Not really cause that's just less games. Sides *personally* I don't care for ultra polished stuff. Weather it is due 2 lead changes, throwing out the entire game in the final hour (looking at y bungie), or just poor management sometimes the damn game needs to be released and move on on. The concept of forever games disgust me tbh. My backlog is mostly these "forever" games masked as fps, rpgs, etc, etc and I'm sick of it. Am I going to go through them... yeah eventually but it's mostly just gonna be 1 playthrough and then forget about it.
Well, We Have A Toxic Community Believe It Or Not. Imagine That U Have A Triple A Company And You Are Selling The Same Game Over Years And U Don't Have To Change Anything In The Product, Would You Change Your Game Or Not? Obviously No. Because You Have Tons Of Employee That Needs Salary And You Don't Want Them To Work Hard And Pay Them More, Just Make Them Copy And Paste Game Assets Over The Year (Imagine Assassins Creed Franchise ). I Am An Indie Developer And I'm Not Happy For The Game Industries At The Moment But We Can Not Do Anything About It And We Should Hope That The Indie Studios Keep The Gaming World Alive
Back then, game companies were made by gamers, for gamers. Most game CEO’s today are from the company marketing team, and most haven’t even played a video game. There isn’t a passion for the craft anymore, games are just products to them.
I think the real reason why games take so long to make is because modt game companies don't use commercial engines and go with inhouse engines EA forced all of their studios to go with frostbite probably to lower development costs. Bethesda's creation engine is so hard to understand I think thats why their games take so long to make.
@@mate1_dev The Creation Engine is actually pretty intuitive to understand, more so than even major engines like Unreal or Unity, that's part of what makes modding it so approachable. It's the scope of the games that makes Bethesda's titles take so long.
This reminds me of a time around the span of N64 when pretty much all game developers were making only 3D games. It didn’t matter if the game was actually good or fun. What mattered was that it was 3D. Just being 3D was perceived value vs delivering actual value.
its nothing close to as bad as that issue.. those were devs having issues adapting to a new format.. adaptation was the issue. the issue today is the goal to begin with.. perfect the game shop.. base the game around the shop and patch the actual game over 2-3 years post release (as long as people are buying from the game shop)
and all snes game shad to look like dkc because graphics was all that mattered. And every game in the 2000s and early 2010s had to look like a movie so everything was grey or had a piss filter. People pretend games are suddenly not fun anymore because they got a burnout. Old games were the same, you just werent.
@@roachybill yeah you're definetly just miserable and burnt out if you think every game is releasing broken. The best games ever made all came out in the last 10 years
Nostalgia is what everyone wants to believe is the reason games don't feel the same, but it's not, the games are just getting worse because AAA companies have quickly realized the average gamer just wants what's "new" not what's good.
It's not what gamers "wanted" or asked for, it's simply what they accepted with their wallet, so these corporations realised they didn't need to put in the effort, because it was still profitable to churn out dog doo, and turn a buck twice as fast, with half the effort
Nah. the companies are also spending more money on making games. It is the same reason films are shit now. We have too much many rich people who thinks they are rich because they are the best, and they start micromanaging their properties into the trash...
yeah I thought it was nostalgia too. But objectively looking at it, things have gotten worse, just happens to coincide when a lot of us grew up. It's not just gaming. Many forms of entertainment are like this. Like Harry Potter and Star Wars are still massively popular. What new things are children getting today?
As graphics get better, games cost more to make. It naturally requires more man hours to go from flat basic textures to something properly detailed. The aversion to indie and AA games is very telling for what people say versus what they do. Games like Metal Hellsinger or Rollerdrome or Furi should be way bigger. Hi-Fi Rush is on the smaller side budget wise but its budget is more than enough to deliver the main bells and whistles... it's great but it did abysmally. AAA games that actually take risks like Alan Wake 2 or Death Stranding are scorned rather than people just saying "Not for me but it's cool that this exists." Just kind of bored of gamers moaning but not supporting the things they ask for. This isn't just the fault of CEOs. Gamers need to be honest. Most core gamers still have 1000+ hours on multiple live service games, purchasing micro transactions on them ... that's time and money they spent previously on the types of games they're asking for. *It's incentivising bad behaviour and practices.*
Skyrim is also in a medieval style high fantasy world. That's like...the perfect setting for a game designed around going on adventures and taking in the wilds and the snowy atmosphere.
@@CapiSocialist yep, and they delivered on NONE of that lmao. only space travel inside planet orbits, most planets are just copy paste. and 99.99% of characters and plots in the game are more boring than skyrim's bleak falls barrow. don't even get me started on "main quest" *shivers*. Starfield still has potential tho... due to modders
Most elder scrolls games are like that though, Skyrim just cut back on the complexities of older elder scrolls, and polished up combat and character models. And it reached a larger audience. People tend to forget skyrim isn't the only game in that same universe, older elder scrolls titles used to have systems like Spellcrafting, which skyrim no longer kept. Elder scrolls games already had the formula, skyrim was just the one that managed to get all the attention
@@CapiSocialist Well yes but Starfield is a space game. Not everyone is into futuristic stuff. I don't know a single person who doesn't enjoy medieval high fantasy in some form. Baldur's Gate 3 anyone?
@@willthevill5500 spellcrafting was absolutely f*cken busted though but having mechanics that you know players are gonna exploit mgiht still be fun just look at the indie game Kenshi and how much you can broke that game yet its a really good sandbox game.
@@Golemoidwell, you said it. if gamers stop accepting this shit the makers will have to change. but good luck with that now that games are mainstream and the average gamer doesn't know what is a good game, music, movie, book, etc.
@@lukmanalghdamsi3189gamers made this happen when everyone stopped wanting paid dlc cause splits the community. Then they switch to free dlc and season passes. Now you have our current gaming culture
With big studios now focusing on live service games it really is now the era of AA and indie games. They might not be the wide spread legacies of Half Life, Skyrim or Minecraft but the smaller more concise indie games really have something for everyone.
I think it's also worth mentioning that a lot of games that are considered "small scope" today would have been considered "massive" or at least adequate 10-20 years ago. Shen Mue for Sega Dreamcast was the most expensive game ever made in its time. Do a google search for "shen mue map" and be ready for a chuckle. It's like a couple of streets and a tiny part of a harbor district. Same with game length. Indie games are coming out these days that will easily take away 50+ hours of your life-time with excellent gameplay.
"I spent my money on cool horse armor in Oblivion" That right there is the answer. Once microtransactions and the F2P model took over in the 2010's, the amount and quality well crafted and finished games took a nose dive. Players showed they were willing to pay up for skins, battlepasses, lootboxes, 5 different currencies. Even worse, they showed they were willing to pay for unfinished games too. Gaming has become more mainstream too where the medium is reaching way more than the small percentage of gaming veterans. Gone are the day where dedicated players seek after the most well-crafted and best designed masterpieces. We are living in the worst timeline, where companies can simply forget about us and seek after the cosmetic glugging whales, and the gambling and FOMO addicts who are convinced to play from a single deceptive trailer. Its far easier and more profitable for them to pump out surface level garbage for the uninformed masses.
Exactly, today is acceptable to a game to have a lot of things only obtainable by real money. The standards are so low that I don't mind if the game has microtransactions as long they are cosmetic only.
@@matheuspimentel5828Bethesda has never been that, they made big games but eventually caved to that with ESO and F76 because kids nowadays would rather play online with their friends.
@@TheFlyingFish692that's because in the golden Era, video games complimented lives rather then the focus. You'd go do shit and then come back and play all night.
Game devs were gamers back them. Felt like 360/ps3 was the pinnacle of playing. It’s mind boggling what was released in 2007/08. Imagine if we had that now. I wouldn’t stop using my console.
the further back in time you go the more impressive games were. people did not have a clear cut boxed out idea of what games are and they just dare to dare and dream of what they could be. look up tes 2 daggerfall
Nobody becomes a game developer if they're not a gamer. The schooling cost more than any commercial related programs like computer science, business, media design, etc. While the pay is sometimes not even half of their related professions. People who design and make games do love them. The reason games are less enjoyable is more convoluted than that and it's not the same reason for everyone.
The 7th generation, from 2005-2013, really did feel like the absolute peak of gaming overall. The graphics looked so mindblowing, the new types of gameplay mechanics and story presentation that were introduced were revolutionary compared to before, and there was generally a boatload of different on-disc content that was very simple to access and play.
To be honest, I feel like even the 7th generation of consoles wasn't the peak, it was the 6th generation. It's just the decline was nearly as severe until the mid 8th generation. Everything after that is not nearly as good as the peak or even the pre-6th generation games and consoles. Only ones who are at least somewhat like how they used to be are Nintendo and other Asian and also Eastern European developers (except Sony and Konami), an Indie/AA studios obviously.
This is actually pretty common in the entertainment industry. A couple fantastic movies or shows, the industry explodes, the market becomes saturated, the quality plummets. The markets nosedives, and then the cycle continues. It's happened thrice with Hollywood, twice with videogames, and once with music. Don't worry about it now. The market is about to crash, and we'll see new gaming Titans emerge.
That said, Fallout 76 actually IS functional now. I'd say Fallout 76, No Man's Sky, Halo MCC, Halo Infinite, et al are all just examples of why you should never buy a game at launch. Instead of paying $70 for a broken, unfinished mess at launch, play some other game today and play that AAA game you've been eyeballing 2 years from now when it's on sale in Steam for $20 and the developer has actually finished it.
@@dioniscaraus6124I’m terms of playability and content added, it’s on par w NMS atm. Not even a fan of 76. I spent maybe 3 hours playing it and it is completely different from launch.
Games have developed the same issues that movies have. Big studios don’t want to risk a loss by experimenting and falling flat, small studios aren’t spending as much and are often pure passion projects so therefore are much more willing to take riskes.
there are a lot of people talking as if they could model and sculpt a random NPC from Witcher 3 or Starfield with their own hand. nah, modern game character was insanely detailed, and it's normal for main character to took 1-3 months to create, and this is still without the Body & face rig and Animation even in the industry, there are only a handful of people that could create a Hyperrealistic character, just because the sheer requirement of knowledge. do you think that all they do is just scan in 1 minute and done? how about you try to recreate one random Gun from Starfield, i bet you can't, and even if you can, the quality is just sad. and in modern game, there were insane amount of Assets, that took a crazy amount of time to create. because people ask for more, they can't settle with outdated looking character & Environment, they want it as realistics as possible.
@@jensenraylight8011 ? I’m sorry but what’s your point, it’s difficult to model stuff okay yeah but that stuff that’s being made is still cool and passionless. No I don’t think I could make an M16 out of CoD but why aren’t more companies creating stuff that’s more interesting
@@Eternity909 i doubt that, to reach AAA quality of game assets, it really took years of training, and for Hyperrealistic AAA Character, it's normal to take 5-10 years of intensive training, or else it'll look like a fake human. you might be proud of your M16, but for Game or Movie Standard, it's just sad, even for an Ancient game like Counter strike. there are a lot more to the real Production workflow, and you don't know what you don't know, unless you work directly in the industry. i think Bethesda did take a huge risk with Starfield, but you can't win against people expectation, they want every Planet to be Handcrafted, which is crazy. and also indie and small studios can get away with using a bad assets, broken animation or just bad character. that's why they could focus on the gameplay and other aspect of the game. while AAA game, even one bad random NPC could turn your game into a laughingstock but one that i agree is that, those Investors and Executive should just shut up and let people do their work.
100% correct. Some of my favorite games were born of small initial teams willing to pursue a vision rather than a sure thing. Doom, Minecraft, PUBG, Max Payne. Some of the greatest games of all time.
2000-2011 or so was the renaissance of games. Games were still being made by smaller studios that didn't need to pay exorbitant fees to be published on consoles. Nowadays, most smaller dev teams can't even get their hands on devkits to develop for consoles, let alone the cash it costs to publish on them.
A few years ago there was talk of AAA studios creating a small crew internally that would make smaller games based on concepts or experimental mechanics. The small team would have access to greater resources and their innovations could be built upon by the studio for larger projects. Guess that never really took off but it seems like it should be the way forward to me.
I've seen it with games like Unraveled, (and few other examples from Ubisoft).problem is - those indie-like offshoots are not experimental. At all. They are just shinier standard platformers (even tho Unraveled 2 was pretty fun)
@@Coxickdude, no. Valve isn’t a game maker. They’re just a platform provider with steam. 1 game every 10 years isn’t a game making company, that’s a hobby. Just no.
A lot of people miss that the reason studios like Rockstar are releasing less frequently is that the standards for making AAA game has become incredibly complex. Any of the titles released in the early 2000's by Rockstar wouldn't even be considered AA by today's standards, and I'd even argue that making a game like RDR2 is probably more complex than all of their games combined prior to 2010's. And that's the standard expected of them now.
Yup. 2000s games wouldnt be shit now, regardless of how good the stories might be. People wouldnt be able to get over the oldschool works, potato graphics, and unrewarding gameplay (relative to modern standards).
@@seminoleboy96 youre focused on a painfully small minority of games but even then, the average ubisoft game is def more rewarding than a 2000s title by design
@@Bdavis2475 lol. This is the perception of the average joe who plays games. If you think that Halo infinite and Halo 3 required a similar amount of work... Man I dont even know what to tell you. Infinite is infinitely more complex/detailed than halo 3 and would've required 4 times the work or more. This is coming from a professional 3D artist with over 10 years experience. --- The engines and graphics are no where near the same and it pains me to even read that. Not even a fan of Halo.
