If you think EA's a fucking PITA, wait until their newest idea goes through.

[Musashi]

Hey, I didn't say the innovation couldn't be stolen from something else.  :D

I guess at some level I'm also arguing that you think you're happier with those games, but the dope's all the same, man.  We could all be just as happy with smaller budget games.  I realize how presumptuous that is.  And how that presumption is insulting.  But it's really not meant to be an insult.  It's just that it's true.

If EA et al disappeared tomorrow, we'd both still be playing games.  It's what we do.  That's the only intrinsic part of this.  You'd just have more time to creep further down the list of unplayed and probably undownloaded Steam sale games.  I submit to you that there are probably a couple games on your very own unplayed Steam list that are categorically better than most big budget poo-paloozas.

[Ingmar]

I can tell you that's untrue because the genre of games I'm talking about specifically don't even exist in the budget/indie category. There's stuff that comes vaguely close, I guess, like Bastion (more of a flavorful ARPGish thing than a real RPG), but in general the western RPG world is AAA titles and utter jank, with nothing in between.

[HaemishM]

I guess at some level I'm also arguing that you think you're happier with those games, but the dope's all the same, man.  We could all be just as happy with smaller budget games.  I realize how presumptuous that is.  And how that presumption is insulting.  But it's really not meant to be an insult.  It's just that it's true.

You need to be wearing a beret and banging a bongo when you say this.

[Musashi]

How do you know I'm not?

[cmlancas]

Random quotes that I'll respond to one by one.

1)  AAA games don't take risks.

Modern Warfare and Rockstar games (Red Dead and GTA4, specifically) drive really gritty storylines that certainly push the envelope.  I'm thinking specifically of senselessly murdering civilians in the airport while you're in deep cover and the damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't choices in GTA4.  I literally stopped playing after I had to decide if someone lived or died because it wasn't the type of entertainment I   was looking for in a game.  Max Payne comes to mind as well.  Shit, Bully is a risk when you think about it.

2)  AAA games don't innovate.

I'd say Fallout and Skyrim have set the bar very high for folks to enter into the sandbox arena.  Also, I think Bioshock did a lot for imaginative shooters.  Gears of War perfected cover fire mechanics-- better than any Clancy game before it.  Also, have you ever so breathtakingly assassinated someone like you did the first time you stealthily killed someone in a crowd as Altair?  You may hate Halo, but you can't deny it's a well-designed shooter.  And if you missed the Halo 1 experience on the computer, it was amazing.

3)  If AAA games didn't exist, we'd play something else.

Here's the thing:  people play what's fun.  For some people, that's looking at dots in space.  For others, they long for purple and orange loot.  Still, some enjoy a positive K/D that comes from a well-executed strategy in a team deathmatch shooter.  As long as there's industry and market competition, you'll always see a Blizzard/Zynga/EA/Apple/Dell/Microsoft/Publix/Wal-Mart/Kroger trying to make successful games you want to play, merchandise you want to buy, and apps you want to use.

So yes, we probably would play something else.  But that's like saying you don't appreciate the power and innovation of an iPhone because it's a big-budget, high-risk, high-reward technology.  It did innovate, better than any other ones before it.

[Musashi]

Oh man.  Red Dead, GTA4, Fallout, and Skyrim have a lot in common.  Open world, "story" driven, explorey types.  Not a great example of taking risks or innovating, if you ask me.  In Portal, I had fun shooting a gun that didn't kill people.  That's innovation.  Those other games?  They're not really that much different than when they were called GTA3.  Way to go out on a limb.

I really can't explain Apple.  That's another thread.  Suffice it to say that I'm an Android guy.  I like to pay less and get more.  Call me crazy.

This is all sort of ancillary to the point that these AAA games are dying dead.  And we're better off for it, whether we know it now or not.  Does AA really sound that bad?  I have no doubt we'll get one or two of those every once in a while.  Hell they might even have voice overs.

[pxib]

AAA games innovate in the same way that Summer Blockbuster Movies innovate: More impressive action setpieces, better special effects.

[Sjofn]

If EA et al disappeared tomorrow, we'd both still be playing games.  It's what we do.  That's the only intrinsic part of this.  You'd just have more time to creep further down the list of unplayed and probably undownloaded Steam sale games.  I submit to you that there are probably a couple games on your very own unplayed Steam list that are categorically better than most big budget poo-paloozas.

