Was watching the vid below, and while i do agree that the gaming industry is polluted with garbage, and from the likes of Ubisoft, Activision and EA, its actually worse than rotten garbage, but there is still plenty of quality titles that are coming out (except 2020-2021 and 2022 aka the covid years).
Independent and small-scale development and publishing is the one redeeming quality of modern gaming. I know a lot of people sort of look down on it with derision or see it as low-quality because they don't market their games or use cutting-edge visuals, but you have to respect the originality, artistry, and spirit that the games are made in, at the very least.
Conversely, AAA is, with rare exception, a whole lot of the same crap we've been getting for a long time. More significantly, we have seen a HUGE drop in polish and quality on released products. Just look at some of the larger releases in recent years.
In the end, however, I think the biggest disappointment with modern gaming is the gamers themselves (and yes, I include myself in that). As much shit as I talk about AAA gaming, when the next Assassin's Creed comes out...I will probably buy it. When the next Battlefield comes out, I will probably buy it (although I didn't actually buy BF 2042 so maybe I won't...). When the next Call of Duty comes out, it will probably sell more than the previous one did.
Youtubers and video game journalism is also having a terrible effect on gaming culture. No one seems to just want to go into games with an open mind, it's all about who can get the game first and post a video with a hot take and then that hot take becomes gospel and it's all about proving/disproving that hot take.
We refuse to vote with our wallets. Worse, we continue to take actions that go against our self-interest such as pre-ordering and purchasing stupid DLC.
So there's a lot to be pissed off about or disappointed in, sure...but honestly it's 2023 and I have had more fun this year than I did in 2022, and I'm pretty sure I said the same thing about 2021 in 2022, and so on and so forth.
Video games are still awesome and we have a lot of choice and variety and if you're on PC you are really lucky because there is just so much good stuff coming out. If I was forced to give up PC and go to console, I'd probably quit gaming altogether and just read more books and watch more TV. I don't know how you console folks do it, at least those of you that are actual gaming enthusiasts and not just the folks that play the one or two hit games that come out each year.
The only good parts left of modern gaming is the AA scene, indie scene, and Nintendo. I guess Larian are a capable AAA dev as well.
Most AAA games simply lack artistry, bleed employees (leading to lack of talent) and vision.
The biggest problem with AAA games is not the business model, but the scope and scale of development whjich leads to all things wrong with modern AAA games including the business model. Design by committee becomes the norm in a climate like this. Because there are too many chefs in the kitchen, games try to do a bit of everything for everyone, which leads to unfocused games. Because games are too expensive and a single miss can sink a studio, developers becoming incredibly risk averse, because the costs are so high, devs need to recuperate costs with microtransactions.
And hell, while general engines like UE4 (UE5 sucks) and Unity are a double edged sword. On one hand it is nice that they can lower the cost of game development and make things more accessible, but these generalized engines lack specialization. Which means some of the more, unique, and technical stuff simply wouldn't be possible. Tears of the Kingdom or Breath of the Wild would not be possible to run on a Switch using UE or Unity. Nintendo needed inhouse tech specialized for these kind of games.
The only good parts left of modern gaming is the AA scene, indie scene, and Nintendo. I guess Larian are a capable AAA dev as well.
Most AAA games simply lack artistry, bleed employees (leading to lack of talent) and vision.
The biggest problem with AAA games is not the business model, but the scope and scale of development whjich leads to all things wrong with modern AAA games. Design by committee becomes the norm in a climate like this. Because there are too many chefs in the kitchen, games try to do a bit of everything for everyone, which leads to unfocused games.
Not it. They're simply not willing to take any risks.
I feel that modern gaming has already passed the Golden Age and is in the Silver Age (which is a lesser age than Golden). The state of AAA gaming and gamers themselves reflect the Silver Age.
@hardwenzen: Which is due to the scope and scale of development leading to ridiculously expensive games where a single flop can sink a studio.
Yes, but that has nothing to do with talent. There might be no talent left at DICE, never had any talent at 343i, but there's no way that Activision studios are all a bunch of talentless hacks. Pretty sure that EVEN Ubisoft has some talent left, but they're simply not allowed to create what they want.