To me a forever game is one that doesn't require online services to play down the road. It often is single player and offers split screen and LAN play for multiplayer so that when the multiplayer servers go down you can still play with friends.
@@ianbelletti6241I think the context here is Space Marine 2 is a game you can pick up that won’t require a significant amount of time sink to fully enjoy.
Jobless MBAs from the giant finance crash in 2008 came to the only industry booming during that time: gaming. A rough enonomy like right now meant more home entertainment. They brought all their banking, nickel and diming, fee model scheming like microtransactions and other monetizing which was a perfect storm intersecting iPhone's new in-app purchase models, which included games. By the end of Gen 7 microtransactions were everywhere and uninformed customers bought them up by the billions. Now they can drip feed content with some monetizing or when a game isn't monetized it's a rare release to keep gamers placated. They don't want to look too greedy. And one thing is for sure: industry darlings of its rise are long gone, eaten up by corporate interests. The pivot is measurable.
I think budgets were much smaller which naturally forced development times to be shorter, smaller contained experiences. 7-10 hour single player and maybe multiplayer. Regardless of the studios size they all were trying to put out a new game every 1.5 - 2 years AND DEMOS no expensive silly commercials and previews. Just a demo for people to try.
I have been thinking about this. The amount of absolutely banger games that released from 2007-2011 is mindblowing. They were so fresh and inovative I still go back and play them from time to time.
A couple years ago I played through CoD:WaW, Black Ops 1-3 and Infinite Warfare as my first CoD games. I cannot express how refreshing it was to play through a complete story over the course of a single weekend.
The forever game trend, at least the live service kind cant last. The simple fact is that time is limited for players and they cant spend their time in all of these games. This means most will fail in the long run.
i dont think it has to do as much with the idea of forever games but actually its about the engines, technologies and production pipelines not being accomodated to the scale studios are going for today together with the community actually demanding games to be produced fast just so the same people complain when they are undercooked. Also i love the idea of these forever games, i love skyrim with all the mod support and i would love to see many other open world games like it that you can just keep coming back to.
„with the community actually demanding games to be produced fast just so the same people complain when they are undercooked.“ Yeah, but if you noticed, back then games released far quicker and where still much more stable and less buggy than basically all games released today.
@@amazinghorizon8270 Gaming technology was primitive and very limited back then compared to today and were also far more repetitive in and of themselves than how there can be a lot more going on in modern games. Gaming has been realized to not be a niche market anymore as well and games can reach people who are not hardcore gamers. Thus, the variety of games themselves has substantially increased with a much broader market of people willing to play games instead of just the hardcore gamers. Technology has quickly improved since when games were first made, and the more you can do, the harder it is to decide on what you want to do.
@@BlueSunStudios1 What exactly are you trying to tell me? Because all I took from your comment is that there is much more choice now in what game to make. But I don‘t understand how this has anything to do with the comment I made.
@@amazinghorizon8270What he's trying to say isn't just that tech is better. People expect games to be bigger, significantly less repetitive and to look way better. The thing is, no matter what "tech" you're using you still need a human being to actually make shit, and they're making more shit than ever, particularly art assets. So, so, so many assets.
I think it's a bit disingenuous to chock all of bethesda's success with skyrim to "accidental" luck. Ever since Arena the goal of their games has been to provide an expansive world with loads of characters and freedom to build your character however you want, doing what content you wish. And over time they allowed the fans to mess with their games more and more. Morrowind led to the first release of creation kit for people to really mod the hell out of the game. Creation kit for skyrim soon came out after release as they've already seen how much longevity mods bring. The release of Special Edition included major engine updates that improved the optimization, stability and modding capabilities of the game even further. Skyrim's longevity, without a doubt, is due to the absurd amounts of mods AND memes that came out of it. And it's because bethesda endorses it. They promote modding more than almost any other company. Todd, the charming devil he is, recognizes their mistakes and doesn't shy away from bringing them up. Yes, games without a doubt take longer and longer to release. And you may justify it with the basic "forever game" reasoning, as that's factual for many games out there. However i don't think bethesda is a stand out example in this, as games with long longevity and replay value and huge amounts of content have always been their thing. And with each generation the standards rise, games take more money and resources to develop. It's exponential growth across the industry.
without mods bethesda would not exist its unpaid labor that carries them, other than that their games are pretty bland and mediocre they got extremely lucky people would stay and start making mods
Yup, Bethesda has always took this path until kids started demanding multiplayer online games. Bethesda caved and went that route which took years but I’d say they’re “back” with starfield and hope they stay the course
@@equalizer-pw2uzBethesda games have never been the prettiest or flashiest looking, if you want that then play TLOU or even assassins creed. Bethesda games, before ESO and FO76 have always been about doing as much as possible in the world. Thats it
Yakuza is the best example of as deep as an ocean, wide as puddle. I'll take that game design over any other game other than crafting games like Minecraft or Space Engineers that say they're forever games.
yakuza is NOT 'deep as an ocean', what are you talking about? they're just massive games. Their design philosophy is almost entirely the opposite of what you're saying.
@@DanielFerreira-ez8qd Yakuza is not "massive", they're relatively small game. Also the OP talking about the map size to content density. The map size in Yakuza is significantly smaller than most open world games but every few meters you'll find extremely memorable event that live rent free in your head. From the random bartering quest to meeting bunch of adult in adult diapers to sneaking yourself to a cult. All of that is packed in a small map that everyone who actually play it remember like the back of their hand. Stark opposite to most "open world games" quest that basically just fetch quest.. go there look for x, etc.
We're getting old. I feel nostalgia for the 16 Bit era and the PS2 era because even though the graphics weren't great, there was so many ideas coming out that blew my mind. Square was at their golden age, Sega was carving out their own legacy, Sony was throwing out tons of money at unique developers all over the world, Nintendo was all quality with AAA development and Blizzard was at their infancy ready to dominate PC gaming for years to come.
This reminds me of Cry of Fear, despite the game engine being 24 years old the game was still terrifying and it scared me so many times on repeat playthroughs, it was better than alot of Triple A horror games, it also told the story better, handled the topic of depression maturely, where the best ending doesn't have your life fixed entirely and all your demons killed, your character is still depressed by the end.
Most Triple A studio's aren't even making horror games to be fair, and the ones they do make as of recently in the last 6 or so years have been either been amazing or at least pretty fun. Back in 2012 when Cry of Fear came out the only horror games even really around that weren't the horror-lacking Resident Evil games of the time were all indies or at most second rate studios anyway.
@@weplo1597 it makes top 5 scariest moments in gaming for sure and he shows up multiple times when you least expect it. finishing that game was torture fr
Realistically games just aren't as easy to make as they used to be. One level in a modern game probably takes more time and effort to make than a whole game in the past. We had lower standards at the time which is why we're so nostalgic for those games. If half of those old games released today with a completely different name, people would hate on it hard. Standards rise and so does the time needed to reach those standards.
You are exactly right, but the average consumer is completely unaware of this. AAA games take at least 3-5 years to make now, with budgets of up to $200 million, which is equivalent to any blockbuster movie out there, therefore making publishers more risk-averse. Games have become exponentially more expensive to make throughout the generations, due to the more content & graphical fidelity DEMANDED by the CONSUMERS, to justify buying a new console. Game development has also become more easier to access than ever before, that is why the Indie market is booming as it is.
yeah games were so much easier to make when you had to code your engines and tools from scratch. nowadays when we have unreal 5 and unity game development is much harder
Yes, but I feel like many of those games have things they don't... need? Like the massive open world. Look at Yakuza, it does perfectly fine in a smaller crowded space. No need for biggest open-world whatever. And because of that, they can whip out more games, even with engine changes.
Actually the biggest problem is a complete and utter lack of talent. Back in college during my programing classes I often saw the difference in talent. There were people who wrote programs with features far beyond what was required for the course in hours while others took the full week or longer on some of the projects. Programing Languages are like any of Language some people can craft epic master pieces while others write nonsensical garbage, like most of hollywood writers these days. And you can see this clear lack of talent in the various stories were community releases day one patches that in some cases the developers take months to fix if they even do. The reason for the lack of talent is the same mindset that nearly killed the gaming industry back when Atari stood atop the reigns. That mind set is that Developers are like factory line workers where you can just swap someone out and replace them with anyone else to do the job. Thus they pushed long hours for low pay and little to no compensation for games that did well. The result was their best developers left and formed Activision. The rest as they say is history. Because the studios threat it as a factory line there is often little room for those with talent to make a meaningful impact. And people get burned out or see the status of the working environment and decided to go their own way. Basically we are seeing the same thing that happen all those years ago repeat itself. The main difference now is that Distribution is a lot easier so small developers don't need to form a big publishing company of their own like the Developers did with Activision. Thus we see the rise of a lot of indie developers. BG3 I think is a great example of what happens in a talented group of developers gets together to make a game. Sure it did take 6 years to make but when you compare that to Starfield and other AAA games that take 6+ years to make it's clear the lack of talent in AAA. BG3 is packed full of content that makes many other AAA games look bare in comparison. It's the difference between going "Yeah I can see why this could take 6 years." instead of the "WTF is this? They had 6+ years and this is all they got." followed by developers saying, "Making games is hard."
Unfortunately it seems now that when talented creators do get fed up and leave to form their own company or something they too produce shit. So there are no renegade companies here to liberate us. The disgruntled devs that leave just make more shit.
I think it's sad. Because starfield to me looks like what i would expect from an amateur indie developer. Vs indie devs put out what i expect from an Aaa studio. I wanted starfield as big as it was with the depth of baulders gate 3. But its befesda we are talking about here. Bound to mess up.
Yeah you get a lot of brain-drain in the industry because game companies don't pay well and work you to the bone. Why would someone wanna sweat bullets for months or years on end over a project when they can do a third of the work and make over twice the money in a different industry?
Well this seems like a perfect spot for some self-promotion. But in all seriousness, I do agree. I think it's partially due to how most many big companies make safe bets and try to chase trends, while the most indie titles create them, usually mixing up genres or themes in innovative ways that seems insane or risky.
Indie games have a cesspool of garbage games, early access titles, and broken promises that kind of influence AAA devs to release crappy early access titles as well. while only a few couple shine, and others tend to be hidden and underrated. The Mods however, is where the games are at
I just don’t understand what these devs do at these companies all day that justify this time to product ratio. How can you have 1,000 people work on Assassin’s Creed Valhalla for SIX YEARS (20% of the average game dev’s life if they’re 30 y/o) and end up with… well, Assassin’s Creed Valhalla. Bungie gave us Halo 3 in 3 years. Blizzard gave us WoW in 4 years. With 40 people. In a cave, with a box of scraps.
Really? You cant conceive that the ridiculous and exponential growth in graohic fidelity, physics engines with stuff like ray tracing and all those other things. You cant possibly see how all the new things in modern games could justify more time than they used to... its almost like modern graphics and HD models take SO MUCH TIME TO MAKE 🤯 I seriously dont understand how gamers dont understand a modern game even if it was equal in scope and size than a game like halo 3. which by the way halo 3 and halo 2 developments were absolute messes and they were and still are super buggy and if you mod you know ITS PAPER CLIP AND STRING holding together those games engines. So its not like the games we used to get arent full of alot of the same problems.
Also like i said halo 3 isnt the developmental master piece you think it is. Its just a game that we are nostalgic for. The story was good yea and everything but the game engine and the graphics were way more simple than a game released YEARS after it on a diffetent genetation like AC valhalla. Like i seripusly dont get how you guys think. Halo 3 is janky as fuck. Thats why you can do so much of the shit you can do in sandtrap and all the other maps without modding. Its a glitchy as fuck game. You just dont remember cuz nostalgia
Lol i checked out ur channel and while im arguing about dev time i just wanna say that you make GOOOOD scp youtube content and as an scp fan Im lowkey glad i accidentally clicked ur pfp when tryna argue lol. Cuz now im gonna watch ur videos. Ik thats weird after the last two comments tone but i was mad but seeing the rarity that is preemo scp content I couldnt stay mad lol. Scp is def on of the easiest cash grab content machines on youtube look at the shitty scp animated and the subpar scp readers tryna capture half of maang or volguns bravado. So like ur awesome for actually putting effort into your videos. Fuck whatever we were arguing about lol idc, i lost or whatever. Just keep making your content please cuz i need scp content
@@EnCounterCultureMedia I remember every single glitch I have ever performed in Halo 3 in greater detail than the faces of my own loved ones, so you’re just wrong on that point. Also, no, I cannot conceive why the “exponential growth in graphic fidelity” and the increased workload for the art department is slowing all of development down just because they have more assets to make in greater detail. But I could be wrong, which is why the entire point of my comment is me saying I do not understand why this is the case. You just really looked at a man that said, “I don’t understand why this is the way it is.” And then tried to make him look like a fool for saying he doesn’t understand why the thing is the way it is.
