Halo 3, MGS4 & Bad Company:- Does every game need to be a grade-A blockbuster title?

From XboxOZ360:

"With the exception of a few months such as October and November the "Grade-A" titles are always outnumbered by an alarming amount. The question here is whether developers should be aiming for perfection or content with less than that.

There is not all that much incentive for developers to aim for perfection when they can just crank out trash and make money. One only needs to look at the sales figures for any movie based game to see my point.

However, all the titles that I would dub either mediocre or crap are always absolutely adored by at least a few people."

[NewSchoolGamer]

was made because of Too Human no? lol

Okay then I think we should just play and enjoy the games that we like. AAA games are just supposed to be more fun. If you have money to spare buy Lair, Haze, Too Human, and other games that are not AAA plus the AAA games. If you just want to spend money on good games than just buy AAA games.

[gaminoz]

Actually Too Human may be a good example of a game that some just LOVE and some really HATE. Haze was boring and just crap (okay I'm sure some people liked it...).

Games, like film, or literature will have different people attracted to different types. I enjoyed Pirates of the Caribbean for fun, though it was by no means a great game. I loved MGS4 but hated some of the long-winded preachy run-on cut scenes and the stupid "oh this a blue ray disc you don't have to swap discs" so-called humour rubbish. No you may not have to swap discs you just have huge loads all the time during the game! Still, despite the over-indulgent cut-scenes the game was great.

Halo 3 was criticised for not living up to expectation, but how could it when expectations were so high? So even AAA games are not perfect and will have people who dislike them (look at Gears and Killzone too).

Some games have good ideas but fail (Alone in the Dark and Turning Point) and some have bad ideas and fail but still may appeal to some (Beowulf).

I don't think all games need to be AAA, but they do need to be clean unbroken games. Two Worlds and Alone in the Dark and Turning Point needed polish and fixing badly.

[marionz]

if devs actually want to sell there product then yes it needs to be as close to AAA as possible, i mean did silicon knights not realise that there game wasnt fun before releasing it?
do sega not care enough to actually play test there sonic games before releasing them to see if they actually play well?

people dont want to see rubbish movies so why would they want to buy anything but the best when it comes to games, seriously devs need to learn that people pay much more attention to what they buy now days and only the best games sell well, hype will only get you so far, if a review is bad or average what do you think gamers are going to do...buy your product or rent for the weekend?

[badz149]

"does every game need to be a grade-A blockbuster title?"

HELL YEAH! people always want the best out of everything and in order to generate sales, ideally the game itself should be a grade-A game! is the writer actually support devs who make craps and sell them and then expecting huge sales? if yes, than he's crap himself! what the hell is wrong with this guy? Is he telling that he's not expecting for the best for his every purchase? games are expensive these days and article like this which insist in telling people to buy and try everything is just ridiculous! if devs make great games, people will but it and happy with the purchase(not talking about all but majority) but if devs produced crap and people bought it, I feel sorry for them if they don't enjoy it and feel the purchase unjustified! so, again, shoul all games be an A-grader? YES and at leasts make them great because dev are asking for people's money here, and should of make sure they made their customers' puchases justified!

[BattleAxe]

BattleField is hardly a AAA title. DICE basically released half of a game. Not to mention the technical issues. Because of this I don't think I'm going to bother with Mirrors Edge which is also made by DICE.

[hay]

Medicore titles can be loved by gamers. But I would like to be sure that I'm spending my money on quality product and it's better for devs. AAA games sell better.

[XboxOZ360]

Personally I'm amazed that so many gamers do not consider the games that fall into the "average" mark. As many are great "games" per-se', it's just that the recent two generations of gamers, especially the latest one, seem hell bent on only accepting Grade=A titles and seeing anything under 8 - 8.5/10 as anything worthwhile.

Any game that gets a 7 or even 8 these days is lumped with critisizm and often contempt. Yet when you look at it as a 'game' - it usually is basically doing what it should do. Entertain and add some enjoyment.

I've picked up many a game that has had so-called bad reviews/press, to find an engaging, and enjoyable game. Sure it might not have been "perfect" or had the pixel perfect graphics or sound, but it has given me hours of fun that I would not have had if I simply saw the 7 - 8.5/10 mark and turned it down just based on that figure

[Tobias123]

Amen man. People listen to review scores far too often. I too have picked up many games that were, shall we say, not well appreciated by the gaming critics, and found some of the best fun there is. Games like Croc(I liked it, be quiet:P), Killzone, Lair, and Two Worlds were all games that I enjoyed immensely, and I am sure I'll find many more that I enjoy that others may not.

However, with games being $60 a pop, I can understand why reviews would make people hesitant to buy a game if they're less than stellar. Most people don't want to blow that money on a game they don't enjoy, which is one of the reasons we see people so reliant on reviews. Another reason is fanboy wars, but most gamers prefer to ignore those.

[Julia Bond]

i enjoyed miami vice for psp i thought it was an enjoyable game and actually captured the look and feel of a michael mann film good stuff

xoxo

<3

[10YearFlop]

still playing FFF games

[Bombibomb]

Lol.

[dro]

no one likes crap and know one will enjoy playing a crap game so obviously every game coming out now should be at least above average and NOT average;and if possible have that AAA feeling.This is supposed to be NEXT GEN gaming!! (-_-)

[XboxOZ360]

It depends on what you call Crap.

Does every game NEED photorealistic visuals - no. Does every game need to have the best physics available to man - no. Does every game need to have completely destructible environments to be entertaining - no.

