The term 'AAA' has nothing to do with production values or budgets

[Shiken]

irstupid said:
AAA game is the same as like a big hollywood blockbuster movie.

Quality means nothing. Just means a shit ton of money was spent on the game. The movie/game can suck or bomb in sales, but that doesn't make it not a blockbuster/AAA game.

Then we as gamers need to word things better when making certain requests.  Like instead of saying, "I want more 3rd party AAA games on Switch," people should say  " I want more QUALITY 3rd party games on Switch."

 

Most people would rather have games like Octopath Traveler, Mario Plus Rabbids, or Fortnite on the console than many of the other lackluster AAA games.  They would be nice to have, and people would brag, but quality seems to be trumping games that cost more to make.  Even the better AAA games that do come to Switch seem to struggle despite people wanting them on the system.  DOOM and Wolf 2 for example, while great ports, lacked in quality when compared to their counterparts.  But cheaper games that are just as good like Crash, Sonic Mania, Octopath, etc are selling like hotcacks.  So when most Switch gamers beg for more AAA 3rd party games, they are not truly asking for what they want based on sales numbers.

 

I am not saying you are wrong, it is just a difference of perspective.  One party is looking at it from a consumer standpoint (mainly Nintendo fans) while the other is looking at it from a development standpoint.  Both sides have a point, and while the development standpoint seems to be the traditional term, a difference in perspective is causing a lose in translation when the topic is discussed.