• 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.

Ghost305

Banned
Jan 6, 2018
775
High budgets have absolutely nothing to do with a game's success.
That's just naive. Higher budgets can mean more time dedicated to tightening mechanics or fixing bugs. Those two things objectively make a better quality game.

And I'm sure we can all think of mediocre games that sold well due primarily to marketing.

And it's absurd to expect CoD size budgets on games that can't recoup that investment. There's a reason why only certain proven franchises have those monster budgets. You seem to think Namco should give a small game like Katamari the same budget as Dark Souls.
How do you know other games/genres can't recoup that investment when many haven't been given that chance in the first place?

Let's not forget there was a time when shooters on console was considered a fool's errand, until someone took a big-budget chance on Bungie.
 

bionic77

Member
Oct 25, 2017
30,888
Gaming has never been so diverse , as others have pointed out . Go to PC , we have sims games like Two Point Hospital , Cities Skylines , TBS like XCOM 2 , Phantom Doctrine , classic RPGs like Divinity O/S 2 , Pillar of Eternity , Torment : Tide of Numenara . And then the Yakuzas games , Monster Hunter World on PS4 . How are these not diverse quality games ? and they are just the tip of the iceberg .

Also this is another case of a member dropping some unreasonable controversial topic and disappeared . Segafreak where are you ? Can't you at least defend your opinion ?
I would say that diversity peaked for console gaming during the PS2 era. But I don't think you can say that the diversity of this gen is particularly bad. I mean if you want to see really bad diversity go and see what we had to play during the Atari years. I think we are having normal diversity for console gaming.

We might be in the peak for PC gaming though. Almost everything is ported to PCs now and there are so many marketplaces and games coming out that no one can even keep track of it anymore.

Then you throw in smartphone and tablet and I would have to agree that overall this is probably the time with the most amount of games with more ways to play them than any before.
 

Budi

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,883
Finland
It's better than ever really. I guess something could be said about the AAA industry and definitely something about what games media tend to cover and focus on, that needs improvement. Could help OP to find some cool and fresh games too.
we never had so many xcom like games

we literally have nu-xcom, xenonauts (old xcom) and phoenix point (nu-xcom done by old xcom dude)

that's not to say other games clearly inspired by it like phantom doctrine

i'm failing to remember another niche subgenre that got (and still will get) so many quality titles in such a short time
Mario + Rabbids too! It's fun and has it's own unique spins to the genre.
 
Last edited:

Asbsand

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
9,901
Denmark
I think a lot can relate to this on some level. At the same time I feel, particularly in a place like this we're in the 'here and now' so we're more concerned with what happens than how the market currently looks.
 

saenima

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
11,892
Because like it or not, higher budget usually indicates higher marketing/popularity.

The most popular games in the world are not even AAA, with the exception of GTA V, which is a very odd and particular case. From League of Legends to Minecraft to Fortnite to Clash of Clans. The games you are complaining about are huge within their own niche. COD sells about 20 million copies on average. There are 80 million PS4's alone out there. That's before factoring in the other consoles, PC and mobile. The biggest shooters in the world are not even COD and BF, they're two independent games that came out of nowhere.

Which in turn dictates industry trends & mechanics that begin to seep into all games.

Tell that to Spelunky and Binding of Isaac, which popularized roguelike elements and procedural generation. Tell that to Divinity: Original Sin and Pillars of Eternity, which ushered in the current golden age of computer RPG's we're enjoying. Also Minecraft, which pretty much created a genre that encompasses literally hundreds of games. Or PUBG, that crystallized what people have been looking for in a multiplayer shooter for a long time and effectively gave birth to a new subgenre that, ironically enough regarding your issues, even COD and BF games are chasing.

All of these and many more did exactly what you're claiming that games need a big budget to do, without needing one.

If more games from different genres were allowed the budgets that COD/BF are allowed, we'd see a wider variety of ideas iterated and improved upon in the AAA space.