Of course they don't. There are games that simply provide enjoyment and fun without the need for such things. We are forgetting where games came from.

ANd it's no longer "next-Gen" it's "This-Gen" . .Next-Gen is for the x720 and the PS4 and other iterations of the majors hardware.

There was a time that 5 was considered the average, where it was a possibly "think" about it, but might not. with 7-8 being a bloody great game and well worth grabbing. Now if a game does not have a score higher than say 8 - 8.5/10, it's considered rubbish and not up to scratch.

[Vicophine]

I agree with you, Gameplay and story over rule all else IMO.

[NewSchoolGamer]

I for one have little money to spend on video games so when I buy a game it has to be an AAA game.

All of my PS3 titles consist of AAA games or games that are at that 8.5 mark like Madden 08.

[XboxOZ360]

SO if a game lost a point on some aspects of its visuals, but had excellent gameplay but still onlyhad a 7/10, then you'd turn it down . .. each needs to be looked at as n individual thing. Not based on a universal scoring system.As even the scoring system is basically flawed, as its completely subjective and open to exploitation and even dare I say corruption.

[badz149]

he already said that he only have little money to spend for games and that's why he prefers only AAA titles but you insist on telling him to also look at games with rating 6,7 or 8?? I understand his feeling because I'm totally on the same boat and that was quite a good choice from his side over there in spending his money but you are just pushing it too much! I bet he'll be more than happy to play even the worst games ever with rating 1, 2 or 3 if you provide it for him for free if you really want him to do as you said that much!

[NewSchoolGamer]

LOL, the open zone is fun some times. I have to admit I've tried to do a second account once but somehow it was deleted.

So how can 10yearflop's account still be active I mean isn't it obvious it is a second account?

I'm just wondering man no offense

[ape007]

don't mention mgs4 and halo 3 in the same sentence

mgs 4 is like the best game ever

halo 3 the most overhyped game ever

[XboxOZ360]

They are both excellent games, we loved MGS4 and we're an Xbox site. Both had flaws and both excelled in many areas. It's like two prize fighters having dinner out or socializing. Just because they are "opponents in the ring, does not make them enemies of the sport.

[ape007]

you are saying that they are all amazing

you mean they are on same level

gameplay wise,story wise,graphically,high production values,they are both more refreshing than their past games

my god

ARE YOU SERIOS

I MEAN COME ON

AM OUT

AM DREAMING

[Tobias123]

Just chill out man. Both games were overhyped in their own ways(don't think I'm saying either is bad, as MGS4 is on my top games of all time, second only to GT5:P and Killzone). MGS4 was a long winded game(this isn't a problem for many people like myself though) and the multiplayer servers disconnect all the time, and Konami has a horrible habit of nickel-and-diming for everything(paying for a second character slot?!?! Or new quick messages?!?!). Meanwhile, Halo 3 had a HORRIBLE single player campaign and the guns(this is all my opinion) lacked feel, and the visuals weren't great(nice and colorful though, refreshing change from the grey that our gen is so obsessed with). However, that being said, the multiplayer side of Halo 3 was fan-friggin-tastic, especially with the Forge mode. Does that make one better than the other? No. If you're a multiplayer fanatic and just want a game to play with your buddies, go for Halo 3 definitely. If you're more of a solitary gamer, or appreciate a genius story and enjoy third person action shooters, get MGS4. Judge each game on its own merits, and don't be a hater.:)

Apologies for my long winded post, I'll be quiet now.

EDIT: @Firstkn1ghT: ZOMG:O MGS4 IZ T3H FL0PZORZ!! 93 = EPIC PHALEZ!

[Firstkn1ghT]

MGS4 averaged 93% .....while Halo 3 averaged 94%!!! :)

[ape007]

if you truly believe that these so called true and unbaised reviews were the true right thing(and I say if truly believes that in your deep bottom of your heart)

you should quit gaming

cause,my dear no need for reviews(I can diss you with gs review 10 mgs 4,9.5 h3 but am not gonna walk that weak path of yours)

mgs 4 is one of the finest games ever made

thank god am not like you,just beleiving these crap reviews and sales that came from hype

go ahead,love figures,have photos with them

BUT IN YOUR DEEP HEART YOU KNOW EVERYTHING

[InMyOpinion]

I love how it's still not ok to say that you didn't consider MGS4 to be the best game ever made. It's ok to say that Halo 3 was the most overrated piece of crap ever made, but once you mention MGS4 and cut-scenes in the same sentence you are bound to get 17 disagrees in less than 3 mins.

[u got owned]

I just finished MGS4 and is a great game. The only complain that i have is to many long cut-scenes. But this game is setting the bar on story telling. Great game, but i just happen to like more H3, i play it every night with my friends, i guess I'm more of a multiplayer gamer.

game on...

[360rxorz]

Hahahaha... MGS4 a AAA title? Hahahah, was that even a game? I think it had more cutscenes than gameplay hahahahahahahahahah how sad!

[ape007]

hahahahha how sad?

I mean how sad you are

you need to check your mind after saying that

do you play games?

damn it comment like these make think,where the hell did you left your brain

fanboyism here on a fck9n whole new level

[Bathyj]

You think? That would be a first. But you dont actually know, because you've never actually played it right?

And dont feel sad for us. I feel sad for those that missed out on it cos their hardware wouldn't run it.

