318
submitted 1 month ago by alessandro@lemmy.ca to c/pcgaming@lemmy.ca
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 237 points 1 month ago

Hey, remember when Baldur’s Gate 3 came out, was pretty excellent, mostly everyone loved it, and then all the AAA studios started whining that it was an unrealistic standard to be held to?

Pepperidge Farm remembers.

[-] QueenHawlSera@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 month ago

I remember that.

I really wish society had class conciousness because if we did. That would have been enough to never ever support another AAA dev again

[-] teft@piefed.social 87 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

So copy what Kingdom Come: Deliverance and Baldur's Gate did and make good replayable games.

Also stop listening to the C suite and start listening to the gamers.

[-] glups@piefed.social 9 points 1 month ago

I'm curious though, viewing movies as investments has made a some studios filthy rich. Why does that seem to be different for games?

[-] teft@piefed.social 30 points 1 month ago

Why do they need to get filthy rich? Why not settle for rich and having a good game?

[-] Typhoon@lemmy.ca 42 points 1 month ago

This is the problem with capitalism now. No one is happy making a good profit. They have to extract maximum profit by cutting everything else.

[-] Lfrith@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Capitalism has always been that way. Might be more accurate to say it gets worse when hobby becomes mainstream enough for more money to start flowing into it. Best balance seems to be when something is profitable but niche so corporations consider it not big enough for them to go all in on with their wealth.

Gaming was better when it was some loser hobby in the eyes of society than accepted like it is now causing it to grow to bring in more revenue than movies and music combined. That drew the attention of the vultures.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] TotallyHuman@lemmy.ca 20 points 1 month ago

On a movie set, the director has a huge amount of authority. It's been baked into the culture for about a hundred years that the director is one step below God. A studio treats films as investments, but they also hire a director and (mostly) get out of the way. Sure, producers do meddle, but it's nowhere close to the same amount as with games -- and all the meddling is still pointed at the director, not the crew. I think this limits the damage that can be done.

Also, the film industry has strong unions. Most of the abuses in game dev simply aren't allowed. I suspect that the horrible culture of game dev can cause developers to stop caring, which bleeds through to the final product, and that won't happen to the same extent for movies.

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 10 points 1 month ago

"Popcorn movies" are a big thing, and most of those big investments are these. They're "turn off you brain for two hours and chill" events. A game, even the most chill ones, almost always last much longer and require more engagement. That is the defining trait of the medium. If you can totally turn your brain off then you didn't make a game, you made an expensive movie. Games, for players, are an investment. Movies often aren't.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] xep@discuss.online 58 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It's okay, we can just not play AAA games.

[-] RonnyZittledong@lemmy.world 56 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Almost all AAA games are online live service games. I have absolutely no interest in those games. I have been surviving off of indy or lower budget games pretty well while the big guys are off trying to make all the money doing boring shit.

[-] Know_not_Scotty_does@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago

I've been on a spree of buying or buying abandoned games or old console games lately and have been really happy with not being online at all, not updating anything I don't want updated, and paying a reasonable price for the content I got. I don't care that the graphics are outdated, if the gameplay works and is fun, its fine looking like almost anything.

[-] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 month ago

Yeah. I guess I'm too old to understand the drive for better and better graphics.

To me, you don't repaint a new version of the Mona Lisa just because we have better paints available today.

Graphics (for me) peaked in the 360/PS3 era when games started to nail smooth "movement". After that it was just about making things more and more photorealistic, which is so completely uninteresting to me because I'm playing a game.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Agent641@lemmy.world 45 points 1 month ago

Have they considered not spending half a billion dollars giving hair strands shadow effects, and instead developing interesting stories?

[-] reksas@sopuli.xyz 14 points 1 month ago

and rest of the budget on ads

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] SuiXi3D@fedia.io 45 points 1 month ago

They aren't bad, they just aren't doing anything out of the ordinary. Ubisoft keeps pumping out effectively the same game for every iteration of Assassins Creed and Far Cry. Activision is the CoD machine and has been for some time. EA is... EA. Microsoft refuses to make a good Halo game because they won't leave their developers alone long enough to see what they can come up with before mandating that it has to be X, Y, and Z.

