very interesting read. Tag this for later - might be handy later

I was at a seminar for Video Game Design, and the speaker brought up some really great points.

Too often Developers are forced to choose high graphical fidelity over actual function, which is poor game design. Pretty games definitely catch a consumer's eye more but you can have a balance of both to KEEP that consumer interested. Many developers spend MONTHs of their dev time concentrating on weather simulation, grass textures, and dynamic shadowing...........but then they forget basics like in house co op, which has all but died in this day in age. Function should supersede flash to a degree.

I went to the Uncharted 3 Expo in D.C. before the game hit, the chosen devs that were their in that theatre went on and on about how they spent a lot of time creating a realistic ocean wave simulator. That in the Shipwreck level the way you get sloshed around was happening realtime. I couldn't help but think.....WHY!? Was this enhancing the gameplay in any real way? Sure, realism adds to immersion but I seriously don't think anyone noticed or cared while they were playing. All that time and effort could have been spent working on mechanics or something more integral to keeping audience attention.

This is the bubble that the AAA mindset creates. We need more innovation, horizontal thinking, less vertical. The consoles have actually realized this in design. At what point do graphics stop to matter? In the future there will be gaming consoles that can output realistic looking games in realtime with ease. When every game looks just as good, what will be the hook? The only answer is the gameplay and features. I personally believe graphics were good enough already in PS360 era, So glad the consoles themselves offer better graphics, but most of their power is put into multitasking capabilities. Now the Game Designers just need to also get into that mindset.

Luckily indies and select AA developers like From Software, Atlus, etc know this. FromSoft reinvented the Action RPG, and JRPG. The games are pretty but they don't dwell on that too much. Mostly it is about the tight gameplay, mechanic manipulation, game ethos, and unique online features. Atlus's Persona series is reinventing the types of interactions we show between characters and making the story and gameplay portions intertwined(social links direct relationship to combat). Quantum Dream also did this with Heavy Rain, breaking the idea of what constitutes as "gameplay" and the way we control characters. We just need more of THIS and less formulaic game releases (COD,Battlefield,Assassin's Creed, Everything Capcom does).

Are you sure that even hardware can enforce such a cap?  To me it seems much like the Wii in that the reason big publishers haven't tried to simply outspend everyone is because they don't feel it would be worth the return on investment on Nintendo platforms.  They just decided to spend more money on PS360 games instead.  Or mobile in the case of the publishers that would have been releasing handheld games.  

I was also under the impression that though Nintendo did save a lot of money developing some of it's games for the Wii but that the advertising was far larger than normal. I'm not sure if marketing and advertising are included in costs here but I would imagine that even in a development environment such as the one you described if there is much competition that advertising costs might be inflated to get the needed attention to your title to be successful.  

It really seems like capping budgets is only something that the management or producers of studios themselves or the publishing entities can really dictate.  

"...destroying MAINSTREM gaming" is what it really means. Indie gaming is thriving, and when consoles hit that wall where nothing can possibly make back any money, suddenly the industry will be all about pure fun over graphics.

And Steam shall reign king...

I kind of agree. To me PS4 level hardware is more than capable of producing just about any genre of game currently in existence (hell even PS360 were), so hopefully there will be a focus on gameplay and creativity in AAA gaming soon.

I don't see Sony having that problem.

Heres some advise:

1. Stop being a little bitch
2. Make a good game.
3. Work with a realistic budget.
4. Market appropriately.
5. Profit!

The gaming business is a waste of time. Consoles aren't sold at very profitable levels, and few games make big money. MS would be smart to sell the Xbox brand while its still a strong brand.

Ah. I read the title, then the article, then the comments. Oddly enough, the article seemed to have very little to do with the other two other than a few lines. Oh, well.

Now, the interesting thing to me, relative to Mr. Fries comments, is that the Xbox division might be right back in a similar situation to that of the original Xbox. They're spending like a billion dollars on game development with a console that is battling to keep second place market share. Titanfall is going to be expensive for Microsoft. Halo 5 will be expensive, Gears of War will be expensive. Quantum Break will be expensive. Original television programming will be expensive. All those new studios will be massively expensive.

Honestly, they're probably praying that all that spending will turn things around.

Perhaps this is what needs to happen, in order for this industry to have a 'reset' The way things are now are unsustainable. 

I fear those that dismiss this cycle of exploding dev costs are going to be in for a rude awakening when/if console gaming crashes. It crashed before it can crash again. This gen there is no Wii to hide behind.