[XboxOZ360]

We played and loved it (MGS4) and gave it a solid review, a good review, not a biased one either . . . it was a great game, sure it had its down side, but so does Gears Of War, Halo 3, COD4 and many other games.

Just because you follow one platform or the other, NEVER rule out the possibility that a good game can come from any platform, and by not accepting that, you cut yourself off from other great gaming possibilities. We're an Xbox site, we loved MGS4, so go burn us at the stake.

[Bathyj]

"Just because you follow one platform or the other, NEVER rule out the possibility that a good game can come from any platform"

I never do Dude. I own all the consoles.
I'm glad you enjoyed MGS4 cos it is game that only comes buy once a generation or so, if that.

I admit I love PS3 alot more than my XB, and about 1000 times more than my Wii, but I'll still be getting Fable 2, and Gears 2. Wii is pretty dead for me. Mad world looks interesting but to be honest I dont really want to waste any more money on that console. Nintendo aren't about gamers anymore.

[PoSTedUP]

if the game is not "nex gen" in any way, then dont waste your money and just rent it.

turok, turning point, haze(was ok), sonic etc. are not really nex gen games compared to resistance and halo gears and warhawk.

all the games i have are worthy of me playing, most games are great. just play games and stop worrying about AAA which i still dont know what it means lol if AAA means "great game" then motorstorm and gears is a AAA title ya know. just play the games you like.

Heavenly Sword
Motorstorm
Metal Gear Solid4
warhawk
resistance
MLB 08 THE SHOW
Uncharted

^ these are all my games btw and these are all AAA "GREAT games" and they are all worth buying. just play the games you like.

-up next.. Ratchet and Clank Future: tools of destruction!

SOCOM beta SEPT. 1st!

[NewSchoolGamer]

don't mention sonic and turok in the same sentence. Sonic was much better, LOL.

[PoSTedUP]

lol yea but the SONIC for DREAMCAST was MUCH better than BOTH of them ya know lol. XD and thats exactly what i mean buy a "nex gen" game.

turok N64 was 25times better than the ps3/360 turok despite the graphics .

sonic for dreamcast was 10times better than the one for ps3/360.

there hasnt been a bond game any where near as good as GOLDENEYE ya know.

halo3 wasnt as good as halo 1 or 2 (says ALOT of halo fans)

but right now there are ALOT of great games so... GAME ON!. peace

[XboxOZ360]

There are those games that simply should have gone back to the drawing boards. Yet they got high scores, and thus high sales. There are those games that were excellently executed, yet for one reason or another, git low scores and got panned and poor sales. YET, when gamers have gone back to those particular games later on, once the PR Hype has died, they have found engaging, entertaining and enjoyable games.

Game Hype has a lot to answer for these days - unfortunately.

[DA_SHREDDER]

The real question is, should we pay full price for a game if it isnt AAA? Why should a mediocre, lame, ugly piece of a crap that everyone calls a game cost as much as a game of AAA status? I think the reason why everyone is so anal about how good games are is cause we always pay the AAA price regardless of content and greatness.

There should be a law for games that aren't of the highest caliber be considered AA games and cost no more then $45 to $50 dollars with tax. Ill be damned if I pay $65 dollars for a game that doesn't have the best graphics, good story, and good gameplay. Any one who does is part of a bigger problem that I dont wanna get into.

[dro]

to me yes every game needs high end graphics and should have a very polished gameplay and should be above average.that is what the hype for this new HD consoles were all about, graphics never before seen in a last gen game and gameplay that is close to perfect with the smallest glitches.every time u enter a new era of gaming u expect to see what last gen console could not do and at least 85% of games coming out should be above average because this consoles are letting u do what the ps2/x box could not do so devs have no reason to make a bad game or make an ok game and just call it average.will u rather have a game like mgs4 with ok graphics and average game play or a mgs4 were u can actualy see the level of details in snakes hair, or the detail on the octocamo suit when it changes colour,games like mgs4,gears2,uncharted...e.t.c shows what next gen is all about and im pretty sure pple will chose games like that over haze,too human,lair,turning point fall of man..e.t.c

[vlazed]

I think we would have to define, as gamers, what a AAA title is. Most titles that get the most attention now are the ones with the most marketing budgets. I remember a time when a games were sold by word of mouth, but alas times have changed and gaming is now mainstream. The industry has come to a crossroads and must either adapt or perish. Most games that the general consensus would consider AAA are, to be perfectly honest, quite boring. I have played all these games before, albeit with lesser graphics, on previous systems. MGS4, in my opinion, is the pinnacle of what I believe to be gaming. Now we need to expend what a game is and maybe even change the word "game", in this context, to something else. Sorry for rambling on, but I feel there is much debate to be had on all these issues and I would like gamers to be more constructive in their arguments.

[gaminoz]

Though I loved MGS4, there was too much 'watch' and not enough 'play'. When I did get to play it was fantastic.

[vlazed]

I agree with you to a certain extent. On my first game play run I saw the cut scenes as a reward for my progression through the game, but on my second run they did seem quite longer than they did the first time. Kojima, in interviews, has stated that as a game designer certain concessions are made in order get the emotionally effect desired out of the player. I would have to agree because I have never been as emotionally moved, by a game, as I was playing MGS4.