These games are allowed those budgets because they will recoup them without fail and make enough of a profit on top of it to justify the investment in the first place. It's as simple as that. I too would like Capcom to get off their asses and greenlight a 60 million dollar Maximo 3 but it ain't gonna happen because no one would fucking buy it.

Blame capitalism.
 

TC McQueen

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,592
Honestly, depending on what you're looking for, the current market can be very feast or famine. Want turn based starship strategy games? You've got like 2 of them - Battlestar Galactica: Deadlock and the game the same developer made before it. Want open world games? Pick your poison from indie and AAA. Want a modern space based RPG that actually has aliens in it and is not a Star Wars game? Mass Effect is basically the only choice. Want a retro style platformer? Here's like 50 billion of the things.
 

saenima

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
11,892
Honestly, depending on what you're looking for, the current market can be very feast or famine. Want turn based starship strategy games? You've got like 2 of them - Battlestar Galactica: Deadlock and the game the same developer made before it. Want open world games? Pick your poison from indie and AAA. Want a modern space based RPG that actually has aliens in it and is not a Star Wars game? Mass Effect is basically the only choice. Want a retro style platformer? Here's like 50 billion of the things.

The 'trick' is to have a wide enough interest in the medium that you can find good stuff everywhere. There are some genres that i would like to see more of as well but as a whole there really is a ton of variety, unless you limit yourself to a couple of genres and/or platforms.
 

Craymond

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,282
Portland
Thread backfire? Games have had more genres represented even dead ones. The variety is insane right now. Also consider games like Yoku's Express, these crazy fun fusions. PS3/360 days were pathetic compared to now.
 

jroc74

Member
Oct 27, 2017
28,992
High budgets have absolutely nothing to do with a game's success. And it's absurd to expect CoD size budgets on games that can't recoup that investment. There's a reason why only certain proven franchises have those monster budgets. You seem to think Namco should give a small game like Katamari the same budget as Dark Souls.

You would think Minecraft would tell ppl this.

Look at other high budget games that didn't sell well this gen. We had threads with publishers talking about single player games dying, and yet Sony has been having success. For whatever reason, some have success, some don't. And it isn't just budget.

A high budget also doesn't automatically equal success or a good game.
 
Last edited:

Thatguy

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
6,207
Seattle WA
PS2/GC era was my perfect blend. Lots of great action games and platformers, RPGs everywhere, plus the budding Sony cinematic style in MGS2 & 3, BGE, etc. That was the gen we got a lot more experimental big budget like KOTOR, SotC, Metroid Prime, Wind Waker.

So we still get big budget experimental, but its rare. BotW is the game I was aching for after playing Wind Waker. NMS is the game I have fantasized about since forever. But for this gen, thats it.
 

ShinUltramanJ

Member
Oct 27, 2017
12,949
That's just naive. Higher budgets can mean more time dedicated to tightening mechanics or fixing bugs. Those two things objectively make a better quality game.

And I'm sure we can all think of mediocre games that sold well due primarily to marketing.


How do you know other games/genres can't recoup that investment when many haven't been given that chance in the first place?

Let's not forget there was a time when shooters on console was considered a fool's errand, until someone took a big-budget chance on Bungie.

Bungie took a big budget chance? No. Goldeneye and Medal of Honor already blazed the trail Bungie thread on.

At this point what you're arguing has nothing to do with the topic. You expect publishers to risk their existence going balls to the wall with epic CoD sized budgets for everything. It's ridiculous. Do you only watch movies with $200 million dollar budgets?
 

ShinUltramanJ

Member
Oct 27, 2017
12,949
Thread backfire? Games have had more genres represented even dead ones. The variety is insane right now. Also consider games like Yoku's Express, these crazy fun fusions. PS3/360 days were pathetic compared to now.

So were previous generations if we're to be honest. Only a few genres were represented with very little experimentation. It's nothing like what we have now.

Just last night with Humble I received a seek and find game as an early unlock. I didn't even know such a thing existed and I consider myself pretty entrenched in the hobby.
 