This is so wrong for me personally it makes my head hurt. I don't buy every game that goes on a Steam sale, I only buy games I think I will enjoy, rather than "gosh this is only three bucks, I'm getting it even though it's in a genre I hate" or whatever. This means I don't actually have much in the way of a backlog. And while there are some little indie games I like just fine, most of them simply do not do the sorts of games I like playing.

I also don't have an innovation fetish, though. I'm not anti-innovation, obviously, but innovation for the sake of innovation doesn't do it for me, nor do I need something innovative for me to enjoy a game. Sometimes I just want to build my little cities, play an RPG character, or use guns on men in peace without the formula being shaken up, or whatever. Most of the time I just want the shit I do like to be done better.

[lamaros]

There are lots of games like the lost vikings being made now.

Your complaint is basically that you are too lazy to find said games, or you want to force everyone else to play the games you like by denying them others.

Honestly you sound like someone who has probably lost a bit of their imaginative power and is wistful about the games they played when they were younger. Generally speaking the quality and breadth of games now is far greater than anything before.

[koro]

Speaking of EA:

https://twitter.com/EdmundMcMillenn/status/238130909465939968

Just found out Popcap laid off George Fan (creator of Plants vs Zombies)a day after announcing that they started working on a sequel SMOOTH!

What's the deal with PopCap anyway? EA bought 'em for a gazillion dollars and... what've they done with them?

Aside from lay off 50 people, that is.

[Margalis]

What's the deal with PopCap anyway? EA bought 'em for a gazillion dollars and... what've they done with them?

The parable of the frog and the scorpion applies here. In other words EA being EA.

Edit: As far as the breadth and quality of games now, any statement one way or the other is highly debatable and ultimately subjective, especially if you consider budget threshold a factor. Sure, there are still some survival horror games being made, but not at the same level of production and budget. The "AAA survival horror" genre is dead. The types of games that command high budgets are pretty narrow these days. And while it's cool that some guy made a spooky survival horror mod for HL2 that's not a proper substitute, any more than an RPG Maker rpg would be an adequate replacement for Mass Effect.

Flight / space sim is still a genre, but "AAA flight / space sim" is not. Personally I hate the term "AAA" but there is something to be said for games with a certain level of production value and scope.

[SurfD]

You may hate Halo, but you can't deny it's a well-designed shooter.  And if you missed the Halo 1 experience on the computer, it was amazing.

Totally my subjective opinion here, but I have no idea how you could call Halo 1 for PC "amazing".  Especially compared to Half-Life, which pretty much set the bar for what people expected out of a story driven PC shooter, which had already been out for nearly 3 years before Halo even hit Xbox, let alone PC.  Unless you are talking about Co-Op or something maybe?

[lamaros]

There is no doubt that trends have left some areas that were once popular neglected. But I dunno if there's such a golden age as when everything was equally popular anyhow. Any pining for a past is usually going to depend on what you like to play before you get to what period you choose.

I like rpgs with turn based squad combat. That boat has sailed in terms of 'top of the line' products. Hell, nearly any turn based squad combat is hard to find. But I'd be entirely subjective if I then turned that into a comment about how the industry is whatever...

I think it less of a stretch to say that as the gaming industry has gotten bigger more titles and more diversity has become available at the same time. Saying if those titles and genres and whatever are 'better' returns us to the subjective discussion. But I would certainly lean towards 'yes' myself.

[Rendakor]

I'd agree that the industry has gotten bigger, but argue it's gotten much less diverse. Almost every AAA title is beginning to incorporate COD style online multiplayer, even franchises that have long been exclusively single-player; RPG-lite ding-gratz mechanics are also being bolted onto a ton of games where it makes no sense. See also: zombies in everything, cover based shooting and the chest-high walls that comes with, horror games turning into action/shooting games, etc. The AAA landscape really feels like we're approaching some singularity where every game is a reskinned Call of Duty.

On the flipside, genres that were pretty popular a console generation or two ago are dying out. JRPGs in general were all over the place from SNES through PS2, while the current gen consoles haven't seen that many (Nintendo DS aside, but even that's been a last-gen system for more than a year now). Platformers are another example; Nintendo's still trying with Mario games and there have been a small handful but not a whole lot. It's even happening for sports games, to the point that baseball is the only sport that has two competing games release each year, with The Show being a PS3 exclusive.

The only "new" genre I can think of to appear within this console generation is gimmicky motion-controlled shit, but even that's a dying fad at this point; it never caught on with serious gamers, and the non-gamers who bought Wiis are playing Just Dance X and not much else.