[dro]

pls just shut up,u have not played mgs4 before bcuz ur a fan boi and its obvious u might never play the best game made in this gen so far,i dont even find it funny any more when fan bois bring up the hole cutscence crap i just find it dumb,stupid and childish. any TRUR GAMER that played mgs4 on this site "e.g me" will tell u that yes some cutscence were too long and some were boring but the graphics/gameplay makes up for that,and i mean it really "made up for that" that has to be the best game so far this gen,the only down side is how long the cutscecne are but apart from that the game is perfect (yes i said it perfect) to me.

but fan bois like u will never know

:'( :'( :'(

very sad indeed... i feel sorry for u!!!!

i hope ur brain will mature soon enough so u can see what every other person that played the game saw..which is the best graphics to date on any console.

[gaminoz]

Exactly: the cut scenes were overdone and not all of them were great, and there were too many 'loading' screens but the gameplay was fantastic and very flexible....a top 'AAA' quality game. And I play mostly 360 games...

[Isaac]

"AAA" is the most moronic buzzword I have ever heard, and there is no place where I see it uttered more other than here, especially by theMart and his gang. "AAA = 9.0+ in metacritic", seriously, metacritic's apparent level of relevance is ridiculous, and suddenly 9.0 being a cut-off or a complete dismissal of titles that get 8.9 is ridiculous. Hell, an average does not really tell you anything, since 9.0 can mean that all reviewers gave it a 9, or that half gave it a 10 and another half gave it an 8. Anyway, when fanboys dismiss a game because "OH IT HAZ 8.9 IN MATACRITIK = PHAIL" or "NO IT IS NOT AAA LOL" just show how high the gene pool contamination ratio has risen.

A review that tells you what games the newly released game has beaten and that explains thoroughly with images and video is worth a lot more than a stupid score. If all reviews were given that way, then we would ensure that no publisher pays for special care of a game, and we would get rid off fanboy gangs that only want to nit-pick and cherry-pick and do a little bit of quote-mining here and there just to make a particular product look bad.

BTW, to me "AAA" means high production values, not "appeal amongst 'professional' reviewers", but as I said before, I hate buzzwords so I only like saying "games with the highest production values", not "AAA GAMES LOL".

Edit:

Xbox360OZ, you said it well, so basically in few words, AAA means high production values. NOT "high metacritic score". Grade-A is just a subjective label, it could be "there goes a ten" the way some people label babes, or it could also be "a great game". However, a game with an 8.0 average score that had lots of 10s and lots of 6s means it is a killer app for some and that it is so-so to others. So basically, average scores fail. Hell, if IGN's resistance reviewer, a very respected source, actually saw theMart making decisions based on Metacritic they would laugh their ass off, since, according to IGN's opinion, Resistance is a great game (9.1), so to them it is a worthy game of the next-gen. It's not like IGN has to be forced to agree with "the metascore", since that is called professional integrity, something theMart lacks considering he runs his own site full of lies and deceit.

[gaminoz]

Agree with you totally.

[XboxOZ360]

There are 3 basic Levels of gaming production, A, AA and AAA. The latter being those games that have huge budgets and marketing behind them and thus qualify as AAA titles.

The AAA rating has little to do with the "quality" of the game per-se', although many get the two confused, which is understandable.

If you do a search for the meaning of AAA titles of games, you'll find a much deeper and more concise definition. As an example. As terrible as it was DRIV3R was a AAA title, so is Halo, MGS4, FF series etc . .While the other 3 are also great games as they stand, the former, DRIV3R was a huge load of rubbish and Atari ended up giving the games away in-stores for $AU1 in the end, simply to move product.

But the game had a AAA rating, as they (Atari) spent over $US10 mil on marketing and promotions for that game, NOT including dev costs.

That is what defines a AAA title from a A title.

A Grade-A title is one that is of high value as a "game" . .

[Bathyj]

Sorry but I think Xbots started all this every game has to be AAA crap.

In their bid to convince us all PS3 had no games, everything was, Resistance isn't AAA, is crap, Motorstorm isn't AAA, its crap, Uncharted isnt AAA bla bla bla. Meanwhile, bots buy any piece of crap anyway. How the hell does Marvel Alliance sell nearly 2.5M while NFS series has over 4M?

I could give a rats arse what metacritic says. We all know the gaming media has had a biased against PS3 they are only just waking up from. Every good game on PS3 has had plenty of 10's 9's, then of course a game that scores solid 9's in 20 or so sites will somehow score 6's or 5's in some dross blog to bring that metascore down. Big deal. I dont consult Metacritic to buy games. I wipe my arse with their scores.

Besides, one of my favourite franchises Tenchu has probably never score better than 7's or 8's. The camera is always crap, the combat weak, the graphics mediocre at best but theres something about killing dogs with shuriken, and distracting samurai with poison rice that I've always loved and I'll keep playing the franchise no matter what scores it gets, as long as I continue to have FUN when I'm doing it. F U N, those are the 3 letters we should be worried about.

[PoSTedUP]

and motorstorm is a GREAT example of why there was alot of hate for the ps3 and why there should be know such thing as a AAA or AA games ya know. if motorstom ISNT AAA then i dont know what is.... there is NO game anywhere near it in its genre, and its not AAA??? **** AAA, for real, it doesnt matter to me and if you are a real gamer it shouldnt matter to you either. motorstorm changed my gaming experance into something beyond great the game is SUPERB . its the greatest in it category! there is no game better than it in it genre and that proven! but no... its not AAA according to reviews cause the media was on hate mode.