@@EnCounterCultureMedia just read THIS comment after posting my previous comment to your last two comments lol. Thank you man, I love to hear it 🫡 I hope I can keep making better and better content that makes you proud
And here Ive been playing Monster Hunter World, Red Dead Redemption 2, Hitman series, Yakuza series, Ghostrunner, Divinity 2, Hollow Knight, Final Fantasy 14, Power Wash Sim, DMC5, Risk of Rain 2, Elden Ring, Hades, Satisfactory, Vampire Survivor, CP77 Phantom Liberty, Remnant 2, Armored Core 6, V Rising, Baldurs Gate 3... struggling to find time to touch grass. But I can say that FPS games havent really been peak nowadays so I can sympathize a liiiiiiiiiittle bit
3:44 "Its more important to perceive value than to receive value" Great quote that summarizes the main point of the video in an easy to remember and rhyming mantra. Good stuff
Back in the 2000s we were getting a feel for what games COULD BE. and how open, explorative, and driven they could be. And in the last decade from 2010-2023, for one thing, corporations got heavily involved. because they saw how much money successful games printed. But, also, gamers still crave the large scope, explorative, free-feeling games like Skyrim, GTA5, Zelda, etc. In the 2000s we were enamored with Mario 64. Ocarina of Time. These games that were, at the time, giving us large areas to explore. We were finally off of the 2d landscape. we had the freedom to look at a piece of landscape and go "I can finally go see that." And Skyrim really perfected that, at the time. It was a sandbox. It was a world we got to exist in, and carve out our own path. And the world reacted to what we did. But alllll during this, our tech was progressing like crazy. The new shiny graphics. the lines of code for the mechanics for the games. All of it exponentially increased development time. And unfortunately, even as big as these game corporations are, they still can't throw enough money at developers (or maybe they just choose not to), to speed up the development of these games. It might be something for AI to get involved in. Coding an AI to do all the pre-fab work. the monotonous stuff that takes forever. Design some procedural worlds. And let human developers work on the story, decide the mechanics, and put the finer touches on things. But. All you have to do is look at the average lines of code for games back in the 2000s. and then 2010s. and now... and... Our games are getting HUGE. Huge in resources. huge in coding. and that all quickly adds up the development time. Bethesda, no doubt, is trying to make a huge forever game with ES6. They're not making ES6. They're making Skyrim 2. The want another game that's going to last for another 10 years. But to do that, the development is going to be insane.
The main problem is that studios are spending many years to make games that'll last forever, and there aren't as many short games that can be made in a shorter period of time, and present new, unique ideas. AI doesn't do that, it only learns from people, it can't be creative by itself.
@@paulhudalla9527 With ambition comes greater desire to do more and have more in your games. An influx of shorter games being the norm will only work if more and more people started moving on from games fast after beating them and couldn't be bothered to sit down and enjoy games for a lengthy time anymore. With society itself becoming more frantic and hectic, we may start seeing that when people have less to do and just want to focus on simpler things, but if things calm down more and people have more time on their hands, expect really big games being made more often again.
i think that now its harder cause everything has been made already in some sense. Everything has been tried, and companies are taking less risks so they just lean on old ip. The bigger the companies get, is the more money they have to make, which means they have to make games that cut corners to save money. I also think that the technology being used is causing them problems as they try to bring in next gen graphics. Also, social media has made it where ppl find out about a game way before they should, pre orders are more of a priority to get money in before hand, and companies are trying to follow trends rather than focusing on making a properly developed game.
Large AAA productions simply cost a lot more to make. Skyrim was made by about 100 people. Starfield around 500. And then a much larger marketing budget. The studios simply CANT take a risk, the game NEEDS to make a certain amount of revenue, so they will stick to well proven mass market compatible ideas, and not experiment too much.
@@alexven92 Absolutely, if I had the proper resources and expert support; that is the unrealistic part. People overestimate the saturation of original ideas. For thousands of years, even in the old testament Bible, people thought that nothing was original or new, but then came the enlightenment and advanced technology and the world changed. Also, the Greek philosophers had some pretty original ideas even back then as far as recorded history is concerned
This year alone we had/are getting: - Zelda TOTK - Star Wars Jedi - Starfield - Spider-Man 2 - Baldur's Gate 3 - RE 4 (Remake) - Dead Space (Remaster) - Street Fighter 6 - Assassin's Creed Mirage - Alan Wake 2 - Diablo IV - Counter Strike 2 - Final Fantasy XVI - Pikmin 4 - Hogwarts Legacy - Payday 3 - Armored Core VI & more And you are telling me we are getting too little AAA games?
I think is a decent year for games too. It will probably become a reference in the future, if the trend of making slow paced games will become a constant mindset for game developers
AAA video games didn't stop at 2008 as how this "crique" proclaims it as so. How about Elden Ring (2022) Death stranding (2021) It Takes Two (2021) The Last of Us Part II (2020) Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice (2019) God of War (2018) Breath of the Wild (2017) The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt (2016) or just a quick Google of "GOTY (insert year)" will do. Not to mention Game of the Year awards have other nominations, are you then saying those independent "modern" vide game titles did not exist in the video creators eyes? Then you are doing a disservice to independent games (ironic being your channel is supposedly named Indie Games) lumping indie games released post 2008 as part of "modern games" as they are video games created by hardworking independent studios in the modern era.
This video is beyond accurate. I honestly haven't been able to put in words how I feel about the gaming industry until this video. Honestly felt like I was going crazy feeling like this age of gaming was different and this put in words how I've been feeling.
@@unionpepe7864 Well more like Fallout in space. Wow though I couldn't even finish the first expansion in Skyrim without being bored out of my mind, and quitting. I even play MMOs.
@JohnFreedman0 wouldn't call jedi survivor an RPG at all. But idk elder scrolls, fallout and starfield just take a lot more imagination to immerse yourself in the world. I really enjoy Bethesda games
You can still write and level design in the same amount of time as yesteryear, but 3d artists are well paid and swallow the budget now. They take ages to deliver hundreds of unique and complex assets that are used to overly clutter each level now, and they have to do this to separate themselves from every other mediocre developer out there or just get lost in the smog.
Hearing the last few words reminded me when Armor Core 6 was announced, I had no idea what it was about and it released around a year later, and it took me back to the PS2 days of arcade-like fun, nothing was changed with its core gameplay (to my knowledge) but it felt fresh
The PS2 era was significantly better because it was the last age when developers had creative freedom and the tech and dev were too long or expensive, compared to all the HD consoles since the Xbox 360. Now it's just AAA or indie, with the occasional Eurojank, but no arcade-style experience. Too many open worlds that are too long and demand too much space on your hard drive.
It doesn't take much longer to develop a game than it used to be. The present problem is that marketing found a solution to feed on a guaranteed hype that wasn't guaranteed back in the day. You had to risk with presenting a concept that could either destroy your project or flourish. Nowadays, we have tools like celebrities, mega collaborations between other industries that hype up the projects and fan cults of certain personas and studios. Another issue is that so many companies nowadays employ non-gamers and "creative" teams that actually don't have an art level of imagination. They may take something new, but borrow a lot of from older projects with mind to shoehorn fan service, but fan services get very stale when you have the same concept, but like repeated 15 times through different titles. And then there are projects announced way before they have an idea of what that game must/should become. Too many conflicting ideas that lead to simple compromises and simple/safe compromises to avoid internal conflicts lead to poor/mediocre games.
@DiamondGlow44" Too many conflicting ideas that lead to simple compromises and simple/safe compromises to avoid internal conflicts lead to poor/mediocre games." Yeah, I've seen this a LOT. Deadlines also play a role in this type of decision making.
Love how you just flippantly claim something like "it doesn't take much longer". What an ignorant take. Your hunch isn't objective reality buddy. Level of complexity has exponentially went up with higher fidelity graphics, physics, larger worlds, optimizing for performance, building it to run across all types of consoles and hardware, game logic, server hosting and scaling to demand, matchmaking... Cross platform is still relatively new, exclusives used to be way more common focusing development. Cross play is now a thing too, and doing cross platform authentication is not plug and play like you think. The higher fidelity means a huge art team, tons of assets, maps, managing performance budgets. Instead of putting a single texture on a flat wall it has to be a blend of models, layered blended textures, separate collision... Gamers expect that, gamers expect good animations, mostly bug free games, good writing. Even using Unreal Engine 5 it takes a long time if you want quality, it takes hundreds or thousands of people. There is a place for smaller indie titles but even then, BattleBit Remastered - a very popular game made by 2 guys took 9 YEARS and that's with buying assets for models, sounds, and some other help. Its incredibly difficult, tedious, and laborious work that just keeps getting bigger as games evolve and expectations grow.
@thepunisherxxx6804 Meanwhile, the tools to do all those things have been easier than ever. They aren't still using the same processes from 15 years ago.
@@thepunisherxxx6804 It should in fact take even less time now than it did before to make a functional and feature complete game. 2 years is good for paving the foundation and then polishing it, but imagine if the work force wasn't bogged down by HR and censors.
@@graye2799 Tools make some* aspects easier, but the scope overall has outpaced them, and they still take a long time to implement and test. Visual scripting in UE5 still takes almost as long as just coding it out including debugging and testing for instance.
Try No man's sky. Everything is free no dlc or micro transactions and they are still updating the game with new content for free.And it's physical and digital versions are super duper cheap.
@@XXXXD What was promised: "In this next generation role-playing game set amongst the stars, create any character you want and explore with unparalleled freedom as you embark on an epic journey to answer humanity’s greatest mystery." What is delivered: "Walk 'n Talk Simulator 2023: Space Edition" Bethesda is good at making Bethesda games (boring slogs that make people convince themselves that they're having fun), not games with "unparalleled freedom" where you live among the stars, exploring planets nobody has ever heard of and finding creatures nobody would have imagined could exist.
Well, I agree, nowadays it feels more than ever that developers want to make a game that would be the only game for someone forever. With huge amounts of meaningless grind and/or replayability, which really contradicts basic desire to play the game, enjoy it, beat it and move on to another one. Other thing to consider is how development has changed. Because from my perspective, devs are having the best tools to ever exist, but artists have to make the most detailed work ever as well, so it’s kinda interesting to get a video regarding work split on game dev studios, if you’re into that kind of stuff.
It is simply unreal how long we'll have to wait for Fallout 5 and the fact that 76 is pretty much the only thing we have to keep us busy until Fallout 5 releases is a terrifying thought. At least we still have NV and 4 and with mods being made for these games pretty much all the time at least we should be able to occupy ourselves until F5 releases in 2056. With a little bit of luck we'll still be alive at that point too.
This spectacle is also a huge hindrance to game developers and what they can do with games. The more of a spectacle games become, the less risk that they are often able to take because one or two bad games of this scope can do much more damage to a studios finances than the smaller games. This means they will take fewer risks, and innovate far less often in favor of playing it safe in order to make the more bloated games turn a profit.
This whole "perceived value" mindset that has taken over AAA games is why I only ever play Nintendo games now. Nintendo isn't marketing to the hardcore gaming crowd, they're marketing to families. Families don't care about massive worlds and cutting edge graphics, they care about fun. Sure, Nintendo has their faults too (the enshittening of the Pokemon series key among them), but overall, among the major developers, I feel like Nintendo is the only one that is willing to experiment and care more about having fun.
Games are too big, the scope is so huge that it makes communication between the devs extremely difficult to manage. Mix that with crunch and tight deadlines and you get overworked and tired workers who don't care anymore, because the management will always have the final word on what the workers make.
Best games for me were FF7, FF8 and FF9. You played them through once, got a great huge narrative with great music and gameplay, and that was it, never played them again, just one time through, not 'forever games'.
I think biggest problem of these companies is administration, as some have had corruption scandals, harassment and internal problems. In recent years games have become something totally mainstream, and many companies that were relatively small have become gigantic monstrous, with more employees, more money and investment and influence And more investors to please.
"harassment" thats the crux of the issue but not for what you are thinking. they put on all these quotas and annoying wah man pr departments and suddenly people couldnt get any work done
It's totally depend on the kind of game they made. I know some of you really love linear game with linear character that focus more on fancy combat but there're games like that released every years. Bethesda games never perfect but they always try to experience new thing, increase character option, dialogue options, etc... Some of the new things they tried may not work but at least they're still one of the rare AAA devs that still willing to risk it in every sequel. If they truly just care about money they would just make TES 6 because people have been yearning for that game a very long time and would pay tons just to get a taste of it.
I wonder what would happen if AAA devs started experimenting with gameplay instead of graphics... A fully fledged Starfield or Cyberpunk with the graphics of something like Half-Life 2 would allow for soooo much more cool gameplay options
Then you might as well just play half life 2 instead. Who would actually play a Cyberpunk 2077 with ps2 graphics? There is a reason why it was criticised during it's launch
@@roachybill Hmm, it might generate a profit, it might not. Loads of indie games exist, so it will compete in another arena, where there even more games to worry about (unless we assume that specifically CDPR have goodwill that will give them an edge in sales) . Also what should even be changed about the game from a gameplay perspective that couldn't be achieved already. Do you know it, does CD project Red know it or ant other company thinking about doing such a move? I get what both you and OP wants, less focus on graphics, but it is not that simple. You should also remember that they have employees that have specific skills and competences, and they have a certain size. Making an indie game would require far less working on it, and different types of employees. It's inefficient. They could produce more games instead, but if everyone did this, the market would have too many games, that most of it would not be bought. We are already in a market, where there is too many games. But yeah in theory it could be done, but I would say it is stupid, and that is not even considering the economics perspective.
I was just thinking about this the other day. And 2023 has been awesome so far. Dead Space. RE4 Jedi Survivor, Armored Core 6, Starfield, spider man 2, mortal kombat 1.
i think youre leaving out a massive part, that players now just want more out of games than they did back then. when you look at games like god of war, uncharted, bioshock, dead space, etc that were beatable in 10 hours 20 max i think a lot of players would be upset spending so much money on a game that gives them so little content and people would hate those games for being too short.