It's no wonder that smaller, usually indie, developers are seeing such success. Sony's been doing well because the games they're publishing are legitimately good experiences, but that's only going to last so long before they get tired of spending oodles on singleplayer games and not seeing the returns they want.

Everything's turned into a live-service game because they're the only thing that actually generates any kind of consistent return on investment, and everything fancy in those games is out of reach for the common person struggling to get by, so the entire game is held up by a small group spending WAY too much on them.

[-] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Some “DLC happy” games seem to work in niches while mostly avoiding the micro-transaction trap. I’m thinking of Frontier’s “Planet” games, or some of Paradox’s stuff.

I’m confused at some games not taking the DLC happy route, TBH. 2077, for instance, feels like it’s finally fixed up, and they could make a killing selling side quests smaller in scope than the one they have.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] hightrix@lemmy.world 37 points 1 month ago

Call me crazy, but I don’t want to play a game “with staying power”.

I want to play games that are fun, I finish them, then move on.

I don’t need a “forever game”. I don’t want seasons, season passes, dailies, battle passes, time limited, time gated content.

[-] Azal@pawb.social 24 points 1 month ago

Crazy. I want to play a game with staying power.

I want the game that I look at and go "When did I get 1000 hours on the game?" Because I keep coming back to it.

But this is where we agree. I want to play games that are fun.

Seasons, dailies, battle passes, etc aren't the things that I see as "staying power", that's microtransactions to a sunk cost fallacy.

Staying power to me is like Terraria, where I go in, build a world. Run around. Then wander off to something else... to wander back and play more Terraria.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ragas@lemmy.ml 18 points 1 month ago

With staying power I thought of games like Factorio.

Bought it once, played it for thousands of hours. A decade later or so it gets an extension which basically quintuples the content, am playing it thousands of hours more.

Factorio, rimworld, stardew valley, and project zomboid are the games I'm likely to be playing at any given time of year since they came out and every time there's an expansion or update.

These weren't expensive games to develop, I even played them for years when they weren't yet finished.

I'm still of the opinion that the best games are the ones that are developed in a way is friendly to the mod community.

Mods literally made MechWarrior mercenaries, Minecraft and GTA5 into Great games rather than merely good ones.

[-] Sanctus@anarchist.nexus 32 points 1 month ago
[-] slazer2au@lemmy.world 39 points 1 month ago
[-] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

And also spent by utterly incompetent management whose prime qualification is fluency in corpospeak and AAA tier ass-kissing...

... as opposed to, you know, any kind of actual project management skills.

They're all self important, self righteous idiots, in leadership roles in AAA.

... The goddamned AAAA pirate game that Ubisoft took 10 years to rework 3 or 4 times, and then shit out as basically a demo of a mobile style gacha game, that requires a fairly high end PC to run.

How is that not just like, money laundering / tax evasion / tax fraud, with extra steps?

[-] gaylord_fartmaster@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago

Constraints have always led to increased creativity, and now that there basically aren't any limits with current tech and ballooning budgets in AAA there's also basically no creativity.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] drosophila 25 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

People have been saying that AAA games suck since at least 2007, with the brown and bloom era, the rise of modern military shooters, and gameplay becoming increasingly trivial with quicktime events and so forth.

In my opinion they weren't wrong then and they aren't wrong now; indie games, then and now, are where innovation comes from. Though from an aesthetic perspective I think if anything AAA games are actually a little bit better now, since at least they're using more colors than "gunmetal grey" and "piss yellow".

[-] Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.ca 24 points 1 month ago

I think the last AAA I tried was Baldur's Gate 3.

Pretty good tbh.

[-] Vupware@lemmy.zip 18 points 1 month ago

BG3 is technically an indie game if you go by the literal definition of the term!

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

It's weird to think of a top-down historically-isometric RPG as "AAA". We've come a long way, baby.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[-] thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works 24 points 1 month ago

We are at a point now that games from the PS3/X360 era still look and play well, so newer titles need to contribute something new in order to make an impact.