Majukun

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,542
actually i think it was way worse a couple of years ago..nowadays with indies getting more and more budget ,kickstarter and whatnot we are getting some genres and games that before we would never hope for...meanwhile until a while ago everything was an fps or tps

sure, it was better in the nineties, but sadly games now cost too much
 

eso76

Prophet of Truth
Member
Dec 8, 2017
8,108
i mean, it's not like in the C64 days when people thought it would be a good idea to make a game in which you're a toothbrush (doing woth toothbrushes usually do) but it's very diverse when you factor in indies and digital only games.
AAA games, by definition need as wide an appeal they can get so that's another story.
 

demondance

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,808
Compared to the past, we're in an incredibly diverse moment. I remember when everything was shitty mascot platformers and half-assed fighting games. I also remember that stretch where everything was a (failed) shooter clone, every other genre was dead or struggling, and every single game had some form of the "chest high cover" gameplay loop. Things have been much worse than they are right now. Much worse.

I'm resigned to major AAA games being formulaic, and not taking risks, because that's what those types of games are. It's just a reality of making something with that much inherent risk in trying to profit from an absurdly large budget. There's never been a point in gaming where you had more than one or two truly revolutionary AAA games over the course of 5 years. Most of the big ideas in major games end up being co-opted from smaller games that had unexpected success.
 

demondance

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,808
I just want more AAA Rpgs in the same vein as Skyrim, Witcher 3 and Dark Souls. I feel we haven't gotten that many as of late.

Has there even been a period of more than two years without a Souls game? And the scale drops to months rather than years if we include games in the same subgenre like Nioh or The Surge.

Skyrims and Witchers don't land very often, granted. That isn't because there's no demand or interest from publishers, though, they're just inherently the sort of game that only comes out once every so often. These are massive projects. Fallout 4 wasn't that long ago, and if you're willing to dip down a tier in production quality there's stuff like Elex waiting for you. Some of the studios that made this type of thing have moved on to different sorts of projects, though, as they quickly discovered that most people are content to wait for the next Skyrim than play something like Divinity 2.
 

Ghost305

Banned
Jan 6, 2018
775
Bungie took a big budget chance? No. Goldeneye and Medal of Honor already blazed the trail Bungie thread on.

At this point what you're arguing has nothing to do with the topic. You expect publishers to risk their existence going balls to the wall with epic CoD sized budgets for everything. It's ridiculous. Do you only watch movies with $200 million dollar budgets?
Ugh, if you're going to keep hyperbolizing everything I say instead of having an actual discussion, I think I'm done here.
 

Ghost305

Banned
Jan 6, 2018
775
The most popular games in the world are not even AAA, with the exception of GTA V, which is a very odd and particular case. From League of Legends to Minecraft to Fortnite to Clash of Clans. The games you are complaining about are huge within their own niche. COD sells about 20 million copies on average. There are 80 million PS4's alone out there. That's before factoring in the other consoles, PC and mobile. The biggest shooters in the world are not even COD and BF, they're two independent games that came out of nowhere.

Tell that to Spelunky and Binding of Isaac, which popularized roguelike elements and procedural generation. Tell that to Divinity: Original Sin and Pillars of Eternity, which ushered in the current golden age of computer RPG's we're enjoying. Also Minecraft, which pretty much created a genre that encompasses literally hundreds of games. Or PUBG, that crystallized what people have been looking for in a multiplayer shooter for a long time and effectively gave birth to a new subgenre that, ironically enough regarding your issues, even COD and BF games are chasing.

All of these and many more did exactly what you're claiming that games need a big budget to do, without needing one.

Well now you're being disingenuous. I never said big budget is a requirement in order to have influence: I said being popular was. And being a big-budget game that everyone has seen commercials for and end up buying as a result is one way to get there.

That games can also become popular through the GaaS model doesn't invalidate this.


These games are allowed those budgets because they will recoup them without fail and make enough of a profit on top of it to justify the investment in the first place. It's as simple as that. I too would like Capcom to get off their asses and greenlight a 60 million dollar Maximo 3 but it ain't gonna happen because no one would fucking buy it.

Blame capitalism.

In a way, I am!

I think my point was more that it's a shame to see so many publishers use the capital they bring in from AAA-games to homogenize genres rather than diversify them. We've seen a fair number of franchises lose their identity in favor of playing doppelganger to more popular ones (Tomb Raider, God of War)

Take your example: if you ever got a $60 million Maximo 3, I'm willing to bet it would resemble God of War PS4 more than Maximo 2. Capcom would probably believe that anything less (like a lower budget game that's an evolution of Maximo 2, aka what you probably actually want) would be perceived as a game that can't compete with the titans of the genre, and therefore never would get made.
 

saenima

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
11,892
Well now you're being disingenuous. I never said big budget is a requirement in order to have influence: I said being popular was. And being a big-budget game that everyone has seen commercials for and end up buying as a result is one way to get there.

That games can also become popular through the GaaS model doesn't invalidate this.

My point is that due to the risk averse nature of AAA development, the innovation and influential trends are coming from other places. Games are not stagnating, at all. Even if what you want is not coming from where you want it to come from.

In a way, I am!

I think my point was more that it's a shame to see so many publishers use the capital they bring in from AAA-games to homogenize genres rather than diversify them. We've seen a fair number of franchises lose their identity in favor of playing doppelganger to more popular ones (Tomb Raider, God of War)

Take your example: if you ever got a $60 million Maximo 3, I'm willing to bet it would resemble God of War PS4 more than Maximo 2. Capcom would probably believe that anything less (like a lower budget game that's an evolution of Maximo 2, aka what you probably actually want) would be perceived as a game that can't compete with the titans of the genre, and therefore never would get made.

I get you, i really do. But in my opinion, the AAA space is in a much better place regarding variety than it was last gen. And i mean variety in more ways than one. From genre and design philosophies to artstyles, from gender and racial makeup to accessibility and business models. There was a point towards the latter half of last gen where i was actually worried about where the industry was going creativity wise. The AAA space was a Frankestein monster of generic greybrown tacked on multi shooter dudebros trying to outdo each other in eating their own tails. This gen has been a veritable breath of fresh air after that. It's not perfect, you're right on your Maximo assessment, but i feel like things are looking up and more risks are being taken on what i would call an upper AA level. There's a great ressurgence there going on for the last couple of years that is only gonna get stronger. The existence of games like Vampyr, Elex, Biomutant, Darksiders 3, Call of Cthulhu, The Surge 2 gives me life.
 

Deleted member 24540

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 29, 2017
1,599
The 'trick' is to have a wide enough interest in the medium that you can find good stuff everywhere. There are some genres that i would like to see more of as well but as a whole there really is a ton of variety, unless you limit yourself to a couple of genres and/or platforms.

Variety how? Most games offer explicit tutorialization, usually by means of a voice com talking over gameplay and arrows pointing in the right direction, testing your ability to follow orders. You know, like how Uncharted highlights points of interest in the color red, even though the number of possibilities are limited in a given scenario. For someone who prefers games with implicit methods of learning, with level design that invites the player to experiment and put things together by themselves, it's slim pickings. How can you then say that all kinds of games are currently being represented, when it's clearly not the case?
 
Apr 21, 2018
3,179
-shitty anime games farted out by Namco
.

Discuss.
Even Namco is sometime able to have smart decision.

Trendy DBZ during the 16 bits era
reliablehomelycockroach


The Anime
dbz-dragonball-z-8xGfCofGLY7ug


Modern DBZ by Namco/ASW
dpXHct


I'm not that fan anymore but some "shitty anime games" became more attractive than the actual serie.
 

saenima

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
11,892
Variety how? Most games offer explicit tutorialization, usually by means of a voice com talking over gameplay and arrows pointing in the right direction, testing your ability to follow orders. You know, like how Uncharted highlights points of interest in the color red, even though the number of possibilities are limited in a given scenario. For someone who prefers games with implicit methods of learning, with level design that invites the player to experiment and put things together by themselves, it's slim pickings. How can you then say that all kinds of games are currently being represented, when it's clearly not the case?

The new AC has an explicit mode for you then! Bloodborne (and the Souls series) is a good example of what you want. If you step out of the small group of AAA games that is designed specifically towards the widest demographic possible (like Uncharted) you will find many, many examples. Take a look on Steam. There are dozens and dozens of games that would fit your demands, of all shapes and sizes. You can also disable tutorials, hints and visual tips in most of the AAA games i was talking about btw.
 

Martoridley

Member
Oct 29, 2017
336
Has there even been a period of more than two years without a Souls game? And the scale drops to months rather than years if we include games in the same subgenre like Nioh or The Surge.

Skyrims and Witchers don't land very often, granted. That isn't because there's no demand or interest from publishers, though, they're just inherently the sort of game that only comes out once every so often. These are massive projects. Fallout 4 wasn't that long ago, and if you're willing to dip down a tier in production quality there's stuff like Elex waiting for you. Some of the studios that made this type of thing have moved on to different sorts of projects, though, as they quickly discovered that most people are content to wait for the next Skyrim than play something like Divinity 2.
I think i kinda forgot about Fallout 4 for a moment. Haven't tried Elex yet, is it any good?
On topic: I think it's not too bad in terms of variety, especially since I got a switch I expanded my tastes a lot.
 

demondance

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,808
I think i kinda forgot about Fallout 4 for a moment. Haven't tried Elex yet, is it any good?
On topic: I think it's not too bad in terms of variety, especially since I got a switch I expanded my tastes a lot.

Elex is pretty cool but it definitely has the requisite amount of jank for a Piranha Bytes game. But this whole genre is pretty janky, so it shouldn't put you off. It's a return to form for PB.
 

Fafalada

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,065
I would say that diversity peaked for console gaming during the PS2 era.
I disagree - PS1 era actually had a lot more hallmark PC ports that mostly disappeared in PS2 gen (though that's in part due to PC market itself being at its lowest point during those years), which very much contributed to overall diversity. And we're back on that level now - much of that same PC output appears on all other platforms as well - so diversity is IMO peaking across the board, even if you're a one platform console gamer.
Heck - even from perspective of more console-specific efforts the recent Sony TGS showcase looked like something that I haven't seen in well over a decade, reminiscent of PS2 peak output.
 

Fafalada

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,065
How do you know other games/genres can't recoup that investment when many haven't been given that chance in the first place?.
From view of large-publishers, they have people that analyze and study trends trying to predict the sales potential of new proposals. Obviously that's far from perfect and it has been known to misfire - but approving tens or hundreds of millions in budget needs to have some justification behind it. Ie. it's less about budgets increasing sales chances directly and more that they follow "safe" bets.
Also why new niche discovery comes from smaller teams 99% of the time.
 

HyGogg

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
2,495
I think it's a lot better than it was 9 or 10 years ago when everything was FPS and cover shooters. The AAA space can't get too daring given the financial risks involved but there's still a good amount of variety that we hadn't seen much of last gen as well a vibrant high-budget indie space that can be a little more daring.
 

Patapuf

Member
Oct 26, 2017
6,408
Variety how? Most games offer explicit tutorialization, usually by means of a voice com talking over gameplay and arrows pointing in the right direction, testing your ability to follow orders. You know, like how Uncharted highlights points of interest in the color red, even though the number of possibilities are limited in a given scenario. For someone who prefers games with implicit methods of learning, with level design that invites the player to experiment and put things together by themselves, it's slim pickings. How can you then say that all kinds of games are currently being represented, when it's clearly not the case?

The biggest games around nowadays, Fortnite, PUBG, League, CS etc. offer very little tutorialisation, if any. Darks Souls got super popular with this. The survival genre too. Among indies, there's no shortage of games that are all about self-discovery either.

Even Nintendo, which is among the worst offenders of overtutorialisation has dialed back in games like BOTW.

I don't think we've ever had more games with minimal tutorials than today. From walking sims to hardcore action games.
 

crazillo

Member
Apr 5, 2018
8,179
Actually a lot of genres have been revived in the last couple of years, i.e. cRPGs (Divinity, Pillars of Eternity), strategy games (Endless Space 2, Civ VI), sims (Cities Skylines, Planet Coaster). Indies have been exploring new topics previously not covered in games (philosophically, e.g. The Talos Principle or The Swapper, you could name tons of categories here). We have a new genre, the infamously so-called Walking Simulator. AAA lacks diversity at times, AA titles have been getting less frequent - I agree on that, OP. And when something is different, like more exploration less combat in the new Tomb Raider, there will often be other problems.

I guess you need to broaden your views.

You got a valid point though: There are certain elements of modern games that seem to be in all of them, I hate it and it makes them feel alike. These gameplay mechanics includes XP and light RPG elements, I am also not a big fan of the focus view that highlights anything and everything for the player.
 

DXB-KNIGHT

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,188
From AAA publishers perspective I do agree.
Since projects are costing more the risks are higher which in some cases one failure can shut down a whole project.
 

Deleted member 24540

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 29, 2017
1,599
The biggest games around nowadays, Fortnite, PUBG, League, CS etc. offer very little tutorialisation, if any. Darks Souls got super popular with this. The survival genre too. Among indies, there's no shortage of games that are all about self-discovery either.

Even Nintendo, which is among the worst offenders of overtutorialisation has dialed back in games like BOTW.

I don't think we've ever had more games with minimal tutorials than today. From walking sims to hardcore action games.

1) Referring to SP only

2) Survival games are grindy, which falls outside the criteria of 12 hour to beat, 20 hours to exhaust of collectibles type games that I stated earlier in the thread; think about a typical 2D Mario game or a Platinum campaign like Bayonetta and Vanquish. I want tight, focused, fine-tuned level design with zero repetitive elements, so you can discard any games that have EXP bars, RPG-like inventory management, and other similar busywork. Celeste is a good example of a 2018 game that fulfills my wishes, it is a complete game designed exactly how I want my games to be like.

3) BotW allows freedom at the cost of having flat difficulty/complexity curves when it comes to dungeon/shrine design. They are all self contained in the sense that every shrine and dungeon is designed as though it's your first, which puts massive restrictions on how far you can take a concept. In other words there is nothing even close to as complex and satisfying as the Stone Tower temple in BotW, for reasons that follow from the choice of an expansive world free to be explored however one pleases.

4) This goes back to the BotW example; game design has taken a hit in order to ensure that you don't need to feed explicit tutorialization. If you simplify and homogenize control schemes across the board, so that an XBOX FPS game has the same button inputs as a Playstation one, etc., then yes you don't need to teach players anything! But you also loose innovation in the process.

The other side of the coin is not tutorials, but guiding systems, well past the beginning stages of games. Like in Spider Man you have this person talking through the com unit informing you about things and its main role is to guide you towards your next objective, and all you do as a player is to follow orders essentially. BotW handles this aspect well, to be fair, because you are purely driven by your curiosity. However, to work around this fact, Nintendo designed the game such that you can make significant progress whichever direction you choose to go in, or whatever you choose to do, so it's kind of pointless. As a result, in modern games you never get the feeling that you are stuck, wondering where the heck to go and what to do next in order to progress the game further. You can understand this notion more clearly when you have people go back to play old games, say A Link to the Past or Super Metroid, because in those games it's possible to wander around aimlessly for hours without having accomplished anything that is trackable in the game, so it feels like you are "wasting time", and the players get frustrated and bored, either putting the games down or look up guides online. This is what has happened in the past decades, the shift towards frictionless gaming, and I find little pleasure from such games for the indirect reason that they must be simplified and made easy to work.

The fundamental problem games have today is that anyone, no matter their experience, must be able to pick up the controller at any stage in the game and be able to accomplish progress, i.e. have fun. Because a person who doesn't instantly derive enjoyment from a piece of entertainment would never buy it. For example, Bayonetta gameplay looks awesome and fluid in Youtube clips uploaded by skilled players, but good luck replicating that on your first try. So instead of expecting more from your players, you dumb the design down so that anyone can make combat look amazing and cinematic, like what happens in Assassin's Creed, which is terribly shallow with a combat system that is essentially a QTE. This is what ruined gaming: developers expecting less work from their players, and players rejecting games that demand more from you.
 
Last edited:

s_mirage

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,770
Birmingham, UK
In the AAA space I agree to an extent. While output from some major publishers may be more varied than it was last gen, it's still not great. On the PC in particular, remember when major publishers made military sims, space sims, point and click adventures, varied strategy games, etc? ~20 years ago this was the case, but not now. EA especially used to put out a wide variety of games across disparate genres, while now they put out as little as possible and what they do put out is as safe as safe can be.

Indie games have vastly increased in numbers and quality, and that has served to spice up the marketplace, but sometimes it would be nice to have something in a underserved genre with higher production values.
 

BassForever

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
29,921
CT
This or he only has one console and no PC.

Maybe if you only own an xbox one and don't play indie games then maybe you can squint and the argument works. If you're someone looking for variety of games and haven't looked at what indies are making you're doing yourself a disservice.
 

Kaxi

Member
Oct 30, 2017
326
Poland
I think the variety is pretty good right now, certainly better than 5-10 years ago, but only if you look at all games: AAA, AA, episodic, mobile, indie, handheld.

The thing is, in PSX/N64 era, the budget gap between AAA, AA and A games was small, for an average teen player almost unnoticable if the game was simply good and fun to play. Now the gap between God of War and puzzle, adventure, or sim games is too wide. In a way, cinematic AAA is a genre in itself already, not something that can be applied to any genre.

Also, remember that's not just greed of publishers wanting going only after the biggest profits. Some genres have simply too small audiences to ever return a triple-A budget unless there's a major shift in the mainstream. But I'm okay with that, it's not like all genres need overblown budgets. Point-and-clicks are so charming partially because they're pretty classic in their visuals, for example.
 

Jawmuncher

Crisis Dino
Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
38,397
Ibis Island
I made a thread about this awhile back. I definitely agree that certain genres are far less now. Even if you can argue that there's more variety in other styles. That statement isn't equal to others. Like linear Third Person Shooters are few and far between now compared to say open world or GAAS ones.

The ability for indie devs to make a certain genre I think plays a factor and as has been said. Indie stuff (especially of higher caliber) isn't as common in fully 3D games.
 

jedezel

Member
Oct 28, 2017
135
I remember a time when all games on PC were FPS and RTS. I have the feeling that we have way more variety now.
 
Oct 25, 2017
11,437
This is what ruined gaming: developers expecting less work from their players, and players rejecting games that demand more from you.

And yet, Dark Souls is a massive success that also led to other success stories, like Nioh. Heck, Cuphead sold over 3 million copies in a pretty short timeframe. Hollow Knight is doing really well, The Witness was a huge success. AAA games that require mastery, like Devil May Cry 5 and Sekiro, are still being made. Or games like Hitman 2 , that are basically one big sandbox of player opportunities.

These are all different genres too. DS is an action RPG, Nioh an action game with a Diablo-esque loot system, Cuphead a run & gun game, Hollow Knight a Metroidvania, The Witness a puzzle game, DMC 5 a character action game, Sekiro an action game and Hitman 2 a stealth game.

Though you seem to be limiting yourself by demanding fairly short, linear games with tight level design (which means you'd miss out on great games like Prey, even though is does have incredible level design), but even then Sega released Sonic Mania, Capcom is making Mega Man 11, Platinum Bayonetta 3, ID is making Doom Eternal and so on.
 
Last edited:
Oct 27, 2017
8,586
I never get the people who complain about control standardisation. I dont think games always need some unique controls to stand out from the rest just cuz and tbh id rather have an easy time knowing the controls and learning the game instead of having to learn both.