People’s definition of what content is isn’t always the same. A well crafted 10-12 hour campaign with replayability features is more content to me than these massive sandboxes full of fetch quests, walking and busy work. To each their own
I may or may not be in the minority but I never care for extra content that amounts to padded gameplay for the sake of padding. A focused experience is just as good than many open world titles with very little to do.
@@Moromom22 the best example is the order 1886, a great game that at the time got heavily criticized for being a full price game with only an 8 hour long campaign, so nobody played it
Only RPGs should be longer than 25 hours. And i dont mean pseudo RPGs like Assassins Creed. Every other game should be 6 to 25 hours max. Im sick of meaningless open world. Thats why i dont play newer games that often any more. Currently Playing God of War 1. 1 Hour in you had so much action already...... in the newer god of war games this would take 5 hours to get going.
I mean this year was a year full of incredible games: Pikmin 4, Rollerdrome, Zelda ToTK, Baldurs Gate 3, AC6, FF16, Starfield, and Street Fighter 6, well and many others but this are the one I played and wow I believe this is a good sign that the AAA might do a comeback, specially with games like pikmin 4 and AC6 that were my favorite and gave me hope in the industry
Sometimes there are games created by small teams and these games are better than 10 years-production-game. It’s not about production time or huge budget, it’s about passion and desire to make a dream game.
Games have moved away from what I loved. Finishing an amazing game in one weekend is one of the best experiences you can have on a screen. Uncharted 1-3, Bioshock 1-3, Heavy Rain, God of War 3, Portal 2, The Last of Us, Arkham Asylum, Red Dead 1. So many amazing compact games with amazing stories coming out in a span of a few years. Where are we now…
I genuinely bought an Xbox 360 and its still a blast, i miss games that i could finish.... I have 7 games installed on my series X that i have yet to finish.
Why not play those 360 games on your Series X? I am going through my backlog of 360 games on it, as most are backwards compatible. The loading times are a lot faster and the controller is way better. I am currently playing Deus Ex: Mankind Divided. The Witcher 2, Farcry 3, Alan Wake, Dead Space 2 and 3, and Metro Redux are up next!
The only thing thats annoying in starfield is that in conversations its either "please help me pls pls pls" or you just have to convince them to do the morally right thing. Bitch my revolver can Kill you 15 times with 1 Bullet GIVE ME THAT DAMN ARTEFACT
Nintendo is the only one releasing games on a consistent schedule. They are focusing on the gameplay and fun factor first and foremost which helps them with that.
Nintendo could stand to stagger its releases, if the Switch Pokemon titles are anything to go by here. I'd be hard pressed to call those "complete" by any measure. Plus, pretty much all of its classic IPs are basically shambling corpses held together with duct tape and super glue in a lazy attempt to nostalgia bait people into giving it more money. "Consistent" and "good" are not mutually exclusive.
@n3rfdr4gon99 I know, Nintendo has a elephant in the room. While Nintendo has greedy similarities to Disney and the other triple AAA companies, thank God the games that Nintendo makes is nowhere near hot garbage as Disney and the other triple AAA. Other than that, stop buying remakes/remasters of retro triple AAA games (including the Nintendo ones) and instead, start buying indie games and AA games.
@DominatorLegend God, I hope Nintendo decides to bring those forgotten ips back from the dead or decides to make a new and original IP game for the next-gen Nintendo console. Also a couple of days ago, I saw a interview for the "Super Mario Bros Wonder", one of the developers of Nintendo said that they developed Super Mario Brothers Wonder without deadlines.
I grew up when I could play an awesome game and then play multiple sequels within a few years. I was still a kid. Still in the same era of my life. Kids today play a game they like, they won’t get a sequel until they’re adults with responsibilities. It’s a shame.
@@cattysplat What are you on about? I very much cared about and dreamed about growing up in medieval times to become a knight, an explorer in the 18 or 19 hundreds, growing up to become an astronaut to land on the moon, growing up as a Native American before the Europeans came, … And all my friends did too. Where did you get the idea from that kids don‘t care about pasts they never experienced?
@@guidedexplosiveprojectileg9943 Yeah, but they are often graphically so dated that they wont be able to get into them. And for current games sequels take forever. Imagine Kids who got into Elden Ring, GTA V, Red Dead Redemption 2, Fallout 4, Skyrim, … They will all be adults by the time their sequels release.
Really great video! This is why I don't spend money on a lot of video games anymore unless I find a really cool indie game. I loved armored core 6 because, It gave me a sense of pride and happiness from the good old days of video games.
The money that is needed for video games to exist and be made also cursed game companies. The reason is that when you take risks to create new games and innovations, you take the risk of losing money if the risk fails. And losing money is something that many companies fear in modern times when production and operations is now needed to be made more efficient and cost-effective due the modern requirements, and more risks and costs must be minimized in order to increase cash flows and profits.
I think I have bought skyrim 3 times and the most recent was only a few months ago. It really is a forever game. Trying to recreate that rarely works though
I think the same thing has happened with music and movies/shows- the bloated large companies that create our media just don't care about being creating original content that really captures you- they just care about pumping out inauthentic boring titles that's been the same for the past 10+ years now with hoping to impress by visuals. I realized this by starting to play indie games that weren't top notch graphically but had great stories that actually had an impact on me
Interesting perspective but this year has been a great year for games imo with games like Armored Core 6, Baldur's Gate 3, Darkest Dungeon 2, Dead Island 2, Dead Space Remake, Final Fantasy 16, Hi-Fi Rush, Hogwarts Legacy, Legend of Zelda TotK, Remnant 2, Resident Evil 4 Remake, Sons of the Forest, Starfield, Street Fighter 6, System Schock Remake, and Star Wars Jedi Survivor. Some more are still on the way that will hopefully be great like Alan Wake 2, Cities Skylines 2, Lies of P, Lords of the Fallen, Mortal Kombat 1, and Spiderman 2. There are plenty more but I guess we'll see when it's all said and done.
mentioning actual good games would ruin thousands of peoples arguments about "triple a = bad", so people tend to literally bring up every game besides the good ones
I agree. Studios are trying to sell huge maps and RTX badge, rather than develop detailed and interesting worlds. For example the map of Hogwarts Legacy is too big and empty. It would be better to make it 2x smaller. Leave only Hogwarts and Hogsmeade but instead add more quests, characters and you will have much better game.
it should have been the size of bully map. bully is basically hogwarts without the magic and with taste anyways. think about it, how many hours you play bully and it never occurred to anyone that the map is small and that it should be considerably bigger.
Those of us who played games in the 80s and 90s thought the 2000s was a step down from the golden age. Now the next generation thinks the current gen is a step down from when they were kids. Its a cycle. 12 years from now some 30 year old is going to making a video essay about how amazing games were back in 2024 and how much they suck in 2036.
In no conceivable way were the 2000s a step down. Most 80s games were barebones garbage that acted more like rigged carnie rides than enjoyable cohesive experiences. The 2000s had the creativity and passion together with technology to make visions realised.
"1000 planets to explore" should have alarm bells ringing. How could a human explore 1000 planets? How many people have even travelled to the Earths 6 continents? Let alone visited a few of the countries in these continents? Then imagine Bethesda being able to fill these 1000 planets with worthwhile content. Its just not happening.
My biggest issue with modern games is they are too bloated. They keep blowing more and more money making games more expensive all for an 8 hour game that takes 70 hours to finish.
Is it worth the wait? Yes. Because the 2000-2010 games dont meet present-day standards. People who have been gaming 25+ years at this point arent entertained by shit devs can throw together in a year (usually), and games like Skyrim and RDR2 have kept more people entertained than all the 2000s game mentioned combined. Its an investment, and yeah, Starfield is already showing its longevity with insane mods popping up every single day. This one game is going to enable countless experiences.
The problem aside from cost is because of the younger Millenials and Gen Zs flooding AAA game studios. They have less experience than Boomers and Gen X developers in the late 2000s.
Do you think it's worth waiting 10 years for a game to come out?
🟥 Grow your indie studio and help fund indie games!
www.patreon.com/GoingIndie
Not really cause that's just less games.
Sides *personally* I don't care for ultra polished stuff. Weather it is due 2 lead changes, throwing out the entire game in the final hour (looking at y bungie), or just poor management sometimes the damn game needs to be released and move on on.
The concept of forever games disgust me tbh.
My backlog is mostly these "forever" games masked as fps, rpgs, etc, etc and I'm sick of it. Am I going to go through them... yeah eventually but it's mostly just gonna be 1 playthrough and then forget about it.
Well, We Have A Toxic Community Believe It Or Not. Imagine That U Have A Triple A Company And You Are Selling The Same Game Over Years And U Don't Have To Change Anything In The Product, Would You Change Your Game Or Not? Obviously No. Because You Have Tons Of Employee That Needs Salary And You Don't Want Them To Work Hard And Pay Them More, Just Make Them Copy And Paste Game Assets Over The Year (Imagine Assassins Creed Franchise ). I Am An Indie Developer And I'm Not Happy For The Game Industries At The Moment But We Can Not Do Anything About It And We Should Hope That The Indie Studios Keep The Gaming World Alive
@@mohammadaskari6996 Whats with the capital letters
It took Blizzard 12 years to release Diablo 3 after Diablo 2. Then another 10 years to release Diablo 4. We've seen how well that worked out.
No. Just move on
Back then, game companies were made by gamers, for gamers. Most game CEO’s today are from the company marketing team, and most haven’t even played a video game. There isn’t a passion for the craft anymore, games are just products to them.
Or have played games, but never was into the actual genre that they are working on.
I think the real reason why games take so long to make is because modt game companies don't use commercial engines and go with inhouse engines EA forced all of their studios to go with frostbite probably to lower development costs. Bethesda's creation engine is so hard to understand I think thats why their games take so long to make.
Play more indies
@@mate1_dev I think Valve is about the only studio that is benefiting from their inhouse engine.
@@mate1_dev The Creation Engine is actually pretty intuitive to understand, more so than even major engines like Unreal or Unity, that's part of what makes modding it so approachable. It's the scope of the games that makes Bethesda's titles take so long.
If a game takes that long to develop and release, it better be a spectacle.
the chances are that the game is in development hell as it has been the case quite a few times.
Rdr2 and Elden ring took over 5 years and feels like the work done well.
Starfield sure fucking isn’t.
Starfield isn’t a spectacle and it took 5 years to make
@@thelastpersononearth9765Rockstar and fromsoft games are the only games that are worth waiting lots of years
This reminds me of a time around the span of N64 when pretty much all game developers were making only 3D games. It didn’t matter if the game was actually good or fun. What mattered was that it was 3D. Just being 3D was perceived value vs delivering actual value.
So we're evolving just backwards
also see: Toy Story then 3D animated movies
its nothing close to as bad as that issue.. those were devs having issues adapting to a new format.. adaptation was the issue. the issue today is the goal to begin with.. perfect the game shop.. base the game around the shop and patch the actual game over 2-3 years post release (as long as people are buying from the game shop)
and all snes game shad to look like dkc because graphics was all that mattered. And every game in the 2000s and early 2010s had to look like a movie so everything was grey or had a piss filter. People pretend games are suddenly not fun anymore because they got a burnout. Old games were the same, you just werent.
@@roachybill yeah you're definetly just miserable and burnt out if you think every game is releasing broken. The best games ever made all came out in the last 10 years
Nostalgia is what everyone wants to believe is the reason games don't feel the same, but it's not, the games are just getting worse because AAA companies have quickly realized the average gamer just wants what's "new" not what's good.
It's not what gamers "wanted" or asked for, it's simply what they accepted with their wallet, so these corporations realised they didn't need to put in the effort, because it was still profitable to churn out dog doo, and turn a buck twice as fast, with half the effort
Nah. the companies are also spending more money on making games. It is the same reason films are shit now. We have too much many rich people who thinks they are rich because they are the best, and they start micromanaging their properties into the trash...
yeah I thought it was nostalgia too. But objectively looking at it, things have gotten worse, just happens to coincide when a lot of us grew up.
It's not just gaming. Many forms of entertainment are like this. Like Harry Potter and Star Wars are still massively popular. What new things are children getting today?
As graphics get better, games cost more to make. It naturally requires more man hours to go from flat basic textures to something properly detailed.
The aversion to indie and AA games is very telling for what people say versus what they do. Games like Metal Hellsinger or Rollerdrome or Furi should be way bigger. Hi-Fi Rush is on the smaller side budget wise but its budget is more than enough to deliver the main bells and whistles... it's great but it did abysmally.
AAA games that actually take risks like Alan Wake 2 or Death Stranding are scorned rather than people just saying "Not for me but it's cool that this exists."
Just kind of bored of gamers moaning but not supporting the things they ask for.
This isn't just the fault of CEOs. Gamers need to be honest. Most core gamers still have 1000+ hours on multiple live service games, purchasing micro transactions on them ... that's time and money they spent previously on the types of games they're asking for. *It's incentivising bad behaviour and practices.*
No, games are still Good.
Skyrim is also in a medieval style high fantasy world.
That's like...the perfect setting for a game designed around going on adventures and taking in the wilds and the snowy atmosphere.
