| haxxiy said: I mean, that's the thing. A lot of people claim that the industry is missing AA games, that everything nowadays is too expensive and time-consuming and that's costing the industry, etc. But the thing is, people nowadays don't buy AA games. Period. They almost unanimously fail with rare exceptions, meaning going back to the old PS2 days where that used to work seems out of the question with today's market. So, you might as well go for high-risk, high-reward GAAS in that scenario. Blame the game, not the players. |
This is definitely how the industry views it.
But I think the reality is (way, way) more complicated.
When I look at the AA space, a lot of the times they're very obviously trying to go after the same trends as the AAA space, but that ultimately means they're just watered down versions of AAA games. I think there's a big missing piece in the industry, and that's where the AAA space used to be. If you look at a lot of the big games of the PS3 era (some of which are still talked about today), there's no development like those. You look at Uncharted 2 or Skyrim, those had surprisingly small teams compared to games today.
Earlier this year, I got pointed to Banishers as an example of a good AA game, it was specifically pointed out as an example of AA games not selling. I have not played it admittingly, but I talked to two people who have, and they both gave me the same impression of the game being unnecessarily padded.
I'm not aware of many AA studios that are putting out tight, fantastic 12 hour experiences like Uncharted 2. I'm not aware of any studios whatsoever that are putting out RPGs like Skyrim.
I think Astro Bot is a great example of what AA should be. That was made by a relatively small team and only over a few years.
(I apologize for ranting. This is a subject that has gotten me worked up this year, with how the industry is going...)
