Honestly, I can't vote on this. It's up to the studio to decide. People join Naughty Dog and Rockstar for the games they make, they want to make those kinds of games. So it's entirely up to wherever their passion is.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Do you think AAA studios should calm down with their pursuit of visual showcase and high production value?
- Thread starter Kaivan
- Start date
Yeah, while Nintendo games aren't competing with the graphics of ps4 or xbox one they still push the system itself to the limit, so I'm not sure that's exactly less hard.
Supergiant Games and tons of other indie studios are proof that you can create timeless experiences without having to animate a horse's testicle in the cold
These next-gen systems will be more than powerful enough to focus on things beyond visual fidelity. Hopefully we see some real advancements in Ai, physics engines, world building in scale and details with interactions. I hate to bring up BoTW and yes there are many things that could be improved in that world, but freedom to be creative and play how you like have to constantly be acknowledged. People are still posting video clips of totally unique things being done that I've never seen before in that game.
Great visuals and storytelling are excellent to have in any game, but the levels to which those characters interact with the game world should also matter...
Great visuals and storytelling are excellent to have in any game, but the levels to which those characters interact with the game world should also matter...
Just don't reveal the games until very close to when they think it's ready to come out. They can tease the game but don't outright reveal it. Kinda like RE2Remake where we kinda knew the game was real, but it was revealed quite close to release. The hype is still there I think.
Or see how mass effect andromeda got absolutely trashed for having some wonky looking animations. A huge part of the issue is the consumers, and unless the opinion of the consumers change wrt demands of quality of visuals, this will still go on.
We haven't got any reports to that effect, and they seem to have really good talent retention, so I'm not going to automatically assume the worst.
According to this article, Nintendo employees work less than 8 hours a day...
Nintendo employees in Japan earn an average salary of $80,653 and work less than 8 hours a day
Nintendo of Japan revealed the work conditions of more than 2,000 employees on a company recruitment page, including work hours and average age.
www.businessinsider.com
This isn't necessarily the case. Fortnite and PUBG look like high-res 360 games. CoD's graphics have been the butt of jokes until just recently. MOBAs look serviceable but that's about it. Minecraft is just blocks. Nintendo has been one of, if not the top publisher in sales for the past couple years and they're essentially half a generation behind everyone else in terms of production values.
You don't need the best graphics to sell lots of games and be massively profitable.
The real problem isn't really the pursuit of high production values, it's the deadline based schedule which is extremely dependant on publisher's need for money at a particular time. You can reduce the scope all you want but as long as the publisher need to make money in a certain quarter the same issue will pop.
Crunch didn't start with the HD era, it was already there even when developing a game took 6 months.
Crunch didn't start with the HD era, it was already there even when developing a game took 6 months.
It probably wouldn't change anything in regards to crunch. The studios would just decrease in size and instead of 300 people crunching to get the games out sooner, it would be 100 people. We'd definitely get more games though.
You have to change the culture within the industry and unionize.
You have to change the culture within the industry and unionize.
No. Industry has to innovate and move forward. Instead of people asking for them to not try and get better, why not ask for them to have better care for their employees?
Yes. Then it'd force them to rely more on solid mechanics. And hopefully would cut costs and dev time as well.
Why wouldn't any Dev/publisher/company aim for the best possible version of their game that they spent blood and tears on?
Is pursuit of excellence now deemed bad?
*Pursuit of Excellence is the games and also taking excellent care of the people who make those games because that is the right thing to do.
Is pursuit of excellence now deemed bad?
*Pursuit of Excellence is the games and also taking excellent care of the people who make those games because that is the right thing to do.
One of my favorite things about Nintendo is their refusal to fall into the trap that is the realism arms race which causes budgets to balloon while simultaneously making the games inevitably age poorly.
if more had studios followed their lead and made stylized games with lower production values, then they could afford to take more risks and put out more niche titles.
Unfortuantely at this point it'll be tough to train (non-Nintendo) consumers away from that mindset that more realistic = better because that's been the driving force for so long
if more had studios followed their lead and made stylized games with lower production values, then they could afford to take more risks and put out more niche titles.
Unfortuantely at this point it'll be tough to train (non-Nintendo) consumers away from that mindset that more realistic = better because that's been the driving force for so long
No. Maybe instead they stop trying to make every game mega long. I just unlocked the last area in Days Gone and thought goddamn you don't even need this in the game. It probably wouldn't have taken them 7 years to develop if they made a more conservative map and story.
People are focusing too much on how the games look. If developers stop trying to make graphics better it doesn't mean it'll take less work or crunch to actually make the games. Everything involved in making a game follows the same mentality. 60fps, physics, online functionality, balancing, interactivity of the game's systems...