[Kail]

I'd agree that the industry has gotten bigger, but argue it's gotten much less diverse.

In a way, I agree, but in another sense, that's only really true for the big name, mainstream stuff.  Small indie studios are pushing out titles that would put AAA studios of ten or fifteen years ago to shame.  There are a ton of niches that aren't being filled by EA or Actiblarg, but there are way fewer that aren't being filled by anybody.  The rise of digital distribution means that you can get this stuff pretty easily, even on XBox and PSN.  I can download titles for $3.00 on my 3DS which would have made my Genesis weep for joy.

And I can't help but wonder if these platforms, which are built on the foundation of AAA titles, would suffer if the big budget stuff got hit too hard.  I find it highly unlikely that the average fratBro is going to react to the news of Call of Duty being cancelled by going out and supporting Botanicula or something.  While AAA games night not be the greatest, I'm not sure we'd be better off without them.  A high tide lifts all boats, and all that.

[cmlancas]

You may hate Halo, but you can't deny it's a well-designed shooter.  And if you missed the Halo 1 experience on the computer, it was amazing.

Totally my subjective opinion here, but I have no idea how you could call Halo 1 for PC "amazing".  Especially compared to Half-Life, which pretty much set the bar for what people expected out of a story driven PC shooter, which had already been out for nearly 3 years before Halo even hit Xbox, let alone PC.  Unless you are talking about Co-Op or something maybe?

Yeah, it was precisely about co-op.  And, I'd have to agree with you about HL1...I've never felt so happy to be armed with a crowbar.  

[lamaros]

I'd agree that the industry has gotten bigger, but argue it's gotten much less diverse.

In a way, I agree, but in another sense, that's only really true for the big name, mainstream stuff.  Small indie studios are pushing out titles that would put AAA studios of ten or fifteen years ago to shame.  There are a ton of niches that aren't being filled by EA or Actiblarg, but there are way fewer that aren't being filled by anybody.  The rise of digital distribution means that you can get this stuff pretty easily, even on XBox and PSN.  I can download titles for $3.00 on my 3DS which would have made my Genesis weep for joy.

Aye, this is what I was suggesting, but worded a bit better.

[Amaron]

AAA games are probably going to die as we know them.  And I'm pretty okay with that.  It took me a long time to cope with that.  So I understand if you (plural) aren't there yet.

If you mean our current crop of crappy mass market console games are going to die then yea.  Not only am I ok with that I'll dance on their graves.

None of that ties into your original crazy time post.


Everything you've said comes across as if you think that games like Kotor, Planescape, and their ilk are all a mistake and nobody actually wants to pay for them.  We're not all you.  Tower defense is fucking boring after a while.

[Sheepherder]

Yeah, it was precisely about co-op.

There was quite a bit more than that.  Not a whole lot of shooters prior to that made good use of melee, grenades, vehicles, and co-op all at once.

[cmlancas]

Yeah, it was precisely about co-op.

There was quite a bit more than that.  Not a whole lot of shooters prior to that made good use of melee, grenades, vehicles, and co-op all at once.

Agree.  But I think co-op/team deathmatch tied it together nicely.  I can cheese through most single player shooters by perfecting a strategy the AI can't adapt to, but human co-op/deathmatch allows for incredibly dynamic gameplay

[Musashi]

Everything you've said comes across as if you think that games like Kotor, Planescape, and their ilk are all a mistake and nobody actually wants to pay for them.  We're not all you.  Tower defense is fucking boring after a while.

Not really.  I'm just implying that they're less games, and more bad movies with game elements shoe-horned in.  I think I've been at least somewhat consistent.  In fact, I kind of feel like a broken record.  If you like paying for them, that's fine with me. 

So maybe I'm also implying your days of enjoying these products are numbered.  And maybe a little, "Ha ha, shit blows anyway."  Don't be mad, baby.  It's party time!  Think about what a wonderful world it will be when our favorite studios are no longer swallowed up by behemoths, milked dry, and rendered asunder.  It's a good thing, man.

There's more to smaller games than Tower Defense or (insert example I made that's only relevant to me).  That's just an example of one genre created out of whole cloth that's good for the industry.  It's just a beacon of light at the end of a dismal AAA tunnel.

[Amaron]

Not really.  I'm just implying that they're less games, and more bad movies with game elements shoe-horned in. 

I don't particularly feel low brow if you label my shit "bad movies with game elements".  They still beat watching TV or playing an endless stream of Mario clones.