If a AAA-studio releases a 7/10 title in 2026, it’s not just competing with the 8s, 9s, and 10s also releasing the same year - but also every single such title from the past 20 years!

This will also only continue to get worse in coming years as the backlog of exceptional titles will continue to build.

[-] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 month ago

For the last little while now, I've been finding that my most played games have been on my old 360 that I decided to plug in again, and my old old PS2 collection that I ripped and loaded to an emulator because the old hardware broke a long time ago.

Third place is "new to me" games that I finally buy when they go on a good sale years after they were "new" (is. RDR2 and Cyberpunk)

I haven't bought a new AAA title in years on console because I can't justify the cost.

[-] NewNewAugustEast@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 month ago

PS2 games look and play great on the Steamdeck. Probably my favorite way to play them.

By the way, I have a couple of PS2's, and I use a harddrive so the hardware just keeps working. Usually it is the laser that fails. There are also options to network and play from NAS, or use a micro SD.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 month ago

Im still waiting for them to make something TRULY original again, like Majestic.

But that takes creativity and hard work, something massive corporations and capitalism will shove down so far you forget they ever existed.

[-] thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 month ago

It honestly feels like original and creative works are exclusively the domain of indie developers nowadays.

Given how bloated AAA budgets have become, publishers seemingly don’t want to risk taking a chance on some more whacky ideas - at least until an indie dev proves it out first.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] ramble81@lemmy.zip 23 points 1 month ago

And then you have Clair Obscur schooling studios on how it should be done.

[-] Washedupcynic@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 month ago

I just started playing this game. I cried at the end of the fucking prologue. What amazing writing and voice acting.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] azertyfun@sh.itjust.works 18 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Whole industry has been saying that for a while. It's unsustainable and to a large extend large studios have fallen to the sunk cost fallacy since they are often on 5-10 years development cycles (!), with very rigid schedules (since they rotate development teams).

Now the big studios are going bankrupt/getting sold to MBS while Expedition 33 is doing tricks on their grave (at least relatively, in absolute numbers their sales numbers aren't high with normies who only play CoD and FIFA).

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] Typhoon@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 month ago

Bring back games that you're passionate for and gamers will love instead of designing a gamified soulless money funnel.

There are thousands of amazing indie games created by people who have an idea and a will to make something. I'll spend my money there instead.

[-] Shanmugha@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago

Games are ok, meaning there are good ones. Trying to release more and more to get more and more money - that's going to fail, yup

Also, look out the window: we have so much more to spend time and resources on

[-] QueenHawlSera@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 month ago

This is what happens when you chase trends instead of just having a solid idea.

Newsflash: You aren't going to turn random horror IP into the next Dead By Daylight. DBD is already Dead By Daylight

You aren't going to make a multi-player online shooter that is the next Fortnite. Fortnite is already Fortnite.

Actually now that I've said that aloud it seems like the problem is that they're trying to be the next big multi-player experience when they should be focused on a solid single player

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 month ago

That's because it was replaced with the far superior AAAA games, of course!

[-] myfunnyaccountname@lemmy.zip 10 points 1 month ago

I dunno about anyone else. I don’t wanna pay 100 for a half finished buggy as fuck game. Wait a year for bugs to maybe be fixed. Only to then pay another 50 to get the 3 dlc’s to make it the complete game. So I can finally buy the same game the for 67th time as cause it’s got a new skin or some shit this year. All while the dev calls it staying power.

[-] itsgroundhogdayagain@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 month ago

We won't have enough RAM for new cutting-edge AAA games anyway. System requirements will plateau for the foreseeable future while they continue to raise game prices and complain that it's too hard.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] NewNewAugustEast@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 month ago

Painkiller wasn't great either. Just saying.

I have played all the way through all the resident evil series, picking up the last 3 when they came out, which is rare for me. I am usually a patient gamer. I assume RES is a AAA game, but correct me if I am wrong.

Point is each one has been fantastic. Not many games hold my attention like those do. So apparently it can be done. Hoping the next one out soon is just as good.

Oh, and I played all of them on Linux, they worked flawlessly.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 28 Dec 2025
318 points (100.0% liked)

PC Gaming

13954 readers
718 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS