So Belgium isn’t a western Nation? Or who does Anon think made Baldur Gate 3?
And Japanese AAAs don’t under deliver?
FromSoft had enough money to make 200 hours of content but apparently couldn’t figure out 60fps on a 4090. Delivering!
Elden Ring is pretty good, though, don’t let me crap on it. I just wish they’d hire the Bluepoint guys that did the Demon’s Souls remake to handle their systems and engine work and just build content on top of that because, man.
It’s almost like every game studio has their own strengths and weaknesses? Crazy.
Hey, I’m on board with that idea 100%, but then you can’t complain online about “Western AAA under-delivering”. That’s just “the studio’s own strengths and weaknesses”. Can’t eat your cake and have it, too.
Can’t eat your cake and have it, too.
I’m upvoting just for the proper version of the phrase
Baldur’s Gate 3 gave me one of the most appealing experiences I’ve ever had playing a video game. It literally felt like a breath of fresh air coming from the rest of the industry. I tried to get into Divinity, but hated the combat so much I stopped playing as much, and then dropped it. I still didn’t love the combat in BG3, but damn, the rest of it literally blew me out of the water. The cinematics of interactions with NPCs, the freedom to do what the developers didn’t intend for you to do, but still allowed it anyway, and so much more. An actual amazing game that seemed to push what SHOULD be the norm for games going forward (RPG wise), but that requires actual writers, actual planners, and actual people who care about video games. That’s not something the big “AAA” studios like to have on their teams, because that costs money.
I think it’s less that they intentionally under deliver, and more that how the actually run leads to bad products. The executives and consultants brought in try and run studios like they’re software companies. Which, yes, technically video games are software, but they’re more than that.
With a lot of software, a short turn around is important if you want to make sure your product isn’t outpaced by a competitor before it even launches. bugs can be patched out over time so shipping with a few bugs is fine so long as you’re getting to market as soon as possible. Breaking the project up in to lots of small items that can be independently worked on without interfering or relying on other items means you can expand the team easily to keep up with deadline.
On a video game, consumers care more about the experience of the released product and less about it being the most technically advanced. Huge bugs at release mutes any excitement, even if the issues are patched out later. Multiple teams working on a bunch of items in parallel will struggle to make a cohesive experience and the design guidelines put in place to make this possible will mute creativity. A handful of cohesive long quest lines makes for a better RPG than a 100 little independent quest scattered over the map.
Better to have smaller teams that work over longer time frames and release a product when it’s ready, 150 million dollars will make a much better product with a 100 person studio over 6 years than a 300 person studio in 2 years.
What about games that take 6 years and still suck? Like Halo?
Halo: Combat Evolved sucks? That’s a hot take - been a few years, but I did enjoy playing it, massive controllers and all. Or did you have a specific one in mind?
No, the new Halos
They released a Halo 2?!
Making smaller games isn’t a bad thing. Every game being a BG3 would be completely unsustainable. Sure, that game was a great accomplishment, but also imagine if they’d made the game that size and it was bad. It would’ve probably sunk the studio. I’m all about more A and AA games. Not everything needs to be a 300 person effort.
You appear to be agreeing with the meme; it didn’t say anything about the size of BG3, only the quality
It’s less “purposely underdeliver” and more “You mean I need to raise 300 million dollars to even try?”
But hey, Anon can gamble nine figures of their own money next time. I’m sure they’d do great.
You mean I need to raise 300 million dollars to even try?
And that’s the brain rot in the industry.
They can make lower budget games. Not every game needs to be some sprawling open world game with multiplayer features. You don’t need a crafting system, complex RPG mechanics, and unique animations for every possible interaction in your action adventure game. I don’t need to see every pore, have accurate hair physics, and a full featured face designer in a looter arpg.
Yeah, pretty graphics are nice, but honestly, I only need a handful of those total. My favorite games have fun, focused gameplay and/or really good story-telling, and that doesn’t cost money, it simply requires talent. Balatro was incredibly cheap to make and really fun, in fact, I could probably create it myself given a year or two, but I probably couldn’t come up with the idea in the first place.
Instead of making one or two big games to impress journalists, how about making aw few fun games with 1/10 the budget (still overkill IMO) each year to impress players?
Not just admitting they under-deliver.
They’re admitting to market collusion and lashing out at the companies that betray class solidarity.
These “Western AAA studios”… Are they in the room with us right now?