So maybe I'm also implying your days of enjoying these products are numbered. 

Why though?  These types of games aren't actually all that expensive when produced by sane human beings.

[pxib]

I, for one, miss the endless stream of Mario clones. More platformers, fewer shooters I say. At the very least they had substantially more gameplay variety.

[cmlancas]

I, for one, miss the endless stream of Mario clones. More platformers, fewer shooters I say. At the very least they had substantially more gameplay variety.

Jump here, not there!

 

[pxib]

[Musashi]

Not really.  I'm just implying that they're less games, and more bad movies with game elements shoe-horned in. 

I don't particularly feel low brow if you label my shit "bad movies with game elements".  They still beat watching TV or playing an endless stream of Mario clones.

So maybe I'm also implying your days of enjoying these products are numbered. 

Why though?  These types of games aren't actually all that expensive when produced by sane human beings.

I suggest that the independent and small game industry is not accurately characterized in your statement.  (Again).

Why are AAA titles going away?  You sort of answer your own question.  Somewhere in the process of trying to turn their relatively inexpensive games into huge franchises, they lose their goddamn minds.  I'm not smart enough to tell you why.  All I know is that two of the biggest  AAA content providers are rumored to be on the block.  And that doesn't bode well.  I'd bet it has a lot to do with the development of the next generation of consoles, and the loss of market share to online distribution channels.  But hey.  What do I know, anyway?

[Thrawn]

Most of this thread should be re-titled "People have different opinions about what is good, news at 11."

Me for example, I still think Eve is the best MMO out their and a great game if you have time to play it. 

[lamaros]

Most of this thread should be re-titled "People have different opinions about what is good, news at 11."

Me for example, I still think Eve is the best MMO out their and a great game if you have time to play it. 

But Musashi is actually right, you know? Everyone else has opinions but he is right.

[calapine]

Can't tell if green or not...

[amiable]

I like rpgs with turn based squad combat. That boat has sailed in terms of 'top of the line' products. Hell, nearly any turn based squad combat is hard to find. But I'd be entirely subjective if I then turned that into a comment about how the industry is whatever...

I already mentioned this once this thread but I assume you are aware of: www.spiderwebsoftware.com   All the titles that guy has put out have been great from a gameplay and story perspective if you are willing to overlook clunky old graphics and sounds.

[Tebonas]

The latest remake of Avernum 1 and the New Avadon series both have better presentation and UI as well if that is a barrier to playing those games.

[Paelos]

I don't think the idea of AAA games needs to go away. I think they need to fall off and reform.

Right now the AAA industry is mired in reactionary iteration in the hopes they can squeeze profit out of bloated overhead. The model they use is to release less games and produce more "franchises" which essentially means sequels. Here's the problem with that theory. There's no risk there, and there are no chances being taken. You can provide a predictable product and ride the highs and lows of consumership if you produce a commodity like soda, pasta, or work pants. People consume and replace those things with little need for change or innovation. The khaki pant will be the khaki pant 10 years from now. They will ride fashion trends to a degree, but they will still be around. Coke is the same, pasta will be pasta.

Entertainment is a different beast. The model of creating predictable entertainment is inherently flawed. People aren't entertained by predictibility. They are entertained by the unknown, the drama, the risk, the comedy, and the dynamicism. What AAA has tried to do recently is homogonize the Entertainment of games into the business model for Soda. That is why they fail, and why they need to rebuild. You can still create a big budget game, but you have to understand that you are cross-colateralized with other products. If anything, I'd say look at an industry that's heavily based on risk R&D, like drug companies, to model your goals for games. After all, aren't games just another fix?

[Amaron]

Why are AAA titles going away? 

No that's not what I was asking.  You've claimed several times that VO and cutscenes are going away.  That's pretty much saying they'll stop making Call of Duty. 

[Musashi]

JFC, dude.  The original post I responded to was talking about how VO's and cutscenes were possible in part because the budget of AAA games is so high.  It's a relative thing.  The game-play for Call of Duty is not going away.  But it might have to exist with a smaller budget.  And if we're making cuts, what goes?  And though it's probably unlikely to die anytime soon, the CoD franchise is Blacktivision, iirc?  What happens if Vivendi really is selling?  What do the new owners do with Kotick and his merry men?  It's really not out of the realm of possibilities that CoD does die, at least as we know it.

[Rendakor]

Given that they've broken sales records every year for at least the last 3, I don't see the Call of Duty series going anywhere, sold off by Vivendi or otherwise.