Making a AAA game will always be like this with or without a pursuit of better graphics, if you want change it would need an actual change in the whole culture of the industry and at that point it wouldn't even be AAA anymore. That might be positive or not, but it's not about visual showcase.
Making a AAA game will always be like this with or without a pursuit of better graphics, if you want change it would need an actual change in the whole culture of the industry and at that point it wouldn't even be AAA anymore. That might be positive or not, but it's not about visual showcase.
I think it would help a lot if studios that don't crunch would brag about it more/ shame studios with crunch
Convincing people to not buy games with heavy crunch is impossible, but it would definitely be possible to get more people to buy games without heavy crunch
Seriously
There were so many games this gen that we're so unnecessarily long
Convincing people to not buy games with heavy crunch is impossible, but it would definitely be possible to get more people to buy games without heavy crunch
Seriously
There were so many games this gen that we're so unnecessarily long
Not necessarily, but I'd rather have less ambitious titles than play something that required devs to basically die at their desks working.
So what I think they should do is aspire for the best, but be allowed to take more time. I can wait a few more months, or even a couple of years, if it means better work conditions for everyone involved.
So what I think they should do is aspire for the best, but be allowed to take more time. I can wait a few more months, or even a couple of years, if it means better work conditions for everyone involved.
I hope that graphics have sort of 'peaked' (maybe through raytracing) and they can finally focus more on interesting AI/physics/collision development instead of #MoarShaders!
HL Alyx sort of does because of the new input opportunities of VR. They're physics implementation sound really tricky according to they're latest interview.
HL Alyx sort of does because of the new input opportunities of VR. They're physics implementation sound really tricky according to they're latest interview.
I'm glad platforms like Switch exists that doesn't focus on AAA. There are AAA games on it of course, but not as much and I like it a lot. I like my games to be more focused on a concept and stick with that instead of being focused on huge worlds and eye candy. I do want a steak diner from time to time though so I don't mind AAA.
Personally, I'm moved far more by mechanics, writing, art direction and feel than I am by visuals - stylised visuals also date way less than realistic ones (citation: LoZ: The Windwaker).
This isn't a phenomena solely relegated to video games though?
You could say 'phones are good enough we should stop' or cars, CPUs, etc etc. It isn't likely to happen.
You could say 'phones are good enough we should stop' or cars, CPUs, etc etc. It isn't likely to happen.
Yes absolutely major "game" studios should actually try to learn what a budget is and not just do made for 300 million "experiences" or $50 Olive Garden gift card given to a weekend janitor freemium rubbish. This isn't really sustainable at the level they are taking things. Plus in terms of pushing actual gameplay they aren't anyway and haven't for quite a while. Nobody pushes systems anymore, there's no real difference from a lot of first year Xbox one games to now, visually, in particular for instance. It's not like in the past where a new hardware generation would bring a whole bunch of new game types and perspectives and such, it'll be more 1st/3rd person shooters since that's the only type they seem to understand, and they'll just be higher resolution on average than today but still not generally 60 fps and still a bunch of sub native resolution but with pretty effects since pretty pictures are what sells things the easiest.
Last edited:
Yes but then that also comes with other trouble Fornite is know for getting out content at a crazy rate .
If you talk about something being sustainable it's the same thing but just another issue that part of it.
This.
In the discussion of scope reduction, I received by some posters here the following quotes:
Yep, the current AAA standard just can't hold. It seems probably unsustainable. If you scheduled to avoid crunch, all but a few of these games would end up in dev cycles so long they couldn't be profitable. Only the guaranteed 20 million+ sellers like GTA could afford it. There's going to have to be some scaling back. Improving tech will make up for some of it, but there's a certain level of bespoke polish that just isn't tenable without labor exploitation.
big yikes, people don't give a damn as long as they get their pixels.
I've been hoping we'd go into looking at advancing scripting/AI/etc for a while now instead of pushing polycounts, but I've been in the minority of that. Mainly because visuals are instantly identifiable and what the casual audience praises/looks at.
Unfortunately I don't see it changing but yes I'd rather they stop worrying about graphics so much, but I say that as someone who actively puts mods on games to make them look better as well, but didn't dictate how I felt about the game originally.
I'll take Fuzzy Witcher on the Go just as much as HD REworked Witcher depending on context. So long as a game is good the graphics don't matter.
Unfortunately I don't see it changing but yes I'd rather they stop worrying about graphics so much, but I say that as someone who actively puts mods on games to make them look better as well, but didn't dictate how I felt about the game originally.
I'll take Fuzzy Witcher on the Go just as much as HD REworked Witcher depending on context. So long as a game is good the graphics don't matter.
Well, the latest Ghost of Tsushima trailer looks like a Sega Saturn game. Awful downgrade. No hyperbole.
/s