Depends on how you look at it, Starfield as a concept was a sprawling universe with infinite potential for planets, creatures and plots 🤷♂️
@@CapiSocialist yep, and they delivered on NONE of that lmao. only space travel inside planet orbits, most planets are just copy paste. and 99.99% of characters and plots in the game are more boring than skyrim's bleak falls barrow. don't even get me started on "main quest" *shivers*. Starfield still has potential tho... due to modders
Most elder scrolls games are like that though, Skyrim just cut back on the complexities of older elder scrolls, and polished up combat and character models. And it reached a larger audience. People tend to forget skyrim isn't the only game in that same universe, older elder scrolls titles used to have systems like Spellcrafting, which skyrim no longer kept.
Elder scrolls games already had the formula, skyrim was just the one that managed to get all the attention
@@CapiSocialist Well yes but Starfield is a space game. Not everyone is into futuristic stuff.
I don't know a single person who doesn't enjoy medieval high fantasy in some form. Baldur's Gate 3 anyone?
@@willthevill5500 spellcrafting was absolutely f*cken busted though but having mechanics that you know players are gonna exploit mgiht still be fun just look at the indie game Kenshi and how much you can broke that game yet its a really good sandbox game.
I’d take a good 8-30hour game per year than a 150 hour game every 5
That's still a low standard, we used to get several games like that every year.
@@Golemoidwell, you said it. if gamers stop accepting this shit the makers will have to change. but good luck with that now that games are mainstream and the average gamer doesn't know what is a good game, music, movie, book, etc.
I'd rather wait longer for something really good than get something that is just ok.
@@lukmanalghdamsi3189gamers made this happen when everyone stopped wanting paid dlc cause splits the community. Then they switch to free dlc and season passes. Now you have our current gaming culture
@@RabidDisposition exactly, so Hard pass on this fake copy of Star Citizen then...
With big studios now focusing on live service games it really is now the era of AA and indie games. They might not be the wide spread legacies of Half Life, Skyrim or Minecraft but the smaller more concise indie games really have something for everyone.
Speaking of which, not every indie or AA game needs a sequel, or prequel, or spin-off.
I think it's also worth mentioning that a lot of games that are considered "small scope" today would have been considered "massive" or at least adequate 10-20 years ago.
Shen Mue for Sega Dreamcast was the most expensive game ever made in its time. Do a google search for "shen mue map" and be ready for a chuckle. It's like a couple of streets and a tiny part of a harbor district.
Same with game length. Indie games are coming out these days that will easily take away 50+ hours of your life-time with excellent gameplay.
@@keeganmcfarland7507 True since plenty of indies didn't have sequels their developers just moved on to other games.
I mean minecraft is an indie game, or was an indie game at least
@sillyninja65 Minecraft used to be a indie game until Microsoft bought Minecraft/Mojang, and slowly ruined everything.
"I spent my money on cool horse armor in Oblivion"
That right there is the answer.
Once microtransactions and the F2P model took over in the 2010's, the amount and quality well crafted and finished games took a nose dive. Players showed they were willing to pay up for skins, battlepasses, lootboxes, 5 different currencies. Even worse, they showed they were willing to pay for unfinished games too. Gaming has become more mainstream too where the medium is reaching way more than the small percentage of gaming veterans.
Gone are the day where dedicated players seek after the most well-crafted and best designed masterpieces. We are living in the worst timeline, where companies can simply forget about us and seek after the cosmetic glugging whales, and the gambling and FOMO addicts who are convinced to play from a single deceptive trailer. Its far easier and more profitable for them to pump out surface level garbage for the uninformed masses.
Exactly, today is acceptable to a game to have a lot of things only obtainable by real money.
The standards are so low that I don't mind if the game has microtransactions as long they are cosmetic only.
@@matheuspimentel5828Bethesda has never been that, they made big games but eventually caved to that with ESO and F76 because kids nowadays would rather play online with their friends.
The uninformed masses lmao 😂😂😂
@@cookdislander4372 Peak zoomer trash comment here.
@@TheFlyingFish692that's because in the golden Era, video games complimented lives rather then the focus. You'd go do shit and then come back and play all night.
Game devs were gamers back them. Felt like 360/ps3 was the pinnacle of playing. It’s mind boggling what was released in 2007/08. Imagine if we had that now. I wouldn’t stop using my console.
the further back in time you go the more impressive games were. people did not have a clear cut boxed out idea of what games are and they just dare to dare and dream of what they could be. look up tes 2 daggerfall
Do you think game devs aren’t gamers now?
You people speak shit you don’t know shit about
Nobody becomes a game developer if they're not a gamer. The schooling cost more than any commercial related programs like computer science, business, media design, etc. While the pay is sometimes not even half of their related professions.
People who design and make games do love them. The reason games are less enjoyable is more convoluted than that and it's not the same reason for everyone.
The 7th generation, from 2005-2013, really did feel like the absolute peak of gaming overall. The graphics looked so mindblowing, the new types of gameplay mechanics and story presentation that were introduced were revolutionary compared to before, and there was generally a boatload of different on-disc content that was very simple to access and play.
To be honest, I feel like even the 7th generation of consoles wasn't the peak, it was the 6th generation. It's just the decline was nearly as severe until the mid 8th generation. Everything after that is not nearly as good as the peak or even the pre-6th generation games and consoles. Only ones who are at least somewhat like how they used to be are Nintendo and other Asian and also Eastern European developers (except Sony and Konami), an Indie/AA studios obviously.
This is actually pretty common in the entertainment industry. A couple fantastic movies or shows, the industry explodes, the market becomes saturated, the quality plummets. The markets nosedives, and then the cycle continues.
It's happened thrice with Hollywood, twice with videogames, and once with music. Don't worry about it now. The market is about to crash, and we'll see new gaming Titans emerge.
I hope your right
I think fallout 76 is a perfect case study for exactly what not to do in game development. Saying that there are quite a lot
That said, Fallout 76 actually IS functional now. I'd say Fallout 76, No Man's Sky, Halo MCC, Halo Infinite, et al are all just examples of why you should never buy a game at launch. Instead of paying $70 for a broken, unfinished mess at launch, play some other game today and play that AAA game you've been eyeballing 2 years from now when it's on sale in Steam for $20 and the developer has actually finished it.
@@MonsucoFallout 76 ain't worth 20$
Ain't even worth a single penny
@@dioniscaraus6124I’m terms of playability and content added, it’s on par w NMS atm. Not even a fan of 76. I spent maybe 3 hours playing it and it is completely different from launch.
@@dioniscaraus6124 trust me, it is. It's a bad adventure game but a great MMO RPG.
Games have developed the same issues that movies have. Big studios don’t want to risk a loss by experimenting and falling flat, small studios aren’t spending as much and are often pure passion projects so therefore are much more willing to take riskes.
It’s on mobile platforms that games are being developed everyday and released
there are a lot of people talking as if they could model and sculpt a random NPC from Witcher 3 or Starfield with their own hand.
nah, modern game character was insanely detailed, and it's normal for main character to took 1-3 months to create, and this is
still without the Body & face rig and Animation
even in the industry, there are only a handful of people that could create a Hyperrealistic character, just because the sheer requirement of knowledge.
do you think that all they do is just scan in 1 minute and done?
how about you try to recreate one random Gun from Starfield, i bet you can't,
and even if you can, the quality is just sad.
and in modern game, there were insane amount of Assets, that took a crazy amount of time to create.
because people ask for more, they can't settle with outdated looking character & Environment, they want it as realistics as possible.
@@jensenraylight8011 ? I’m sorry but what’s your point, it’s difficult to model stuff okay yeah but that stuff that’s being made is still cool and passionless. No I don’t think I could make an M16 out of CoD but why aren’t more companies creating stuff that’s more interesting
@@Eternity909 i doubt that, to reach AAA quality of game assets, it really took years of training,
and for Hyperrealistic AAA Character, it's normal to take 5-10 years of intensive training, or else it'll look like a fake human.
you might be proud of your M16, but for Game or Movie Standard, it's just sad,
even for an Ancient game like Counter strike.
there are a lot more to the real Production workflow, and you don't know what you don't know, unless you work directly in the industry.
i think Bethesda did take a huge risk with Starfield, but you can't win against people expectation, they want every Planet to be Handcrafted, which is crazy.
and also indie and small studios can get away with using a bad assets, broken animation or just bad character.
that's why they could focus on the gameplay and other aspect of the game.
while AAA game, even one bad random NPC could turn your game into a laughingstock
but one that i agree is that, those Investors and Executive should just shut up and let people do their work.
100% correct.
Some of my favorite games were born of small initial teams willing to pursue a vision rather than a sure thing. Doom, Minecraft, PUBG, Max Payne. Some of the greatest games of all time.
2005-2011 was amazing 6 years for games
97-2011 for me, Age of empires, Warcraft 3, Gothic series, Fallout 1-2 etc
@BlobBlobkins The second , or third golden age of rts
@@BlobBlobkinslate 90s to 2013 for me. 2013 is really the year when gaming became what it is now
@@lalotime yeah after 2013 we were done :(
2000-2011 or so was the renaissance of games. Games were still being made by smaller studios that didn't need to pay exorbitant fees to be published on consoles. Nowadays, most smaller dev teams can't even get their hands on devkits to develop for consoles, let alone the cash it costs to publish on them.
A few years ago there was talk of AAA studios creating a small crew internally that would make smaller games based on concepts or experimental mechanics. The small team would have access to greater resources and their innovations could be built upon by the studio for larger projects. Guess that never really took off but it seems like it should be the way forward to me.
AFAIK, Nintendo has been doing that for years at least. They have a few small teams who focus on more experimental stuff.
Sounds like Valve, but they usually scrap the games even when long in development
I've seen it with games like Unraveled, (and few other examples from Ubisoft).problem is - those indie-like offshoots are not experimental. At all. They are just shinier standard platformers (even tho Unraveled 2 was pretty fun)
@@Coxickdude, no. Valve isn’t a game maker. They’re just a platform provider with steam. 1 game every 10 years isn’t a game making company, that’s a hobby. Just no.
@@TheMilhouseExperience Well, they are making games, they just don't finish them/don't release them. Look into that if you don't believe me
A lot of people miss that the reason studios like Rockstar are releasing less frequently is that the standards for making AAA game has become incredibly complex. Any of the titles released in the early 2000's by Rockstar wouldn't even be considered AA by today's standards, and I'd even argue that making a game like RDR2 is probably more complex than all of their games combined prior to 2010's. And that's the standard expected of them now.
Yup. 2000s games wouldnt be shit now, regardless of how good the stories might be. People wouldnt be able to get over the oldschool works, potato graphics, and unrewarding gameplay (relative to modern standards).
@@shift7808ah yes rewarding gameplay mechanics like loot boxes, battle passes, Ubisoft tier fetch quest checklist rpgs, and graphics>gameplay
@@seminoleboy96 youre focused on a painfully small minority of games but even then, the average ubisoft game is def more rewarding than a 2000s title by design
That doesn't explain why halo infinite has less features than halo 3. Even though it's a very similar game engine with similar mechanics and graphics
@@Bdavis2475 lol. This is the perception of the average joe who plays games. If you think that Halo infinite and Halo 3 required a similar amount of work... Man I dont even know what to tell you. Infinite is infinitely more complex/detailed than halo 3 and would've required 4 times the work or more. This is coming from a professional 3D artist with over 10 years experience. --- The engines and graphics are no where near the same and it pains me to even read that. Not even a fan of Halo.
I'm personally looking forward to Space Marine 2.
Its one of the only games coming out that isnt trying to be a forever game.
>Its one of the only games coming out that isnt trying to be a forever game.
40k Space marine game out over 13 years ago...
@LCDqBqA he means the type of game halo infinite tried to be. As in a liveservice game.
@@LCDqBqAwhat's your point?
To me a forever game is one that doesn't require online services to play down the road. It often is single player and offers split screen and LAN play for multiplayer so that when the multiplayer servers go down you can still play with friends.
@@ianbelletti6241I think the context here is Space Marine 2 is a game you can pick up that won’t require a significant amount of time sink to fully enjoy.
Jobless MBAs from the giant finance crash in 2008 came to the only industry booming during that time: gaming. A rough enonomy like right now meant more home entertainment. They brought all their banking, nickel and diming, fee model scheming like microtransactions and other monetizing which was a perfect storm intersecting iPhone's new in-app purchase models, which included games. By the end of Gen 7 microtransactions were everywhere and uninformed customers bought them up by the billions. Now they can drip feed content with some monetizing or when a game isn't monetized it's a rare release to keep gamers placated. They don't want to look too greedy. And one thing is for sure: industry darlings of its rise are long gone, eaten up by corporate interests. The pivot is measurable.
Excellent comment.
This man here speaks the truth. Hear ye!
Yup it feels like this with every industry now a days, low quality high price products. The consumer gets fucked over everywhere now
Yup, a big fault of the current economy is that corpos only care about investors. Short term growth.
Much like how the Japanese changed entirely after the economic crash in the 90's
Was it because there was more competition in part? I feel like since the early 2000s big game companies have been buying up all their competitors
Or straight up dEAstroyed them....
The 2008 financial crisis wiped out a lot of smaller studios, and the industry has been slow to recover
I think budgets were much smaller which naturally forced development times to be shorter, smaller contained experiences. 7-10 hour single player and maybe multiplayer. Regardless of the studios size they all were trying to put out a new game every 1.5 - 2 years AND DEMOS no expensive silly commercials and previews. Just a demo for people to try.
complexity in coding low level dx12/vulcan graphics code, high poly modelling, integrating animations, shooting captured animations, arranging for voice acting
I have been thinking about this.