MLB 08 the show is the greatest baseball game made to date (fact for a true baseball fan) its quality, game play, content due to blu-ray, graphics are far superior than any baseball game ever made but let me ask you a question... why isnt it labeled as AAA???? and yet another example of the biased media and the hate it had/has towards the ps3.

srry 4 the profanity lol but funk AAA for real. just play games. *goes back to playing resistance*

[Droid]

of course we started it. how can u blame us when we got so many of them in a row over the passed couple of years while you were getting hyped flop after hyped flop? LAWL

[Bathyj]

And what are all these so called AAA games you had you first year? I was there, I didn't see them.

GRAW was good. Not mind blowing but good. Then what? It was a big dry spell till Gears came out buddy. And that was so overratted it could have been a Halo spin off. Standard 3rdPS with pretty graphics with a cover system that was better on Rainbow 6. And the graphics should be good, Epic spent about 3 or 4 years on that engine before they finally coughed a game out on it. It made nice screen shots but it still wasn't as smooth a frate rate or have half the amount of action on screen as Resistance, a launch title made on a new engine. A launch title that had 20 on 20 online battles that run smoothly. Something Xbox still cant manage and judging from Gears 2 is even scared to try.

Then what? Another long dry spell, near a year for Halo 3, while decent like Gears, I'd give them both high 8's, Halo 3 with go down as the most overratted game ever made. Halo 3 owes its success to its name, not its quality. Xbots would buy Superman 64 if you put Master Chef in it and called it Super Halo 64.

Now I'm sorry if anyone thinks I've attacked your beloved frachise. I actually haven't. I think the games are overatted but I've given them good scores myself.

Just dont try to tell me PS3 has no good games and XB is overflowing with AAA titles because both statements are crap. PS3's 1st party titles cant be touched by other systems. Each one is either the best or near the top of its genre, and theres plenty variaty too.

XB has a handful of great games, and like all consoles, lots of crap too, which still seems to sell, so I suppose no wonder devs liked it at first. Its quick and easy, like 2 minute noodles, but if you want a quality meal it take more effort and preparation than that.

[Droid]

hmmmmmm.

360 launched with AAA titles Condemned 1 and PGR3.

then, yeah GRAW was awesome, Oblivion came right after that, of course Vegas 1 was amazing. stuff like that. but yeah, then ps3 got the ports later, so i cant really count those as exclusives, but they were technically exclusive since that's what we were playing all those years.

then crackdown came, gears. halo. mass effect. bioshock. 360 has had it damn good.

ps3 was sh1t for a while, but it's getting a lot better, which is why im getting one soon.

[PoSTedUP]

hmmm.. resistance was a ps3 launch title. no 360 game till this date has as much action/enemy's on screen wile holding their AI as resistance does and this is in fact due to the cell processor.

motorstorm was a ps3 launch title. there is no game like it till this day and it remains the most intence badass of road dirt racing game ever and it was a launch title.

NBA 07 was another launch title, 60fps 1080p(rez dont really matter) but yea it was a launch title and an awesome basketball game compared to the others that was out and imo its better than live and 2k7 and thats what alot of people think.

ridgeracer7 was a ps3 launch title and was a really good one at that if your a fan of arcade racers with amazing graphics.

its all about exclusives even though both systems had great launch titles, ps3's launch titles were more impressive. motorstorm.... resistance..... are amazing games till this day. no1 is really talking about condemned, their not even talking about condemened2 and that game just came out not to long ago. pgr3 was great for a launch title but so was ridgeracer7. "crackdown came, gears. halo. mass effect. bioshock" <---those are all shooters XD XD *busts out laughing* j/k but yea 360 has some cool games.....

- just play games.

[NewSchoolGamer]

Actually has a point. When the PS3 started geting titles like Uncharted, HS, and Warhawk that were not AAA games just AA xbox fanboys started that whole dilemma.

[gaminoz]

But you see I'd say Uncharted WAS a AAA title, and as I said I play mostly 360 games. I loved it to bits. Yeah it also had some problems but it was a lot of fun and my kind of game. It was better than the new Indiana Jones movie IMO.

[Aclay]

Well, if every game was AAA quality, we certainly wouldn't be seeing as many games being released monthly because a developer would spend a longer time developing them.

But, I do think that more games should be AAA quality, especially when games these days are $60 bucks a pop and when Limited Editions go for $80+ bucks.

Also you've got to take into account that that the majority of AAA games are big budget games, and not every developing studio has the funds to pour tons of money into one game.... Some studios probably have to release a game whether it's the best it can be or not because they might not be able to afford to spend anymore money on it and they just have to make some money off of the game.

The Video Game Industry to me is pretty much like the movie industry because you've got the Big Budget Summer Block buster movies like The Dark Knight and Iron Man, but then you've got the low budget films that aren't really that great sometimes, and it works the same way with Video Games because there's big budget Blockbuster video games like Metal Gear Solid 4 and Grand Theft Auto 4, and then there's lackluster video games like Turning Point Fall of Liberty and HAZE.

I think that the majority of video games should be AAA quality, but I don't think it would really be possible because not every developing studio has the talent to make a AAA game and not every developer has the funds to pour millions and millions of dollars into one project to make a game as good as it can be and to ensure that it lives up to AAA quality.

[Firstkn1ghT]

AAA is a game that is highly rated by mostly everybody like Halo 3, MGS4, and Gears but that doesn't mean a game that averages a 7 can't be a AAA title for someone. Different strokes for different folks. I personally loved playing Lost Planet and that averaged 7's and 8's. For somebody that says a game HAS to be a 90% and up is just plain silly.

