Is content killing AAA games?

BeoTeK

BeoTeK

New member
Came across this video I thought to very interesting. I quite enjoy the journalism of Danny o'Dwyer and raises very valid and controversial topic here. He raises a very valid point in terms of the extreme amount of content that gets thrown into AAA titles as selling points and the fact that indy title are (imo) winning the war with regard to quality over quantity. I'll agree that I've had a lot more joy recently with indy titles.

What are your guys thoughts?



 
I don't even want to look at Ubisoft games nowadays because I know they're going to be stuffed to the brim with boring filler content. Being able to say your game takes 150 hours to complete means nothing when 120 hours of that is spent doing bland, banal boring rubbish.

This was also a major gripe of mine with Dragon Age Inquisition. Much of the open world content was simply of very low quality.
 
I don't think it's the amount of content, but rather the quality of the content that's the problem. It's no longer AAA games, but more like AB-. How often do we see AAA games being completely redesigned or re-imagined in the 6 months after launch? Do they not have a design plan at all?

They have enormous budgets, of which 50% is spent on marketing (absolutely insane). In this day and age the community will do all of the marketing for free as long as the developer actually delivers.
 
Yeah, I hear you.

But as well, today compared to 15 years ago I'm also concerned at the rate at which games are coming out. I remember having to wait months or even years for a game to be developed and released from the word of it coming. Nowadays there's a release trailer and then at most three months later the game release. Sure the indie market contributes towards this but let's only focus on big name developers and publishers. Their demands have become so stringent on the developers that this causes them to have release half arsed games. I've lost all faith in the Battlefield franchise mainly due to this. Then you get develops like Nuaghty Dog who do things their own way and when they're ready and look what they have put out. I don't think they've ever really put out a bad title (with reference to bugged and brokenness).
 
BeoTeK said:
Yeah, I hear you.

But as well, today compared to 15 years ago I'm also concerned at the rate at which games are coming out. I remember having to wait months or even years for a game to be developed and released from the word of it coming. Nowadays there's a release trailer and then at most three months later the game release. Sure the indie market contributes towards this but let's only focus on big name developers and publishers. Their demands have become so stringent on the developers that this causes them to have release half arsed games. I've lost all faith in the Battlefield franchise mainly due to this. Then you get develops like Nuaghty Dog who do things their own way and when they're ready and look what they have put out. I don't think they've ever really put out a bad title (with reference to bugged and brokenness).
Click to expand...

Sadly it's because gamers allow this to continue. If people voted with their wallets and said, "hey you screwed me over with BF4. I won't be buying BF5 unless it's 100%." it would be different. But sadly it's like "OOH BF5, look shiny videos, pre-ordered!". Meanwhile it's a graphical representation of the game paid for by the 50% marketing budget.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top