The amount of absolutely banger games that released from 2007-2011 is mindblowing. They were so fresh and inovative I still go back and play them from time to time.
A couple years ago I played through CoD:WaW, Black Ops 1-3 and Infinite Warfare as my first CoD games. I cannot express how refreshing it was to play through a complete story over the course of a single weekend.
Try MW 1, 2, 3 next. Youll enjoy it.
The OG ones from back in the day. Not the remaster garbage that just came out from 2019 until now.
@@willem9450 Been looking at trying that, just haven’t had the time for it. Doesn’t help that they still cost full price lol.
If you played WaW on veteran you wouldn't have felt refreshed as it took you like 3 weeks to complete. I still did it anyway for some reason
The forever game trend, at least the live service kind cant last. The simple fact is that time is limited for players and they cant spend their time in all of these games. This means most will fail in the long run.
i dont think it has to do as much with the idea of forever games but actually its about the engines, technologies and production pipelines not being accomodated to the scale studios are going for today together with the community actually demanding games to be produced fast just so the same people complain when they are undercooked. Also i love the idea of these forever games, i love skyrim with all the mod support and i would love to see many other open world games like it that you can just keep coming back to.
„with the community actually demanding games to be produced fast just so the same people complain when they are undercooked.“
Yeah, but if you noticed, back then games released far quicker and where still much more stable and less buggy than basically all games released today.
@@amazinghorizon8270 Gaming technology was primitive and very limited back then compared to today and were also far more repetitive in and of themselves than how there can be a lot more going on in modern games. Gaming has been realized to not be a niche market anymore as well and games can reach people who are not hardcore gamers. Thus, the variety of games themselves has substantially increased with a much broader market of people willing to play games instead of just the hardcore gamers. Technology has quickly improved since when games were first made, and the more you can do, the harder it is to decide on what you want to do.
@@BlueSunStudios1 What exactly are you trying to tell me?
Because all I took from your comment is that there is much more choice now in what game to make.
But I don‘t understand how this has anything to do with the comment I made.
@@amazinghorizon8270What he's trying to say isn't just that tech is better.
People expect games to be bigger, significantly less repetitive and to look way better. The thing is, no matter what "tech" you're using you still need a human being to actually make shit, and they're making more shit than ever, particularly art assets. So, so, so many assets.
@@colbyboucher6391 Yeah, I know.
I still don't understand what this has to do with my comment.
But thank you for better explaining his point.
I think it's a bit disingenuous to chock all of bethesda's success with skyrim to "accidental" luck.
Ever since Arena the goal of their games has been to provide an expansive world with loads of characters and freedom to build your character however you want, doing what content you wish.
And over time they allowed the fans to mess with their games more and more.
Morrowind led to the first release of creation kit for people to really mod the hell out of the game.
Creation kit for skyrim soon came out after release as they've already seen how much longevity mods bring.
The release of Special Edition included major engine updates that improved the optimization, stability and modding capabilities of the game even further.
Skyrim's longevity, without a doubt, is due to the absurd amounts of mods AND memes that came out of it. And it's because bethesda endorses it. They promote modding more than almost any other company. Todd, the charming devil he is, recognizes their mistakes and doesn't shy away from bringing them up.
Yes, games without a doubt take longer and longer to release. And you may justify it with the basic "forever game" reasoning, as that's factual for many games out there.
However i don't think bethesda is a stand out example in this, as games with long longevity and replay value and huge amounts of content have always been their thing.
And with each generation the standards rise, games take more money and resources to develop. It's exponential growth across the industry.
I agree, I felt like attributing their success to accident was a big stretch. This is a well thought out post.
without mods bethesda would not exist
its unpaid labor that carries them, other than that their games are pretty bland and mediocre
they got extremely lucky people would stay and start making mods
@@equalizer-pw2uz They still sell very heavily on console which has no/limited mods.
Yup, Bethesda has always took this path until kids started demanding multiplayer online games. Bethesda caved and went that route which took years but I’d say they’re “back” with starfield and hope they stay the course
@@equalizer-pw2uzBethesda games have never been the prettiest or flashiest looking, if you want that then play TLOU or even assassins creed. Bethesda games, before ESO and FO76 have always been about doing as much as possible in the world. Thats it
Yakuza is the best example of as deep as an ocean, wide as puddle. I'll take that game design over any other game other than crafting games like Minecraft or Space Engineers that say they're forever games.
👏👏👏👏
yakuza is NOT 'deep as an ocean', what are you talking about?
they're just massive games. Their design philosophy is almost entirely the opposite of what you're saying.
@@DanielFerreira-ez8qdhe means wide as an ocean, deep as a puddle
@@VividFlash I hope so, that would make more sense but I have my doubts.
@@DanielFerreira-ez8qd Yakuza is not "massive", they're relatively small game. Also the OP talking about the map size to content density. The map size in Yakuza is significantly smaller than most open world games but every few meters you'll find extremely memorable event that live rent free in your head. From the random bartering quest to meeting bunch of adult in adult diapers to sneaking yourself to a cult. All of that is packed in a small map that everyone who actually play it remember like the back of their hand.
Stark opposite to most "open world games" quest that basically just fetch quest.. go there look for x, etc.
Take me back man. I miss how frequent and how different games were.
Now that I'm older (40's), I just play silly nintendo kiddy games.
We're getting old. I feel nostalgia for the 16 Bit era and the PS2 era because even though the graphics weren't great, there was so many ideas coming out that blew my mind. Square was at their golden age, Sega was carving out their own legacy, Sony was throwing out tons of money at unique developers all over the world, Nintendo was all quality with AAA development and Blizzard was at their infancy ready to dominate PC gaming for years to come.
Blizzard is first reason for start this... mmo idea is cursed itself.
Also last good game they made is warcraft 3.
Aint got nothing to do with age. Gen Z here, and games were indeed better back then. I am jealous on what experienced since the NES.
@@VITAS874 I liked the first Overwatch. With that exception for myself, I agree.
@@richardalex4516 i liked them until 2009
This reminds me of Cry of Fear, despite the game engine being 24 years old the game was still terrifying and it scared me so many times on repeat playthroughs, it was better than alot of Triple A horror games, it also told the story better, handled the topic of depression maturely, where the best ending doesn't have your life fixed entirely and all your demons killed, your character is still depressed by the end.
try silent hill 2!!
Most Triple A studio's aren't even making horror games to be fair, and the ones they do make as of recently in the last 6 or so years have been either been amazing or at least pretty fun. Back in 2012 when Cry of Fear came out the only horror games even really around that weren't the horror-lacking Resident Evil games of the time were all indies or at most second rate studios anyway.
First Chainsaw boss fight made me crawl under desk and try to quit the game when i was a kid lmao.
@@weplo1597 it makes top 5 scariest moments in gaming for sure and he shows up multiple times when you least expect it.
finishing that game was torture fr
@@MyAccount217 Fr. Actually I was talking about big chainsaw guy but that sawrunner just makes you remind you that you have a heart and its beating
Realistically games just aren't as easy to make as they used to be. One level in a modern game probably takes more time and effort to make than a whole game in the past. We had lower standards at the time which is why we're so nostalgic for those games. If half of those old games released today with a completely different name, people would hate on it hard. Standards rise and so does the time needed to reach those standards.
You are exactly right, but the average consumer is completely unaware of this.
AAA games take at least 3-5 years to make now, with budgets of up to $200 million, which is equivalent to any blockbuster movie out there, therefore making publishers more risk-averse.
Games have become exponentially more expensive to make throughout the generations, due to the more content & graphical fidelity DEMANDED by the CONSUMERS, to justify buying a new console.
Game development has also become more easier to access than ever before, that is why the Indie market is booming as it is.
yeah games were so much easier to make when you had to code your engines and tools from scratch. nowadays when we have unreal 5 and unity game development is much harder
Wrong. I played Brothers in Arms: European Assault. The game is still nice
Yes, but I feel like many of those games have things they don't... need? Like the massive open world.
Look at Yakuza, it does perfectly fine in a smaller crowded space. No need for biggest open-world whatever. And because of that, they can whip out more games, even with engine changes.
Gaming Studio Executives are getting way too comfortable. They're going to do with the gaming industry, the same they did with the movie industry.
Actually the biggest problem is a complete and utter lack of talent. Back in college during my programing classes I often saw the difference in talent. There were people who wrote programs with features far beyond what was required for the course in hours while others took the full week or longer on some of the projects. Programing Languages are like any of Language some people can craft epic master pieces while others write nonsensical garbage, like most of hollywood writers these days. And you can see this clear lack of talent in the various stories were community releases day one patches that in some cases the developers take months to fix if they even do.
The reason for the lack of talent is the same mindset that nearly killed the gaming industry back when Atari stood atop the reigns. That mind set is that Developers are like factory line workers where you can just swap someone out and replace them with anyone else to do the job. Thus they pushed long hours for low pay and little to no compensation for games that did well. The result was their best developers left and formed Activision. The rest as they say is history.
Because the studios threat it as a factory line there is often little room for those with talent to make a meaningful impact. And people get burned out or see the status of the working environment and decided to go their own way. Basically we are seeing the same thing that happen all those years ago repeat itself. The main difference now is that Distribution is a lot easier so small developers don't need to form a big publishing company of their own like the Developers did with Activision. Thus we see the rise of a lot of indie developers.
BG3 I think is a great example of what happens in a talented group of developers gets together to make a game. Sure it did take 6 years to make but when you compare that to Starfield and other AAA games that take 6+ years to make it's clear the lack of talent in AAA. BG3 is packed full of content that makes many other AAA games look bare in comparison. It's the difference between going "Yeah I can see why this could take 6 years." instead of the "WTF is this? They had 6+ years and this is all they got." followed by developers saying, "Making games is hard."
Unfortunately it seems now that when talented creators do get fed up and leave to form their own company or something they too produce shit. So there are no renegade companies here to liberate us. The disgruntled devs that leave just make more shit.
Wokeness has played a part in hiring useless people.
I think it's sad. Because starfield to me looks like what i would expect from an amateur indie developer. Vs indie devs put out what i expect from an Aaa studio. I wanted starfield as big as it was with the depth of baulders gate 3. But its befesda we are talking about here. Bound to mess up.
Correct, workers in big AAA companies are motivated by the same reasons employees work in Amazon warehouses - Wage. They are not there to create art.
Yeah you get a lot of brain-drain in the industry because game companies don't pay well and work you to the bone. Why would someone wanna sweat bullets for months or years on end over a project when they can do a third of the work and make over twice the money in a different industry?
Team Fortress 2 took 9 years of development (worth the wait).
Meanwhile for inde game the wait is actually worth it most of the time
Well this seems like a perfect spot for some self-promotion.
But in all seriousness, I do agree. I think it's partially due to how most many big companies make safe bets and try to chase trends, while the most indie titles create them, usually mixing up genres or themes in innovative ways that seems insane or risky.
99.99999 indie games are trash not even worth downloading for free
@@trader2137 yea, but i wait for the passion protects and the ones that can be trusted, like how im waiting for crosworn rn
Indie games have a cesspool of garbage games, early access titles, and broken promises that kind of influence AAA devs to release crappy early access titles as well. while only a few couple shine, and others tend to be hidden and underrated. The Mods however, is where the games are at
@@trader2137that's not true now, is it? Most of indie games go unnoticed, but your number is pulled out straight out your ass.
I just don’t understand what these devs do at these companies all day that justify this time to product ratio. How can you have 1,000 people work on Assassin’s Creed Valhalla for SIX YEARS (20% of the average game dev’s life if they’re 30 y/o) and end up with… well, Assassin’s Creed Valhalla. Bungie gave us Halo 3 in 3 years. Blizzard gave us WoW in 4 years. With 40 people. In a cave, with a box of scraps.
Really? You cant conceive that the ridiculous and exponential growth in graohic fidelity, physics engines with stuff like ray tracing and all those other things. You cant possibly see how all the new things in modern games could justify more time than they used to... its almost like modern graphics and HD models take SO MUCH TIME TO MAKE 🤯 I seriously dont understand how gamers dont understand a modern game even if it was equal in scope and size than a game like halo 3. which by the way halo 3 and halo 2 developments were absolute messes and they were and still are super buggy and if you mod you know ITS PAPER CLIP AND STRING holding together those games engines. So its not like the games we used to get arent full of alot of the same problems.
Also like i said halo 3 isnt the developmental master piece you think it is. Its just a game that we are nostalgic for. The story was good yea and everything but the game engine and the graphics were way more simple than a game released YEARS after it on a diffetent genetation like AC valhalla. Like i seripusly dont get how you guys think.
Halo 3 is janky as fuck. Thats why you can do so much of the shit you can do in sandtrap and all the other maps without modding. Its a glitchy as fuck game. You just dont remember cuz nostalgia
Lol i checked out ur channel and while im arguing about dev time i just wanna say that you make GOOOOD scp youtube content and as an scp fan Im lowkey glad i accidentally clicked ur pfp when tryna argue lol. Cuz now im gonna watch ur videos.
Ik thats weird after the last two comments tone but i was mad but seeing the rarity that is preemo scp content I couldnt stay mad lol. Scp is def on of the easiest cash grab content machines on youtube look at the shitty scp animated and the subpar scp readers tryna capture half of maang or volguns bravado. So like ur awesome for actually putting effort into your videos.