[Isaac]

Oh well, I guess people change to the convenience of times.

[Hunter86]

I dont think the writer is saying that games have to be 90% and up I think he is saying that devs should aim for their game to recieve that sort of reviews, rather than allowing it to be average.

[Tobias123]

I have to disagree with this article to some extent. The reason for doing so is the basis on review scores mostly. For a game to get 10/10 nowadays, and "deserve" it, it has to have obscenely good graphics, excellent gameplay, longevity(usually in the form of multiplayer, which itself must be tweaked and tuned to be as good as possible), a good plot, and overall good value. I disagree with that view really. Above I listed GT5:P, Killzone, and MGS4 as my favorite games of all time, and they are, they keep me coming back for more, no matter what, and I never get bored of them. But to me, the best game will always be Super Mario World. I'll have a lot of people disagreeing with me, but oh well. What was wrong with Super Mario World? It had good graphics for its time, and it still looks quite charming. It had brilliant level design, nice music, and most importantly, it was fun. Unbelievably, incredibly fun. I can't play it as consistently as I can the three titles I listed above, but every few months I'll come back to Super Mario World, and be hooked. I'll burn through that games 4-5 times(including doing all the special missions too) before I get bored again, but I always know that in a few months I'll come back to it again. Would I pay $60 for that game? Absolutely. Would it be a "grade-A blockbuster title"? Not likely, but I would love it. I would gladly pay full price for a game that was simply THAT fun. It doesn't have to be amazingly pretty, or have lengthy multiplayer. It just has to do that one thing well, and that's enough for me. But that's my 2 cents.

[Immortal Kaim]

You make a good point mate, though I think the changing times have actually ensured that the 'fun' aspect isn't now the most prominent crux of games. It seems now that great graphic/sound ect have overtaken the very reason why I personally play games. There are certain games (usually in the earlier generations of consoles) that weren't considered the pinnacle of gaming graphics but were just damn fun.

Gamers seem so superficial nowadays, if it doesn't have eye exploding graphics then it's usually dismissed without a proper look in.

Bubbles for your intelligent statement :)

[arngrim229]

why does everyone expect everygame that comes out to be game of the year? its annoying

[juuken]

According to the 360 fanboys, yes.

Heaven forbid it's an 80/85 average and it's called garbage. And yet they can't take the sh*t that's dished out when they don't receive flattering scores for some of their games.

[Cajun Chicken]

They don't have to be crapilly developed or have a lack of unique art design and over used game mechanics BUT generally have to bring something different to the table that works with a sense of strong narrative and characters.

I miss that era of games that everyone just made games that were pure fun, take Haven, Eve of Extinction, Serious Sam Next Encounter, Earth Defence Force 2017, Alter Echo, Giants Citizen Kabuto, Metal Arms, Messiah, Wild 9 and many, many more.

No-ones allowed to take a risk these days, the technology and the risk of the cost of developing and publishing a game is huge if not received well meaning quite simply, originality is dying and those who try get tarnished in the process by the press and then the public.

We don't currently have those wacky developers like Shiny, Planet Moon, Croteam, Running With Scissors risking making a dent in the mundane world of gaming; fact is. We need those. NOW, anytime soon.

A large percentage of the games now are only good, because nobodies bothering to do anything better and I personally; no offense, blame the 'hardcore' gamer who just likes killing endless lines of people for no apparent reason except make him/her feel better and godlike and refuses to try anything different or condemns it before the games that try to be different are even out.

[Droid]

judging by most ps3rd games, I'd say no.

[Cajun Chicken]

Seriously, the games on the 360 that are brilliant and not exactly 'AAA' are being missed out on;

I see the majority of 360 players passing out on classics like Earth Defence Force 2017 and Crackdown and stopping them from getting developed due to everyone focusing on Gears and Halo mainly overrated, overhyped, pointlessly brutally gory or 'pawning' online gaming which MS have the cheek to charge you for even though you BOUGHT THAT CONTENT ON THE DISK, so why pay extra?

Now I use my 360 occasionally, but seriously, attempting to aim for every game to be 'AAA' on a console is NOT realistic. Its like making every single film in cinema 'AAA' just so it appeals and wows people for the time being until the next thing like the situation we have in the cinema as of now.

If that's the case, its making games nearly undistinguished from each other and just the same old, same old and limiting creativity in the industry hence all these damn sequels every damn next gen console is getting.

I'm sorry. I've got fed up of most games running on the Unreal Engine 3 on 360, because the best looking games and just majority of games on 360 are made with that as the base engine and just involve SHOOTING.
I'll be honest; ITS BORING.

I think Sony does not make games based on the lowest denominator of what else people are currently playing and actually take a freaking risk like the early years of the 360.

But, I'm also wondering; Is there actually any point replying sensibly to you like this?
Because I know, you're just probably going to ignore everything I said as you do everyone else or have me on ignore already. At least GiantEnemyCrab sees some points of my views occasionally.

[Droid]

um, im getting a ps3 soon. i have owned almost all consoles since NES.

but anyway, I only have so much free time anymore. so for me, I can only devote time to the AAA titles. anything less is not worth my time. if they cant make a great game, then why play it.

[Cajun Chicken]

That's a terrible way of looking at things. Give some damn developers a chance.
Many developers start up making sub-par games and improve over time, like a fine wine, if everyone thought like that in the past, many top developers will be dead by now.

