-
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.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Nintendo's switch games makes me realize how little I like a lot of big budget AAA games
- Thread starter MercuryLS
- Start date
It's the complete opposite for me. I find the Nintendo games pretty shallow and not that exciting.
The only game I've enjoyed is smash
The only game I've enjoyed is smash
Last edited:
Oh I know what it means in general, I meant in this context specifically.
*shrugs* not really, depends on the game I guess, but shallow games are shallow games regardless. Can't extract blood from stone, and you sure as shit can't extract fun from paint by the numbers open world games.
Plenty of quality action games to be had, tho saying you need Nintendo for it is absurd, because I'm still waiting for a Zelda game that doesn't have mediocre at best combat, and in the case of Odyssey they wasted those mechanics on so much putzing around.
A few things. One I name dropped Hitman, did I not?
Two Dishonored n Deus Ex aren't fucking open world games, they are immersive sims. Goes without saying I'm on board with those.
Now lets talk about the games I did name drop. 2-3 of them are pretty similar to The Phantom Pain, albeit the Phantom Pain probably has the dullest open world of the bunch. The Phantom Pain however has far more depth to its mechanics, there is more synergy between your tool set, your tools happen to be vesatile while still excelling in specific niches, and there is enough content n challenges n enemies that allow you to apply your shenanigans.
A lot of western open world games are mechanically wack and offer little to no room for player expression. Far Cry out of the games I name dropped is the best one at that, and even then I would argue its pretty lacking.
So we just lying now?
I honestly think the underlying implication here is that Nintendo doesn't offer AAA, which is a problematic assertion. Feel free to correct me, but it's hard not to read into it like that. If you want to say they offer experiences that are unique, then I guess that's one thing. But reading through the OP and a fair amount of these replies, it feels like the perception is that they don't offer premium, AAA experiences.
You can literally go straight to Ganon and fight him at any time after the plateau with any setup.
Can't speak for others, but my clear time on Odyssey was 15 hours...that's not a very long game if you're just trying to see the credits roll.
You can literally go straight to Ganon and fight him at any time after the plateau with any setup.
Can't speak for others, but my clear time on Odyssey was 15 hours...that's not a very long game if you're just trying to see the credits roll.
Sure, 10 times out of 10, I'm pretty fucking annoyed at reading/hearing the words "Open-World", but to The Phantom Pain's credit the outposts it does have are pretty well designed with multiple ways to attack. OKB Zero, The Palace, that one base in the middle of a canyon or whatever are kino.
I feel the same way about movies. Once i hear its over 100 million dollars I won't enjoy it. If it's between 5-20 million its probably going to be one of the best movies ever.
So... You noticed you don't like big budget AAA games by playing Mario Odyssey and BOTW, two big budget AAA games? That's nice, I guess.
Systemic as in things aren't hard scripted. Me and you going down the same road in AC:Odyssey or Origins would look different because of all the dynamic elements that exist within the AI framework and even how that can be disrupted. And that has a very large effect on the experience. An infiltration for me might be easier since guards are sleeping at night or for you it might go awry because some guards are returning to the base after a patrol and an animal decided it was hungry. Or even during the day, there are several things that the AI can be doing that affect visibility and awareness. Training, eating, pissing, etc. The AI functions on a 24 hour schedule. One of my most memorable moments is when a relaxing introspective and quiet journey through a valley in the desert led to an ambush because some bandits were waiting for any travelers to wander by so that they could kill and loot them. Stuff like that.
Yep and it's the compete opposite for me. Hence why I sold my ps4 and rarely use my Xbox one. They just don't compete for me in terms of fun.
I realized I didn't really enjoy AAA games that much when Red Dead and Spider-Man came out. I played them both, went "Wow, this is really well made" and realized that despite that, I wasn't having fun haha. Like nothing wrong with the games, just weren't really for me. Like hindsight activated and it was like "Yeeeeah a lot of those big budget games don't really do it for me."
Weird games with a semblance of a budget(Nier Automata counts as AA right?) or indie games tend to be more my thing lately. Or strategy games in general.
Weird games with a semblance of a budget(Nier Automata counts as AA right?) or indie games tend to be more my thing lately. Or strategy games in general.
In this thread people are using BotW as the defacto example of Nintendo offering less repetitive, more innovative, systemic and sandboxy gameplay design than other publishers, but outside of the busy work or repetitive elements that have already been discussed from BotW, in terms of outright freedom, re-imagining and scope, BotW is actually an outlier in Nintendo's portfolio, and not indicative of their output as a whole.
In-fact, prior to BotW's release, a common complaint was that Nintendo is too reliant on rehashing tentpole or older IP's, doesn't release enough first party new IP's, and isn't necessarily doing enough to differentiate their titles and franchises beyond iterative changes, and that's still true to a large extent outside of BotW, eg if you look at Mario Kart 8, Smash Bros U, Xenoblade 2, Super Mario Odyssey, Super Mario Maker 2, Super Mario Party, Yoshi's Crafted World, Kirby Star Allies, Pokemon Let's Go and so on.
In-fact, prior to BotW's release, a common complaint was that Nintendo is too reliant on rehashing tentpole or older IP's, doesn't release enough first party new IP's, and isn't necessarily doing enough to differentiate their titles and franchises beyond iterative changes, and that's still true to a large extent outside of BotW, eg if you look at Mario Kart 8, Smash Bros U, Xenoblade 2, Super Mario Odyssey, Super Mario Maker 2, Super Mario Party, Yoshi's Crafted World, Kirby Star Allies, Pokemon Let's Go and so on.
Wait, are you telling me that you don't like cinematic videogames, full of celebrities doing voices and the most #realistic visuals ever? What's wrong with you.
This is so on point and I agree with everything. You feel it in practically every AAA game, with maybe the rare - oftentimes first party - exception. Ads are everywhere, the store menu is highlighted, fake currencies, the daily tasks, double earning weekends, numbers, bloat, levels, loot, XP, crafting and grinding all just toxically mixed together in an attempt to create maximum retention factor and recurrent spending. It's as invasive as it is blatant, feeling more like some addiction scheme than game design.
That's true for the vast majority of franchises, including from the likes of Sony, Capcom, From Software, and so on, unless you're going to tell me that the Souls games, Monster Hunter, Ace Attorney, Gran Turismo, Uncharted, all but one God of War game, MLB, Little Big Planet, and so on aren't iterative series that didn't do much to differentiate themselves from other entries. Even when Sony release new IPs, they just go on to make iterative sequels. In the case of something like Super Mario Odyssey, I'm not sure how that's an iterative game when it's level design, settings, and main gimmick is so markedly different from previous 3D Mario titles. Aside from the small handful of franchises that change up things almost entirely with most of their entries, like Final Fantasy, it's the series that changes the most per entry
Last edited:
You can speedrun most games in ridiculously quick times, but the bulk of the game in BOTW is stuffed with shrines, cooking, standing around in the rain etc. I don't see how it's any different to other AAA open world games in the bloat stakes.
Odyssey, yeah, you can see the credits pretty quickly but the number of moons per level is mind boggling. I prefer the more focussed approach of 3D World.
These games are just straight up AAA with the same issues as many others, so I just don't think they fit with the point as presented by the OP.
So now we decide whether or not we enjoy games based on budget? I mean, these posts are pretty funny.
In that case personally speaking, if a game has a budget of more than $100 million counting marketing it's trash to me.
In that case personally speaking, if a game has a budget of more than $100 million counting marketing it's trash to me.
I would agree about the iterative nature of most franchise releases or sequels, but then I'd also argue that certain other publishers experiment with or put out more new IP's than Nintendo does.
To be contrarian perhaps? It reminds of those who have to routinely state or mention they don't listen to popular or trendy music, or watch popular action or super hero films or whatever. Only in this instance it is actually far more amusing given the counter example games listed are both AAA and insanely popular lol.
Many do but, in the case with Nintendo, it's not quite the most fair comparison as they often put out games with completely different gameplay styles from other games within their respective franchises or make spin-offs, such as Kid Icarus Uprising, Kirby's Epic Yarn, Captain Toad, Super Mario Maker, and so on. They experiment with new ideas just as much as anyone else. They just don't put them into new IPs and integrate them into pre-existing franchises
That's not true at all. The kind of games op is talking about have massive budget that require 5 or more million sales. Botw broke even after ~2 million (iirc) and within its first month
Not long before someone makes a thread: "Watching the MCU, I realized how much I hate mainstream movies" while citing Avengers, Cap. America and Ironman as examples of not mainstream movies.