Fuck whatever we were arguing about lol idc, i lost or whatever. Just keep making your content please cuz i need scp content
@@EnCounterCultureMedia I remember every single glitch I have ever performed in Halo 3 in greater detail than the faces of my own loved ones, so you’re just wrong on that point. Also, no, I cannot conceive why the “exponential growth in graphic fidelity” and the increased workload for the art department is slowing all of development down just because they have more assets to make in greater detail. But I could be wrong, which is why the entire point of my comment is me saying I do not understand why this is the case.
You just really looked at a man that said, “I don’t understand why this is the way it is.” And then tried to make him look like a fool for saying he doesn’t understand why the thing is the way it is.
@@EnCounterCultureMedia just read THIS comment after posting my previous comment to your last two comments lol. Thank you man, I love to hear it 🫡 I hope I can keep making better and better content that makes you proud
And here Ive been playing Monster Hunter World, Red Dead Redemption 2, Hitman series, Yakuza series, Ghostrunner, Divinity 2, Hollow Knight, Final Fantasy 14, Power Wash Sim, DMC5, Risk of Rain 2, Elden Ring, Hades, Satisfactory, Vampire Survivor, CP77 Phantom Liberty, Remnant 2, Armored Core 6, V Rising, Baldurs Gate 3... struggling to find time to touch grass. But I can say that FPS games havent really been peak nowadays so I can sympathize a liiiiiiiiiittle bit
3:44
"Its more important to perceive value than to receive value"
Great quote that summarizes the main point of the video in an easy to remember and rhyming mantra. Good stuff
Back in the 2000s we were getting a feel for what games COULD BE. and how open, explorative, and driven they could be. And in the last decade from 2010-2023, for one thing, corporations got heavily involved. because they saw how much money successful games printed. But, also, gamers still crave the large scope, explorative, free-feeling games like Skyrim, GTA5, Zelda, etc.
In the 2000s we were enamored with Mario 64. Ocarina of Time. These games that were, at the time, giving us large areas to explore. We were finally off of the 2d landscape. we had the freedom to look at a piece of landscape and go "I can finally go see that."
And Skyrim really perfected that, at the time. It was a sandbox. It was a world we got to exist in, and carve out our own path. And the world reacted to what we did.
But alllll during this, our tech was progressing like crazy. The new shiny graphics. the lines of code for the mechanics for the games. All of it exponentially increased development time. And unfortunately, even as big as these game corporations are, they still can't throw enough money at developers (or maybe they just choose not to), to speed up the development of these games.
It might be something for AI to get involved in. Coding an AI to do all the pre-fab work. the monotonous stuff that takes forever. Design some procedural worlds. And let human developers work on the story, decide the mechanics, and put the finer touches on things.
But. All you have to do is look at the average lines of code for games back in the 2000s. and then 2010s. and now... and... Our games are getting HUGE. Huge in resources. huge in coding. and that all quickly adds up the development time.
Bethesda, no doubt, is trying to make a huge forever game with ES6. They're not making ES6. They're making Skyrim 2. The want another game that's going to last for another 10 years. But to do that, the development is going to be insane.
And with that mindset you'll kill some of your creativity. Trying to hard
The main problem is that studios are spending many years to make games that'll last forever, and there aren't as many short games that can be made in a shorter period of time, and present new, unique ideas. AI doesn't do that, it only learns from people, it can't be creative by itself.
“In the 2000s we were enamored with Mario 64. Ocarina of Time”
My guy those games came out in 96 and 98. PS2 was released in 2000.
@@paulhudalla9527 With ambition comes greater desire to do more and have more in your games. An influx of shorter games being the norm will only work if more and more people started moving on from games fast after beating them and couldn't be bothered to sit down and enjoy games for a lengthy time anymore. With society itself becoming more frantic and hectic, we may start seeing that when people have less to do and just want to focus on simpler things, but if things calm down more and people have more time on their hands, expect really big games being made more often again.
@@DefaultProphetpeople didn't just stop playing those games in the 2000's, so he's not wrong
i think that now its harder cause everything has been made already in some sense. Everything has been tried, and companies are taking less risks so they just lean on old ip. The bigger the companies get, is the more money they have to make, which means they have to make games that cut corners to save money. I also think that the technology being used is causing them problems as they try to bring in next gen graphics. Also, social media has made it where ppl find out about a game way before they should, pre orders are more of a priority to get money in before hand, and companies are trying to follow trends rather than focusing on making a properly developed game.
So many things have not been tried. I’ve dreamed of things that could be done in games but there’s often almost nothing for it
Then why tf they still buy out competent studios
Large AAA productions simply cost a lot more to make. Skyrim was made by about 100 people. Starfield around 500. And then a much larger marketing budget. The studios simply CANT take a risk, the game NEEDS to make a certain amount of revenue, so they will stick to well proven mass market compatible ideas, and not experiment too much.
@@jonathanz.9675 You really think with this hypersaturated indie game market that your ideas would be original and sell well?
@@alexven92 Absolutely, if I had the proper resources and expert support; that is the unrealistic part.
People overestimate the saturation of original ideas. For thousands of years, even in the old testament Bible, people thought that nothing was original or new, but then came the enlightenment and advanced technology and the world changed. Also, the Greek philosophers had some pretty original ideas even back then as far as recorded history is concerned
This year alone we had/are getting:
- Zelda TOTK
- Star Wars Jedi
- Starfield
- Spider-Man 2
- Baldur's Gate 3
- RE 4 (Remake)
- Dead Space (Remaster)
- Street Fighter 6
- Assassin's Creed Mirage
- Alan Wake 2
- Diablo IV
- Counter Strike 2
- Final Fantasy XVI
- Pikmin 4
- Hogwarts Legacy
- Payday 3
- Armored Core VI
& more
And you are telling me we are getting too little AAA games?
I think is a decent year for games too.
It will probably become a reference in the future, if the trend of making slow paced games will become a constant mindset for game developers
I think 2023 is an outlier
jsut for me, damn im worried w/ the amount of new IP
Calls CS2 a new game but DS remake is just a remaster?
AAA video games didn't stop at 2008 as how this "crique" proclaims it as so.
How about
Elden Ring (2022)
Death stranding (2021)
It Takes Two (2021)
The Last of Us Part II (2020)
Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice (2019)
God of War (2018)
Breath of the Wild (2017)
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt (2016)
or just a quick Google of "GOTY (insert year)" will do. Not to mention Game of the Year awards have other nominations, are you then saying those independent "modern" vide game titles did not exist in the video creators eyes?
Then you are doing a disservice to independent games (ironic being your channel is supposedly named Indie Games) lumping indie games released post 2008 as part of "modern games" as they are video games created by hardworking independent studios in the modern era.
This video is beyond accurate. I honestly haven't been able to put in words how I feel about the gaming industry until this video. Honestly felt like I was going crazy feeling like this age of gaming was different and this put in words how I've been feeling.
I’ll take a 2010 graphic, Fidelity over anything we get nowadays
Being a Final Fantasy fan is a unique form of torture😭
“Skyrim in space” really explains everything!
@somethingdiabolical3894 not really its pretty accurate. I say that with 5000 hours in skyrim lol
@@unionpepe7864 Well more like Fallout in space. Wow though I couldn't even finish the first expansion in Skyrim without being bored out of my mind, and quitting. I even play MMOs.
@JohnFreedman0 you sound like you just don't enjoy single player RPGs which is fine
@@unionpepe7864 Last ones I played and finished would be kingdom come deliverance, cyberpunk, jedi survivor, and dark souls 3.
@JohnFreedman0 wouldn't call jedi survivor an RPG at all. But idk elder scrolls, fallout and starfield just take a lot more imagination to immerse yourself in the world. I really enjoy Bethesda games
90% of the physical games on the left side of the thumbnail didn't even release in 2007 wtf, especially wolfenstein the new order
This is why when I first bought my PS4, I sold it a few months later. The games mostly seemed to focus on visuals and cinematics.
You can still write and level design in the same amount of time as yesteryear, but 3d artists are well paid and swallow the budget now. They take ages to deliver hundreds of unique and complex assets that are used to overly clutter each level now, and they have to do this to separate themselves from every other mediocre developer out there or just get lost in the smog.
It’s just so relaxing, getting in my bed and watching one of your videos. I’d rather watch your channel over Netflix any day now
Hearing the last few words reminded me when Armor Core 6 was announced, I had no idea what it was about and it released around a year later, and it took me back to the PS2 days of arcade-like fun, nothing was changed with its core gameplay (to my knowledge) but it felt fresh
That also how I feel, it's a PS2 era mech game back when mechs were Still popular in Japan. But with modern technology, and it's great
I would play Armor Core, but I dont got it.
The Stagger System is definitely a massive change in core gameplay from the older titles
They added the stagger system and healing. There were definitely changes to the gameplay, but it still does feel like a classic ps2 era mech game.
true, that stagger and the direct hit@@CreamTheEverythingFixer
This video is inspiring me to actually keep trying despite how harsh the market is for indies...
The PS2 era was significantly better because it was the last age when developers had creative freedom and the tech and dev were too long or expensive, compared to all the HD consoles since the Xbox 360. Now it's just AAA or indie, with the occasional Eurojank, but no arcade-style experience. Too many open worlds that are too long and demand too much space on your hard drive.
It doesn't take much longer to develop a game than it used to be. The present problem is that marketing found a solution to feed on a guaranteed hype that wasn't guaranteed back in the day. You had to risk with presenting a concept that could either destroy your project or flourish. Nowadays, we have tools like celebrities, mega collaborations between other industries that hype up the projects and fan cults of certain personas and studios.
Another issue is that so many companies nowadays employ non-gamers and "creative" teams that actually don't have an art level of imagination. They may take something new, but borrow a lot of from older projects with mind to shoehorn fan service, but fan services get very stale when you have the same concept, but like repeated 15 times through different titles.
And then there are projects announced way before they have an idea of what that game must/should become. Too many conflicting ideas that lead to simple compromises and simple/safe compromises to avoid internal conflicts lead to poor/mediocre games.
@DiamondGlow44" Too many conflicting ideas that lead to simple compromises and simple/safe compromises to avoid internal conflicts lead to poor/mediocre games."
Yeah, I've seen this a LOT. Deadlines also play a role in this type of decision making.
Love how you just flippantly claim something like "it doesn't take much longer". What an ignorant take. Your hunch isn't objective reality buddy. Level of complexity has exponentially went up with higher fidelity graphics, physics, larger worlds, optimizing for performance, building it to run across all types of consoles and hardware, game logic, server hosting and scaling to demand, matchmaking... Cross platform is still relatively new, exclusives used to be way more common focusing development. Cross play is now a thing too, and doing cross platform authentication is not plug and play like you think. The higher fidelity means a huge art team, tons of assets, maps, managing performance budgets. Instead of putting a single texture on a flat wall it has to be a blend of models, layered blended textures, separate collision... Gamers expect that, gamers expect good animations, mostly bug free games, good writing. Even using Unreal Engine 5 it takes a long time if you want quality, it takes hundreds or thousands of people.
There is a place for smaller indie titles but even then, BattleBit Remastered - a very popular game made by 2 guys took 9 YEARS and that's with buying assets for models, sounds, and some other help. Its incredibly difficult, tedious, and laborious work that just keeps getting bigger as games evolve and expectations grow.
@thepunisherxxx6804 Meanwhile, the tools to do all those things have been easier than ever. They aren't still using the same processes from 15 years ago.
@@thepunisherxxx6804
It should in fact take even less time now than it did before to make a functional and feature complete game. 2 years is good for paving the foundation and then polishing it, but imagine if the work force wasn't bogged down by HR and censors.
@@graye2799 Tools make some* aspects easier, but the scope overall has outpaced them, and they still take a long time to implement and test. Visual scripting in UE5 still takes almost as long as just coding it out including debugging and testing for instance.
indie studios can't build a game like starfield, but bethesda can't build a game like starfield either
Whatare you even tryingto say ?
Blud is not onto anything 💀
Of course they can.
Try No man's sky. Everything is free no dlc or micro transactions and they are still updating the game with new content for free.And it's physical and digital versions are super duper cheap.
@@XXXXD What was promised: "In this next generation role-playing game set amongst the stars, create any character you want and explore with unparalleled freedom as you embark on an epic journey to answer humanity’s greatest mystery."
What is delivered: "Walk 'n Talk Simulator 2023: Space Edition"
Bethesda is good at making Bethesda games (boring slogs that make people convince themselves that they're having fun), not games with "unparalleled freedom" where you live among the stars, exploring planets nobody has ever heard of and finding creatures nobody would have imagined could exist.
Well, I agree, nowadays it feels more than ever that developers want to make a game that would be the only game for someone forever. With huge amounts of meaningless grind and/or replayability, which really contradicts basic desire to play the game, enjoy it, beat it and move on to another one.
Other thing to consider is how development has changed. Because from my perspective, devs are having the best tools to ever exist, but artists have to make the most detailed work ever as well, so it’s kinda interesting to get a video regarding work split on game dev studios, if you’re into that kind of stuff.
It is simply unreal how long we'll have to wait for Fallout 5 and the fact that 76 is pretty much the only thing we have to keep us busy until Fallout 5 releases is a terrifying thought. At least we still have NV and 4 and with mods being made for these games pretty much all the time at least we should be able to occupy ourselves until F5 releases in 2056. With a little bit of luck we'll still be alive at that point too.
