show instead of game developers.
Pillars and Divinity are both games aiming for gamers who pine for days long gone. Like I said--I understand that they're quality games and I'm glad they got made. But I was never a PC gamer back then, so the nostalgia that's driving people to play those games doesn't really exist for me.
The scope of indie games is typically much more focused than for a AAA game. While the big...I guess epicy...ones do exist, I can see why some people may judge them as not worth their time based on your comments. There is a huge misconception on what indie games are though. Not that you have this misconception, just that they are worthless time fillers with very little to no redeeming value beyond the first 15 minutes of play. There are plenty of examples which buck this perception, but the people that hate indie games for no reason don't pay attention. Neither indie nor AAA is dying, and I personally would prefer an AAA game over an indie game given the choice. But I do know that there are indie games that are very much worth playing, and have been pleasantly surprised on many occasions. Indie is just this gens mid-tier, and plenty of mid-tier games went on to become huge franchises. All that being said, I really hope hellsblade changes some perceptions, but I know it won't.
Problem with today is, people keep being yearly improvements at full price so they don't need to focus on new ideas.
Articles like this are what needs to die, how about stop trying to dictate what everyone should be playing or what publishes should be focusing on and just give every game equal attention and let the people decide what they want to play instead of trying to force gamers into liking something they're not interested in. Believe it or not some people actually know what they want, it's funny how people think that corporations control us into buying anything they wanna sell, but articles like this that have headlines that basically try to tell people what to like lol I'll buy or not buy any game that interest me or doesn't, whether it be AAA or AA or indie.
Completely disagree that big titles are less viable - Shadow of Mordor is used as an example of a "blip" which was nominated for a slew of game of the years awards, sold millions, and is still regarded as one of the most technically innovative titles on new-gen consoles and PC. What the hell are you on about? AAA games sure aren't as plentiful as they used to be, and that's fine, because it shows that publishers are learning. They're learning that COD Ghosts (used as an example even though sold over 19 million copies) was a trip, and they've got to innovate even the big dogs like COD. As a side note, this is an opinion, not an article, articles contain indisputable facts and frankly this is light on that.
There are more AAA games being released now than there has ever been. They have been growing for quite some time. What has died is the mid-tier titles, so it's either shovel-ware or AAA, with indie left to fill the gap. Truth is, it's hard to make a game nowadays for less than $20 million, and for that low, the game is going to be fairly basic, like visual novels or one mechanic type things. Most indie games have budgets in the hundreds of thousands nowadays(not the mobile type games), and can go upwards of several million in some cases. The mid-tier thing was a generality. They still exist, but tend to be niche type titles.
Not true. Witcher 2 cost $10mil to make but Witcher 3 cost $40mil when you add the consoles to the mix. I'm guessing console development adds a lot more addition costs to budget as well as marketing.
Witcher 3 is kind of an anomaly then. I'm not saying games can't be made cheaper than they are now. There is a lot of wasteful spending in AAA game production, and more time is spent in meetings than actually developing the game. Anyhow, console development does require liscensing, but the biggest cost in development is the media creation. 2nd biggest cost is marketing.
As long as they're falling in price all the time and still fun enough, I'm happy.
Does need more research and support.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.