The OP only errs in trying to generalize this as Nintendo vs. everyone else. Nintendo does have a number of teams that are consistently capable of turning out amazing games with broad appeal, but they they're also perfectly capable of churning out shallow, cynically monetization-driven drivel as with their mobile offerings. Nor are all their titles pick-up and-play accessible titles. Fire Emblem is as much a commitment as a lot of the kind of AAA content that doesn't seem like the OPs thing.
I different genres and developers suit my tastes better than others, but I can't think of a single publisher that uniformly outdoes everything from any other publisher. It's a broad market with everything from predictable soulless sequels to hidden gems and high-budget masterpieces.
I different genres and developers suit my tastes better than others, but I can't think of a single publisher that uniformly outdoes everything from any other publisher. It's a broad market with everything from predictable soulless sequels to hidden gems and high-budget masterpieces.
That's because those games are often multiplatform and thus have larger development teams and budgets. BotW is exclusive (to Nintendo platforms), and a 2m break even point would put its production budget at between $60m and $100m, which is actually pretty high for an exclusive. Horizon Zero Dawn for example had a development budget of over €45m.
The examples listed go back prior generations, which sort of highlights how rarely Nintendo actually experiments with new IP's, let alone spin offs, not to mention some of the ones listed don't really represent the hugely different gameplay approaches indicated, for example Mario Maker being an extension of Super Mario Bros but with the builder twist, and Captain Toad being an extension of the Captain Toad isometric mini games from Super Mario World 3D, hence they're suited to being spin offs.
for me, nintendo holds my suspension of disbelief better. when i'm playing some 60 million dollar aaa behemoth, i get caught up on the little things. really, all that money and you can't even patch this bug out? really, a dev team that big and the va is this obnoxious? all that dev time and the animations here are still kinda janky?
whereas if something in mario isn't up to par, my brain is just like who cares i'm just having fun with my little red italian dude.
whereas if something in mario isn't up to par, my brain is just like who cares i'm just having fun with my little red italian dude.
For some reason people are stuggling with this concept, but saying "Games like BOTW and Mario Odyssey are different from most AAA games in xyz ways" does not mean "BOTW and Mario Odyssey are not AAA games".
What the OP is saying is in no way contradictory, and these 'gotcha' posts just make you look foolish.
What the OP is saying is in no way contradictory, and these 'gotcha' posts just make you look foolish.
nib95 I agree with most of what you're saying, but I'm going to make two corrections, a) Nintendo does in fact do a lot of new IP (albeit a lot of their new IP is smaller experimental shit, I grant you). Now, I know they don't do as much as Sony, but Sony is an outlier on that front to begin with in terms of how many new IP they experiment with; b) Nintendo does have an immense amount of variation within a single IP—Mario 64, Galaxy, 3D World are all immensely different within the frame of the series' aesthetic; Zelda wildly experiments with each instalment (probably more so than any other series of its budget and scope, actually); Metroid literally hops genres. Obviously there is Nintendo IP that stays pretty stable (e.g., Pokemon, NSMB), but it's unreasonable to say Nintendo doesn't wildly experiment within its IP.
That said, the bulk of what you say, I agree with.
That said, the bulk of what you say, I agree with.
Me too, but it's still a great game I can appreciate. It just does nothing for me.
There's like always at least one thread up at any given time that goes "I think (insert AAA game here) is one of the best things ever because (y)"
Going back to the topic at hand:
I personally can get enjoyment out of AAA games, but they rarely crack my top five games of the year. Often it has to do with that I weigh production value/graphics extremely low, and I tend to be more interested in stories and unique mechanics.
I remember when GoW came out, I had plenty of fun with it, and spent a great deal of time on it. It was a fun 8/10 game that was absolutely gorgeous but didn't really bring anything new to the table mechanically speaking.
Fair enough. Don't disagree with the bulk of what has been said here. Though I do personally wish they experimented with more completely new tentpole IP's, instead of more (albeit rather different) spin offs, but that's just me. If they do more re-boots or re-imaginings of a BotW esque caliber, that would also be welcome.