This spectacle is also a huge hindrance to game developers and what they can do with games. The more of a spectacle games become, the less risk that they are often able to take because one or two bad games of this scope can do much more damage to a studios finances than the smaller games. This means they will take fewer risks, and innovate far less often in favor of playing it safe in order to make the more bloated games turn a profit.
Well better take a risk and succeed, rather that be a forever zombie...
The problem this days is that the internet is good at many things, including blowing things out of proportion.
This whole "perceived value" mindset that has taken over AAA games is why I only ever play Nintendo games now. Nintendo isn't marketing to the hardcore gaming crowd, they're marketing to families. Families don't care about massive worlds and cutting edge graphics, they care about fun. Sure, Nintendo has their faults too (the enshittening of the Pokemon series key among them), but overall, among the major developers, I feel like Nintendo is the only one that is willing to experiment and care more about having fun.
True ...
Games are too big, the scope is so huge that it makes communication between the devs extremely difficult to manage. Mix that with crunch and tight deadlines and you get overworked and tired workers who don't care anymore, because the management will always have the final word on what the workers make.
It's deffo not nostalgia, companies have been run by greed for several years now. It's all about money
Best games for me were FF7, FF8 and FF9. You played them through once, got a great huge narrative with great music and gameplay, and that was it, never played them again, just one time through, not 'forever games'.
I think biggest problem of these companies is administration, as some have had corruption scandals, harassment and internal problems. In recent years games have become something totally mainstream, and many companies that were relatively small have become gigantic monstrous, with more employees, more money and investment and influence And more investors to please.
"harassment" thats the crux of the issue but not for what you are thinking. they put on all these quotas and annoying wah man pr departments and suddenly people couldnt get any work done
It's totally depend on the kind of game they made. I know some of you really love linear game with linear character that focus more on fancy combat but there're games like that released every years. Bethesda games never perfect but they always try to experience new thing, increase character option, dialogue options, etc... Some of the new things they tried may not work but at least they're still one of the rare AAA devs that still willing to risk it in every sequel. If they truly just care about money they would just make TES 6 because people have been yearning for that game a very long time and would pay tons just to get a taste of it.
I wonder what would happen if AAA devs started experimenting with gameplay instead of graphics... A fully fledged Starfield or Cyberpunk with the graphics of something like Half-Life 2 would allow for soooo much more cool gameplay options
that would have been cool but unfortunately the gamedevs that work for AAA studios are beyond worthless
That’s a good idea, but I wonder if people would still like the game. Graphics still matter to a point.
Then you might as well just play half life 2 instead. Who would actually play a Cyberpunk 2077 with ps2 graphics? There is a reason why it was criticised during it's launch
@@bahshas gamedevs don't have any say in the decision making they are just the people following orders from the management.
@@roachybill Hmm, it might generate a profit, it might not. Loads of indie games exist, so it will compete in another arena, where there even more games to worry about (unless we assume that specifically CDPR have goodwill that will give them an edge in sales) . Also what should even be changed about the game from a gameplay perspective that couldn't be achieved already. Do you know it, does CD project Red know it or ant other company thinking about doing such a move? I get what both you and OP wants, less focus on graphics, but it is not that simple. You should also remember that they have employees that have specific skills and competences, and they have a certain size. Making an indie game would require far less working on it, and different types of employees. It's inefficient. They could produce more games instead, but if everyone did this, the market would have too many games, that most of it would not be bought. We are already in a market, where there is too many games.
But yeah in theory it could be done, but I would say it is stupid, and that is not even considering the economics perspective.
Another hiccup delaying games is feature creep. You’re half way done and the boss comes in and says “ya know what would be cool?”
I was just thinking about this the other day. And 2023 has been awesome so far. Dead Space. RE4 Jedi Survivor, Armored Core 6, Starfield, spider man 2, mortal kombat 1.
The film industry is in a similar boat. There are more "blockbustet" movies then ever but they all do terrible.
i think youre leaving out a massive part, that players now just want more out of games than they did back then. when you look at games like god of war, uncharted, bioshock, dead space, etc that were beatable in 10 hours 20 max i think a lot of players would be upset spending so much money on a game that gives them so little content and people would hate those games for being too short.
People’s definition of what content is isn’t always the same. A well crafted 10-12 hour campaign with replayability features is more content to me than these massive sandboxes full of fetch quests, walking and busy work. To each their own
I may or may not be in the minority but I never care for extra content that amounts to padded gameplay for the sake of padding. A focused experience is just as good than many open world titles with very little to do.
@@Moromom22 the best example is the order 1886, a great game that at the time got heavily criticized for being a full price game with only an 8 hour long campaign, so nobody played it
Only RPGs should be longer than 25 hours. And i dont mean pseudo RPGs like Assassins Creed. Every other game should be 6 to 25 hours max. Im sick of meaningless open world. Thats why i dont play newer games that often any more. Currently Playing God of War 1. 1 Hour in you had so much action already...... in the newer god of war games this would take 5 hours to get going.
I mean this year was a year full of incredible games: Pikmin 4, Rollerdrome, Zelda ToTK, Baldurs Gate 3, AC6, FF16, Starfield, and Street Fighter 6, well and many others but this are the one I played and wow I believe this is a good sign that the AAA might do a comeback, specially with games like pikmin 4 and AC6 that were my favorite and gave me hope in the industry
Yeah and only three of the game in the stack came out in 2007
FF16, Starfield are bad games. like really bad games.
Sometimes there are games created by small teams and these games are better than 10 years-production-game. It’s not about production time or huge budget, it’s about passion and desire to make a dream game.
Games have moved away from what I loved. Finishing an amazing game in one weekend is one of the best experiences you can have on a screen.
Uncharted 1-3, Bioshock 1-3, Heavy Rain, God of War 3, Portal 2, The Last of Us, Arkham Asylum, Red Dead 1. So many amazing compact games with amazing stories coming out in a span of a few years.
Where are we now…
I genuinely bought an Xbox 360 and its still a blast, i miss games that i could finish.... I have 7 games installed on my series X that i have yet to finish.
Why not play those 360 games on your Series X? I am going through my backlog of 360 games on it, as most are backwards compatible. The loading times are a lot faster and the controller is way better.
I am currently playing Deus Ex: Mankind Divided. The Witcher 2, Farcry 3, Alan Wake, Dead Space 2 and 3, and Metro Redux are up next!
The only thing thats annoying in starfield is that in conversations its either "please help me pls pls pls" or you just have to convince them to do the morally right thing. Bitch my revolver can Kill you 15 times with 1 Bullet GIVE ME THAT DAMN ARTEFACT
Nintendo is the only one releasing games on a consistent schedule. They are focusing on the gameplay and fun factor first and foremost which helps them with that.
Nintendo could stand to stagger its releases, if the Switch Pokemon titles are anything to go by here. I'd be hard pressed to call those "complete" by any measure. Plus, pretty much all of its classic IPs are basically shambling corpses held together with duct tape and super glue in a lazy attempt to nostalgia bait people into giving it more money. "Consistent" and "good" are not mutually exclusive.
@n3rfdr4gon99 I know, Nintendo has a elephant in the room.
While Nintendo has greedy similarities to Disney and the other triple AAA companies, thank God the games that Nintendo makes is nowhere near hot garbage as Disney and the other triple AAA.
Other than that, stop buying remakes/remasters of retro triple AAA games (including the Nintendo ones) and instead, start buying indie games and AA games.
I mean, when you just copy-paste the same bing bing wahoo over and over... Then again, tendies like that.
@DominatorLegend God, I hope Nintendo decides to bring those forgotten ips back from the dead or decides to make a new and original IP game for the next-gen Nintendo console.
Also a couple of days ago, I saw a interview for the "Super Mario Bros Wonder", one of the developers of Nintendo said that they developed Super Mario Brothers Wonder without deadlines.
mihoyo hello?
We did not realise back then but we when we were younger in the first decade of the millennium we were living through the golden age of triple a games
"this is why we don't have GTA VI yet" meanwhile at the game studio: This game is coming out in 2026
I grew up when I could play an awesome game and then play multiple sequels within a few years. I was still a kid. Still in the same era of my life.
Kids today play a game they like, they won’t get a sequel until they’re adults with responsibilities. It’s a shame.
Kids don't care about a past they never lived through. It is what it is.
@@cattysplat What are you on about?
I very much cared about and dreamed about growing up in medieval times to become a knight, an explorer in the 18 or 19 hundreds, growing up to become an astronaut to land on the moon, growing up as a Native American before the Europeans came, …
And all my friends did too.
Where did you get the idea from that kids don‘t care about pasts they never experienced?
@@cattysplatyou are very wrong
Now kids can play all the sequels that came out.
@@guidedexplosiveprojectileg9943 Yeah, but they are often graphically so dated that they wont be able to get into them.
And for current games sequels take forever.
Imagine Kids who got into Elden Ring, GTA V, Red Dead Redemption 2, Fallout 4, Skyrim, …
They will all be adults by the time their sequels release.
I played oblivion fifty times, still playing it.
Really great video!
This is why I don't spend money on a lot of video games anymore unless I find a really cool indie game.
I loved armored core 6 because, It gave me a sense of pride and happiness from the good old days of video games.
The money that is needed for video games to exist and be made also cursed game companies. The reason is that when you take risks to create new games and innovations, you take the risk of losing money if the risk fails. And losing money is something that many companies fear in modern times when production and operations is now needed to be made more efficient and cost-effective due the modern requirements, and more risks and costs must be minimized in order to increase cash flows and profits.
Back then, passion came first in terms of creativity, now it’s a job.
Back then devs had passion now its just about money u can tell by the quality of the final product
I will take anime graphical video games over photorealistic video games any day.
I think I have bought skyrim 3 times and the most recent was only a few months ago. It really is a forever game. Trying to recreate that rarely works though
Once in a lifetime game. I’ve never bought a game as many times as I have Skyrim
as a gamer, i dont need beautiful graphics, i just need a playful game, just like battlebit
I think the same thing has happened with music and movies/shows- the bloated large companies that create our media just don't care about being creating original content that really captures you- they just care about pumping out inauthentic boring titles that's been the same for the past 10+ years now with hoping to impress by visuals. I realized this by starting to play indie games that weren't top notch graphically but had great stories that actually had an impact on me
Interesting perspective but this year has been a great year for games imo with games like Armored Core 6, Baldur's Gate 3, Darkest Dungeon 2, Dead Island 2, Dead Space Remake, Final Fantasy 16, Hi-Fi Rush, Hogwarts Legacy, Legend of Zelda TotK, Remnant 2, Resident Evil 4 Remake, Sons of the Forest, Starfield, Street Fighter 6, System Schock Remake, and Star Wars Jedi Survivor.
Some more are still on the way that will hopefully be great like Alan Wake 2, Cities Skylines 2, Lies of P, Lords of the Fallen, Mortal Kombat 1, and Spiderman 2. There are plenty more but I guess we'll see when it's all said and done.
mentioning actual good games would ruin thousands of peoples arguments about "triple a = bad", so people tend to literally bring up every game besides the good ones
I agree. Studios are trying to sell huge maps and RTX badge, rather than develop detailed and interesting worlds. For example the map of Hogwarts Legacy is too big and empty. It would be better to make it 2x smaller. Leave only Hogwarts and Hogsmeade but instead add more quests, characters and you will have much better game.
it should have been the size of bully map. bully is basically hogwarts without the magic and with taste anyways. think about it, how many hours you play bully and it never occurred to anyone that the map is small and that it should be considerably bigger.
Quality gameplay over quality visuals, when you focus on the perfection of visuals everything else takes a backseat.
That's why Nintendo is in the lead right now.
Those of us who played games in the 80s and 90s thought the 2000s was a step down from the golden age. Now the next generation thinks the current gen is a step down from when they were kids. Its a cycle. 12 years from now some 30 year old is going to making a video essay about how amazing games were back in 2024 and how much they suck in 2036.
In no conceivable way were the 2000s a step down. Most 80s games were barebones garbage that acted more like rigged carnie rides than enjoyable cohesive experiences. The 2000s had the creativity and passion together with technology to make visions realised.
AAA: spends six years getting the best graphics
some other company: sends six years optimizing the physics and other interactions.
This just makes me much more hyped for Hytale, man!
*Honestly microtransactions killed games but the disease truly began the moment DLC was introduced*
Honestly, the long development times don’t bother me because all the indies and AAs fill the void while we wait.
short linear games - yes. i want that. i dont need a big world. just an immersive one
"1000 planets to explore" should have alarm bells ringing. How could a human explore 1000 planets? How many people have even travelled to the Earths 6 continents? Let alone visited a few of the countries in these continents?
Then imagine Bethesda being able to fill these 1000 planets with worthwhile content. Its just not happening.
My biggest issue with modern games is they are too bloated. They keep blowing more and more money making games more expensive all for an 8 hour game that takes 70 hours to finish.
Is it worth the wait? Yes. Because the 2000-2010 games dont meet present-day standards. People who have been gaming 25+ years at this point arent entertained by shit devs can throw together in a year (usually), and games like Skyrim and RDR2 have kept more people entertained than all the 2000s game mentioned combined. Its an investment, and yeah, Starfield is already showing its longevity with insane mods popping up every single day. This one game is going to enable countless experiences.
The problem aside from cost is because of the younger Millenials and Gen Zs flooding AAA game studios. They have less experience than Boomers and Gen X developers in the late 2000s.
And thus they are more disposable to the top brass, too.
to be fair having halo 3 on the thumbnail 3 times will bolster the 360's appearance