Ignoring reviews and 'AAA' status' can pay off for you in the long run, you might just discover something that YOU like, or an hidden gem among gold.

I've ignored many reviews wherever 'AAA' or not and jumped in because it sounds like something I like and found out I did.

But really; the PS3 does have some brilliant games with great experiences that you won't find anywhere else because of the talented in-house developers but are only currently small in number, but who cares; those games are great and I hope you find something you like.

I'm glad you replied though, thanks for not just ignoring me.

[Droid]

sure thing.

but yeah, I don't mean "AAA" status by reviewers. I mean AAA status by ME. Like Condemned 2, which is a perfect 10 in my book, but is rated like an 8, which is a god damn OUTRAGE.

Im looking forward to trying unfarted, ratchet and turd, also constipation 2, MGS4 (huge MGS fan, also DEFINITELY God of War 3. love that series), maybe blurzone 2 if there is a game under that tech demo, and also heavy rain since i personally loved indigo prophecy.

but lets not forget halo, gears, bioshock, mass effect, crackdown, PGR, etc. 360 pwnz. both have good games, but I think 360 has bigger hitters overall.

[hazardman]

All i'm gonna say if your gonna be charging gamers $60 a game..Then yes developers need to try and make very good games..something worth the money..either that or ship your game with some sticky ickky..that way if your games garbage i can smoke and laugh at the demise of your company.. lorda mercy =]

[XboxOZ360]

I have to say though, many gamers these days are BETTER off than gamers say even 5 -10 yrs ago. Our prices now are almost the same, and actually cheaper than they were in most regards to say 5-10 yrs ago. Consoles cost upwards of $US600 and some as expensive as $US1000, The PS2 on launch here in Australia back in its hey-day was almost $AU800, when our dollar was exceptionally poor and money bought you very little, it still does.

The increase in game prices has only risen $us% and in Australia $AU10 across the board as they moved into this-gen. Yet we get games that are often 10 times better than their predecessors. Yet we still complain.

[cereal_killa]

I have to give you props... Your a 360 based site and yet you would say that an Exclusive PS3 game (MSG4) is a solid game i wish all gamers were like you. People should stop being so pro this and pro that the 360 has some really good games that in most peoples opinions are AAA titles (Gears and Halo) personally IMO Gears is the only reason i have a 360 though "I" thought Halo was weak but different people have different opinions and thats there choice but to say that the PS3 sucks is just being blind the PS3 had a weak start but is now proving to be a great gaming console and are producing some solid games. And as i said anyone who says different is Blind

[XboxOZ360]

Thanks mate.

Hey, I'm a gamer first and foremost, so are our writers and staff, but we prefer the Xbox as a platform for a variety of reasons, NOT because it's MS or that we hate Sony. Simply because some of us chose it, that is all.

Hey, I don't like Halo as such, not to the extent many do. I find it boring, repetitive, and actually very little interest to me. I don't mind the SP mode, but find the MP side of it absurd and full of twits basically.

I think many in here are getting confused with the difference between AAA games and A-Grade games. An AAA game is based not on quality, but on budgetary expenses and marketing punch.

Heck, we only have to look at many major selling games and over hyped games to see that, but they were/are AAA titles. It has also little to do with the scores they may get, be they high or low. Look at DRIV3R, it had a huge budget on both the dev side and the marketing side, and it fell into the same AAA title listing as did Halo, which also had a similar Marketing budget (both had around $US10- $US15 million on marketing alone - NOT incl development costs)

A major AAA title game is any game that has a significant "development budget" in excess of $US10-$US15mill plus, and has a significant Marketing Budget and promotional budget, irrespective of the titles name, ip or style of game, let alone whether it's good - or not.

A-Grade games on the other hand are games that are up there in the upper levels of scores.

And btw, here's our review on MGS4 for those that might be interested.

http://xboxoz360gamer.com/2...

Plus we covered the games release night in Sydney and had a ball.

http://xboxoz360gamer.com/2...

Oh, and bubbes to you cerial-killa

[GUNS N SWORDS]

"Halo 3, MGS4 & Bad Company:- Does every game need to be a grade-A blockbuster title?"

i have over 20 games, i picked them because i liked them, all of them, even with what ever flaws they had.

heh, i just bought "Bad Company" just the day before yesterday, ha, i can't believe i didn't get this game a long time ago.

[XboxOZ360]

That's like BLACK, it got panned, yet had a decent score from some sites because they saw the game for what it was, not what it wasn't. Many have come back to play it again, and found it's graphics on par with many This-Gen games, it's destructible environments on par with 2 and 3rd wave This-Gen titles . .yet it was only a AA title game and classified as a B-Grade game.

[GUNS N SWORDS]

interesting, never played it, but if it was like bad company than i say it's a pretty good game.

( good to see you here commenting(XboxOZ360), you prove a lot of good points :)

[Godem]

You know, often I take the punt and buy an average game, and then I end up selling it a few weeks later, I think all games should aim high, or the momentum for advancing games is less strong.

[Simmo44]

I often do the same. Even with games that dont score too well. I like to give them ago myself without taking into account Gamerankings or metacritics scores.

[Mutley416]

For my Money the game has to be good-
AAA, Whatever, For the Time , Research and money I`m going to devote.

I`m not interested in 7.5 (except Battlefield). And usually the reviews are right, Sure Halo was a little high, and MGS4 lost it`s appeal in 25 hours- for 63.$and some change we as consumers have to be careful-

I guess it`s replay ability- addiction factor... Don`t think the devs are`nt working on that-

[ROCCOZILLA]

i was on BATTLEFIELD last night from 11:00pm till 3:45am and was in and out of the lobbys and EVERY game was 12 on 12.this game is becoming the biggest FPS EVER,its nuts in there.the maps are the biggest ive played on and the action is complete madness.its a AAA game for sure. P L A Y B 3 Y O N D !!!

[rbbrdman]

I'm a busy guy I only have time to play the AAA titles at launch. If I don't feel that it is AAA it's rented.

[Figboy]

"it's OKAY to not be AAA" sensitivity when Heavenly Sword, Warhawk, Folklore, and quite a few other Playstation 3 exclusive titles that were excellent games, but not genre-defining, revolutionary experiences by any stretch of the imagination, were released last year?

so, the 360 finally gets an over-hyped, thoroughly disappointing title and suddenly everyone wants to brush it under the rug, and say, "it's okay, not ALL games have to be AAA,"?

WTF?? i've been saying that not all games need to be "AAA" for the past, i don't know, FOREVER, and often times got trashed by haters.

for me, personally, as long as i'm having a good time with the game, i don't care if it's "genre-defining," "ground-breaking," or "revolutionary."

R&CFuture: TOD doesn't pave new ground in the Ratchet series, but it's DAMN FUN.

Heavenly Sword can't compete with the DMCs, God of Wars, and Ninja Gaidens of the industry, but it's a LOT of fun to play (and the amazing graphics, animations, facial animation, and really good story, don't hurt either).

it frustrates me that it took a hugely hyped 360 title getting a less than stellar reception (for valid reasons, mind you. none of this "too much variety," or "too short" BS), for the 360 fans, and the media at large, to begin to question the nature of game quality, and even the review system period.

i gave Too Human a chance. i really tried to enjoy it, but i genuinely couldn't. i don't like fighting with a game to get enjoyment out of it. i can handle repetitive gameplay, as all games are repetitive in their own right. i can handle less than stellar visuals, as long as they aren't piss poor (ie, PS1 quality visuals for a "next gen" game). i can even handle a mediocre story and frustrating camera if the gameplay is FUN enough.

it's unfortunate then, that Too Human is mediocre in ALL of those areas;

the controls are not fun. the right analog stick combat could work in a game if the battle system itself wasn't broken. i don't like it when i'm trying to attack an immediate threat, but the game's auto-targeting ALWAYS targets a foe not even in my range of vision, forcing a disorienting camera re-arrangement, and plenty of cheap shots from that immediate threat i was trying to handle, you know, IMMEDIATELY.

the story has some really cool elements and ideas, but from what i've seen, they just don't gel together like in some other games. i could handle the broken gameplay, if the story was compelling enough to g
et me to want to continue it. unfortunately, Baldur and his crew just aren't very interesting.

the camera is notoriously bad, but if the combat was actually enjoyable, i could overlook this. i've played plenty of games where the camera would shift at inopportune moments, or get caught up on a wall; it's nothing new to me, but if the game isn't fun to begin with, why bother?

long development cycle or not, Too Human could have been much better, and fails at game design standards that a seasoned studio like Silicon Knights should KNOW BETTER than to fall into.

of course, being a fan of the studio, i'll eagerly await their next game, and even a sequel to Too Human (granted they improve the narrative in the sequel).

it may seem like i'm being too harsh on the game, and maybe i am, as i've been anticipating this title since i heard the words "Silicon Knights," and "working on new game," and i've been eagerly following Too Human since it's reveal, and even after i got to see it face to face at E3 a few years back, when it was practically unplayable on the show floor for the same issues why it's been received so poorly NOW, so i think it's within my rights to be disappointed with the finished product i've waited so long to get my hands on, just as much as it's within the rights of those that enjoy Too Human to enjoy it there's really no right or wrong about it. but it MUST be acknowledged that Too Human is a mediocre, slightly above average game in the same vein as Lair and Haze.

going forward, i hope more gamers understand that not all games have to be AAA, as long as they are fun, enjoyable experiences. a score of 7 or 8 isn't the end of the world, nor does it mean a gaming experience can't be enjoyable. i've enjoyed many a game that was "trashed" in reviews. and that's all that should matter to us, as gamers; if WE enjoy the game, who CARES what other people think of it? we shouldn't need anyone else to validate our fun.

so if you're having fun with Too Human, good for you. i had fun with Lair and Haze, even though those games are mediocre in the highest degree in terms of gameplay (Lair has FANTASTIC production values, however. it truly is amazing in the audio/visual department. sadly, the gameplay is weak, with a few sparks of fun scattered about).

[enjoi187]

i believe halo 2 new and used....still sells better than mgs4

[Blink_44]

I dont consider BF:BC a grade A blockbuster title, but thats just me.

[IAm1Bearcat]

Ninja Gaiden 2. IGN had their review up and NG2 got an 8.7, a f*cking 8.7! thats a pretty damn good score, and all everyone could scream about was how it was lower than the first. no one bothered to say it might be as good, but the bar has been raised, people just instantly assumed it "sucked" because it wasn't as good a score as the original (obviously not "original" original).
some people even stated they wouldn't buy the game anymore!
8.7!? i know, 60 bucks is alot to spend on a game, but 8.7 is good, if not great. some people just expect too much and when they don't get it they cut down any redeeming qualities the game may have.