What? All of those examples are from within the past decade, three of which were from this generation, and hardly the only examples out there, just the ones off of the top of my head. I could've also brought up the likes of Arms and Splatoon as well. I could've also brought up how they've had major changes in the Paper Mario series. It's silly to purely judge off of their Switch output as it's only two years old so there hasn't been as much time for as many more experimental titles. Also, all of those do experiment quite significantly within their respective franchises. Super Mario Maker's various gimmicks and additions allow for completely different levels than what you'd get out of a traditional 2D Mario. I'm fully aware that Captain Toad is built off of what came from 3D World but that was still a new idea, not a rehash of what came before
It seems more like you're just looking for new big budget IPs from Nintendo, which they admittedly don't do much of, but hardly anyone does that often, even other publishers are usually just going for established trends and following them with minor deviations
Last edited:
This would be excellent.
What a weird opinion. Like, a game's budget is what determines if you'll enjoy it, but you like those games from a specific publisher.
Whack
I agree with you op. But I still believe that we need high budget games to make hardware flex their muscle.
Current AAA games are tedious for the most part. For someone with a full time job and other inerests besides gaming it's really demanding.
The thing with many modern indie games is that they try to replicate great games of the past but they haven't hit such high notes for the most part. So I'd rather play the old classics and discover games from platforms I didn't own back in the day. I'm having a blast with mega drive games for example.
Current AAA games are tedious for the most part. For someone with a full time job and other inerests besides gaming it's really demanding.
The thing with many modern indie games is that they try to replicate great games of the past but they haven't hit such high notes for the most part. So I'd rather play the old classics and discover games from platforms I didn't own back in the day. I'm having a blast with mega drive games for example.
It's a different kind of console warring. Nintendo discourse ends up being about the gap between Nintendo fans and everyone else, which was really opened up in the Wii generation as PS3 and 360 converged so closely and Nintendo diverged so radically, and PC joined them. Many in the Nintendo fandom have, consciously or unconsciously, a chip on their shoulder about being left behind by the rest of the industry, while those for whom the Nintendo console environment is a distant memory are, equally subconsciously, vexed by Nintendo's persistent relevance and oft-success, and you end up with passive-aggressive sniping in a way that's different from the more open tribalism that comes from Sony vs Microsoft (or recently Valve vs Epic). Because what you're seeing is two sets of gamers for whom the defaults of the genre, their core preferences for what constitutes gaming, are different.
Pretty much on point. Guess you view things differently when you're kind of a fan of everything. I have no problem with Nintendo fans preferring Nintendo's AAA games. What I think is more interesting is the forums general reaction to people that express enthusiasms for something Nintendo. Sometimes there's blatant bait like things said, other times I think people read things the wrong way. OP for example didn't intend to categorize Mario and Zelda incorrectly.
I think it says more about the state of the business that AAA games can only be games with massive budgets and cutting edge visuals.
Last edited:
This is mostly me these days, but there are mega-budget AAA games for PS4/Xbox One that come out on a semi-regular basis which I just have to play. Most recently those have been Kingdom Hearts III and Marvel's Spider-Man. This isn't to say I love everything Nintendo puts out (I'm not a big Fire Emblem fan and have little interest in Three Houses, for example), but the Switch just has an incredible library more tailored to my favorite genres and the general lens through which I view gaming as an adult.
They would be worse if photorealistic.
I don't need photorealistic so the dev time and money can go to more contents or new games.
As other have already mentioned, games like BotW and Mario Odyssey are also AAA games. Maybe the OP is thinking of the more "stereotypical AAA games" (for the lack of a better phrase), but there is a wider spectrum of games that fall under "AAA games" so i think its a too broad of a term. For example, Gran Turismo Sports/Forza 7 and Zelda BotW are all AAA games, but naturally they have very different game mechanics. Theres also games like Wolfenstein 2, which is closer to an AAA title (if not a AAA title), while the newly released Wolfenstein: Youngblood is probably more towards an AA title due to having a smaller scope and budget. Both games still offers much of the same type of gameplay and mechanics. I also know that the OP said "a lot of big budget AAA games " and not literally every game, but still, i think the term "AAA games" can be quite broad when it comes to what types of games that there is.
In the end though, it just comes down to personal taste. I've enjoyed $10 games more than i've enjoyed $60 games, and i've enjoyed $60 games more than what i've enjoyed $10 games. So theres no right or wrong answer to it :)
In the end though, it just comes down to personal taste. I've enjoyed $10 games more than i've enjoyed $60 games, and i've enjoyed $60 games more than what i've enjoyed $10 games. So theres no right or wrong answer to it :)
Last edited: