I didn't realize that RE2, Metro Exodus, God of War, and Spider-Man were brand new short linear AAA IPs
You know guys, it wouldn't kill you to actually read what was said
-
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.
Single-player games like Uncharted: Drake's Fortune wouldn't get approved by publishers today.
- Thread starter Lant_War
- Start date
You know guys, it wouldn't kill you to actually read what was said
I think there's a salient point in the fact that as far as new IP is concerned, it'll be difficult to greenlight something like UC1 at this point in time. Long-running single-player franchises can still get sequels because there's already market awareness.
But trying to launch an entirely new single-player-only AAA IP is a risk I don't think most publishers are willing to take anymore. Sony is likely the only one who still has the stones, the money AND the pipeline to manage it.
But trying to launch an entirely new single-player-only AAA IP is a risk I don't think most publishers are willing to take anymore. Sony is likely the only one who still has the stones, the money AND the pipeline to manage it.
You're reading this into her quote.
Amy references Uncharted directly as her example, which is a first party console exclusive, which if she intended to exclude first parties would make the entire statement just bizzare.
This is bang on. Just like not every movie or TV series is designed for maximum financial return, there will be a market for high end SP games that appeal to (not exclusively) an aging demographic that grew up on them. If people like us stop buying them however, then yeah they will likely stop being made because I'm not sure how much Gen Z players are interested in them. I am 36 and intend on gaming for decades to come, so here's one SP focused customer that isn't going away.
But the discussion is about what she said in response to the interview question, which was specifically talking about a narrow range of games. It's other posters who are coming in here, not reading the article or interview, and twisting the point she's making to try prove her wrong.
If anything, her response is very much in line with what many people hate about AAA games today (GAAS, too many open-world, not enough small linear experiences, etc. etc.).
Amy used Uncharted as an illustrative example, a title that she has intimate knowledge of. Here's the whole quote for context.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/ventur...ing-a-video-game-and-inspiring-newcomers/amp/
So you spent that time making a stupid meme rather than reading the full context and quote you're trying desperately to make fun of?
Ok...
I think that's what's craziest about this. We've got threads and threads of people lamenting the state of games and basically saying what she is here. But this thread? Hey that woman who is literally an expert on this sort of thing must be WRONG!
I agree with most of what she said. The gaming landscape today definitely makes it hard for publishers (especially third party) to greenlight new AAA IPs that are single-player only and can be completed in less than 10 hours. First party will still make a few of those to broaden their portfolio and sell hardware, but yea I don't see the likes of EA, Activision, S-E, and Ubisoft making too many new AAA IPs that only has a short SP campaign and that's it.
I mean, Drake's Fortune was the worst in the series by a mile, so I wouldn't greenlight it either.
Sarcasm aside, I get what she means. Publishers naturally do have a fiduciary duty to make as much as possible, and games you play once and are done with dont make much beyond the initial purchase. Bethesda found that out the hard way the past few years with games like Prey, Dishonored, and Wolfenstein.
Sarcasm aside, I get what she means. Publishers naturally do have a fiduciary duty to make as much as possible, and games you play once and are done with dont make much beyond the initial purchase. Bethesda found that out the hard way the past few years with games like Prey, Dishonored, and Wolfenstein.
She correctly talks about pitching a new game these days. On the first page people cite RE7 and RE2 as counters, what? That's a sequel and a low risk remake. She's not wrong, and many of the games still being made like that come from the likes of Sony, who have a different business model to third party publishers.
Shes wrong.
She said the same last year and even had a discussion with the creator of Firewatch that totally desagreed with her. Time and time again single player games with no multiplayer in it has proven her wrong by the sales numbers.
Shes super salty cuz her single player Star Wars game got canned by EA. Here's an advice for Amy, leave that trash company, and stop saying that games cant live without microtransactions and lootboxes.
She said the same last year and even had a discussion with the creator of Firewatch that totally desagreed with her. Time and time again single player games with no multiplayer in it has proven her wrong by the sales numbers.
Shes super salty cuz her single player Star Wars game got canned by EA. Here's an advice for Amy, leave that trash company, and stop saying that games cant live without microtransactions and lootboxes.
Good to know. Pitty that she still stuck with EA mentally tough.
In a sense I agree. It wouldn't be made by some monster AAA publishers looking to monetize the shit out of everything, to appease shareholders.
But it would still be made by platform holders and some third parties.
But it would still be made by platform holders and some third parties.
I do finish the longer ones but I also value a game that doesn't put in a gazillion hours of filler just to say they have it. Can't stand when I have to go on a gazillion of the same quest just so a dev can brag about the hours it'll take
I'm not sure what you think this adds to argument in the post I was responding to but I'm not seeing it.
I'm arguing against your (imho not very well reasoned) point that Amy is excluding first party games while using a first party game to make her point.
In fact she's not just using a first party game to make her point, she's specifically saying that a first party game like Uncharted wouldn't be greenlit today because of factors that should impact first parties far less due to the rise of digital revenue streams, platform royalties, online subscriptions etc., all the while excepting first party games (in your opinion) from the equation.
Sorry but I fail to see any logical coherence in that interpretation.
Last edited:
OK? And? If your point was to post a counter, that's not it. A first party game which is also a sequel, and a remake. Nope.
Yes I realise the argument she is trying to make, and she is mostly right, but also she is referring to a game (Uncharted) that was funded by a console manufacturer and greenlit at the start of a new gen!
Why do these western companies refuse to acknowledge the success some AAA japanese companies are having with singleplayer short experiences for example Capcom with RE2 and DMC5 coming out the same year.
Because making a few million is not "successful" when the same product could make a fuck ton of millions. If DMC5 doesn't have the potential of selling as much as GTA V, then why bother?
