starcraft said:
The problem is, that doesn't really tell us much, except that we don't know much!
As we've seen in this thread, what constitutes AAA varies. You seem to feel it is AAA if a studio says so (happy to be corrected if you have a more specific view).
One thing we do know based on the PS+ terms of use is that Sony seems to believe it consitutes a high-rating game, which in turn (to them) consitutes a 70+ meta. Now, whatever we don't agree on, I am sure we can both agree that the vast majority of users on this site would not believe that 70+ metagames should receive anything like a AAA labelling (excepting those users who explicitely view AAA as an indication of budget). So at best we know that Sony hopes that many of these studios are going to produce a game that could be called AAA - but we also know that regardless of how that turns out, Sony is likely to call the product AAA.
Hell, I am inclined to call Infamous: Second Son AAA. I used to consider AAA games to be big-budget titles over 90+ with system selling capability (by that metric, the WiiU is winning the gaming war). I don't necessarily believe that now. But many gamers do!
I guess my point is this: Right now the PS4 does not have much in the way of impressive, big budget experiences period, letalone exclusive ones. Will they get some? Sure. But there is virtually no chance those studios are all going to produce at least one such title - not all Sony studios are Naughty Dog after all!
|