People seem to be deliberately ignoring the "New IP" part of the equation, which is obviously the most important part. It DOES feel like we used to launch new single-player franchises more often.
As a real counter-example though, maybe Detroit?
As a real counter-example though, maybe Detroit?
Guys RE2 and God of War are not counters to what she's saying. GoW has like 30 hours of content and is the 7th game in a beloved franchise. RE2 is a remake of a classic in one of the longest running franchises in the history of video games. The number of original IP being greenlit with sub-10 hours of single player content and no multiplayer/monetization options is almost zero at this stage. The only games I can think of are The Order, Until Dawn, Detroit, Prey, and Quantum Break. 5 games over the course of a 7 year generation is incredibly low.
Id leave first party stuff out of this conversation since its way easier and necessary for publishers like Nintendo and Sony to have these singleplayer experiences since they have to sell hardware and develop the brand.
Detroit is first party, and it's also funded partly by tax credits.
First party games get 100% of the revenue on full game sales and DLC etc. on the digital platform. Third parties get 70%. That's a huge difference. Third party games have to be profitable. First party games, profitable is nice, but if they drive hardware sales which means more online subs sold, more royalties from other games, etc., that's a big win for the first party too.
I'm not into Uncharted either but what on Earth does that have to do with what she said?
Wait but she's talking about Uncharted which IS first party and saying it wouldn't be greenlit?
She's talking in general about the industry today. Most recently she was at a third party, and she was talking to a cross-section of devs. What posters here are saying is that of those few SP AAA games like that, they are often from first party devs, which have a different business model so it can make more sense for them.
For the record, whether you mean to use its ilk as an example, something like Firewatch is not a big budget AAA title.
Single player without online extensions isn't leaving -- it'll thrive. Amy does not counteract this entirely.
But like war (/s, paging Ron Perlman...) it has changed, it is a little different, and that's because of the modern model and trend of the AAA gaming space and consumer mentality.
No, not true. Your initial post was directed to the article, not her. Why else will you sneak in her name with that amendment?
That's because you know you were wrong with the target, but you gotta maintain the same stance, so you shifted the crosshair from the article to her, and awkwardly shove in that part about her Star Wars project as a weak attempt to undermine her statement. When there's no link at all
Yeah, even for first party, that kind of game wouldn't be greenlit today. Just look at recent Sony games, there's only one that fit that criteria, The Order, which didn't perform that well either. PS4 upcoming games are mostly open world games like Days Gone, Ghost of Tsushima, and Death Stranding. Even TLOU2 looks like it's gonna be on the longer side even though linear single player.
Yep. which again is why I point to game pass. Single player games subsidizing each other. (with multi thrown in of course too).
I just want AA-quality games back. We need more Ninja Theorys and THQ Nordics in this industry - games that are squarely between indie (we'll say A) and AAA. Those are perfect for 8-10 hour games.
The death of rental stores like Blockbuster also really hurt AA games in the past two generations, since AA games were perfect rental games. But with the rise of digital distribution letting developers make higher margins per unit sold, I really hope we get more of those games going forward. If we can get more AA games like Hellblade, that would be very healthy for the industry.
The death of rental stores like Blockbuster also really hurt AA games in the past two generations, since AA games were perfect rental games. But with the rise of digital distribution letting developers make higher margins per unit sold, I really hope we get more of those games going forward. If we can get more AA games like Hellblade, that would be very healthy for the industry.
Yeah, an 8-10 hour Uncharted game would never get made nowadays...
True, but the point isn't just about open world. She also mentions GAAS, multiplayer and battle royale, none of which the last bunch of PS4 single player exclusives have featured. (God of war, Uncharted lot legacy, Spiderman, Detroit).
True, but the point isn't just about open world. She also mentions GAAS, multiplayer and battle royale, none of which the last bunch of PS4 single player exclusives have featured. (God of war, Uncharted lot legacy, Spiderman, Detroit).
Yeah, it's not about open world, the point is about single player games with short playthrough and one and done content like Uncharted. While the games you mentioned don't fit those criterias, they still doesn't fit Amy's criteria too. God of War is the longest game in the series, with RPG mechanics and side quests. Uncharted Lost Legacy is short, but it also has multiplayer and only $40. Detroit has multiple paths to encourage multiple playthroughs. And Spider-Man is open world, by the way.
This hurts people like me. I love linear single player games like Uncharted that have 7-10 hour campaigns.
The problem is most people don't want to drop $60 for a 10 hour game. Hence almost all big budget single player games are open world or have heavy MP modes. Even NPD Mat said so last year.
In order for a non-open world SP game to succeed, it needs to score well into 90+ MC territory.
The problem is most people don't want to drop $60 for a 10 hour game. Hence almost all big budget single player games are open world or have heavy MP modes. Even NPD Mat said so last year.
In order for a non-open world SP game to succeed, it needs to score well into 90+ MC territory.
Even as a new IP, I still don't agree with her. Uncharted's appeal were its graphics and its exclusivity. It's length, scope, or single-player focus don't even enter the equation.
And so if a new short, single-player, stunning-looking game released exclusively on PlayStation, it would still do well, and the decision-makers know that, I think.
And so if a new short, single-player, stunning-looking game released exclusively on PlayStation, it would still do well, and the decision-makers know that, I think.
The Order didn't, and there hasn't any game with similar characteristics released on PS4 so far.
Like The Order? How does being exclusive make a game more appealing?
JFC, this thread is something else.
People, just a hint, if your counterexample to her statement has a number in the title, it's probably not a new IP, yeah?
People, just a hint, if your counterexample to her statement has a number in the title, it's probably not a new IP, yeah?