Was explaining this to my cousin yesterday, we both loved the Battlefield franchise so very much.
In Battlefield 1 every assault, medic, support and sniper looked different they all had 1 archetype and they were easily distinguishable for the player.
This meant a lot for gameplay: in one glance a player can easily distinguish his enemy and what threat he poses.
Now flash forward to 2023
Loading Video...
Everything is about skins now. Everything is about grinding battle passes and unlocking skins. Every single gameplay mechanic that stood in the way has been pushed aside.
@R4gn4r0k: At least downvoting is on point on that vid. Surprised that even the cod dudebros didn't want that shit.
Mobile mechanics: it doesn't matter if your game is disliked or if millions of people abandon your game. You just need to hook a few people that are willing to spend thousands each month and a few dozen people who are willing to spend hundreds.
That's the trick with modern gaming:
If you spend €60 or €70 as the base price of entry for a game you will get treated like a peasant. It's those that keep spending on skins, they get treated like kings. This is evident on all the game design and game mechanics now revolving around skins.
As a side note every game starts looking the same. I keep calling these samey skins fortnite skins and I keep calling Battlefield operators "Specialshits"
@R4gn4r0k: At least downvoting is on point on that vid. Surprised that even the cod dudebros didn't want that shit.
Mobile mechanics: it doesn't matter if your game is disliked or if millions of people abandon your game. You just need to hook a few people that are willing to spend thousands each month and a few dozen people who are willing to spend hundreds.
That's the trick with modern gaming:
If you spend €60 or €70 as the base price of entry for a game you will get treated like a peasant. It's those that keep spending on skins, they get treated like kings. This is evident on all the game design and game mechanics now revolving around skins.
As a side note every game starts looking the same. I keep calling these samey skins fortnite skins and I keep calling Battlefield operators "Specialshits"
Of course. Then spend about 100M on marketing, and no matter how shit your game is, everyone will forget its problems and buy the next entry no questions asked. Not all communities are this easy to milk, but the CoD one is just easy mode.
@hardwenzen: Which is due to the scope and scale of development leading to ridiculously expensive games where a single flop can sink a studio.
Yes, but that has nothing to do with talent. There might be no talent left at DICE, never had any talent at 343i, but there's no way that Activision studios are all a bunch of talentless hacks. Pretty sure that EVEN Ubisoft has some talent left, but they're simply not allowed to create what they want.
I am not even sure what you are responding to any more. Everything you have mentioned is addressed in my original point. And everything you mention is a symptom of the scope and scale of development.
It is generally agreed that modern AAA games lack artistry and vision. It is well documented that employee retention is dismal, which is why studios end upo having to constantly rehire new people. Which results in a lack of experienced employees. See Naughty Dog.
Of course. Then spend about 100M on marketing, and no matter how shit your game is, everyone will forget its problems and buy the next entry no questions asked. Not all communities are this easy to milk, but the CoD one is just easy mode.
Go to a random channel like Westie or Jackfrags, popular COD streamers, look at each one of their thumbnails.
Youtubers were once praised as the saviours of the gaming discourse, so pure and full of integrity.
Literally all of their videos are an ad to buy skins. Companies are very smart about this. Young gamers no longer grow up on buying games, they grow up on buying skins.
@hardwenzen: Which is due to the scope and scale of development leading to ridiculously expensive games where a single flop can sink a studio.
Yes, but that has nothing to do with talent. There might be no talent left at DICE, never had any talent at 343i, but there's no way that Activision studios are all a bunch of talentless hacks. Pretty sure that EVEN Ubisoft has some talent left, but they're simply not allowed to create what they want.
I am not even sure what you are responding to any more.
It is generally agreed that modern AAA games lack artistry and vision. It is well documented that employee retention is dismal, which is why studios end upo having to constantly rehire new people. Which results in a lack of experienced employees. See Naughty Dog.
"Most AAA games simply lack artistry, bleed employees (leading to lack of talent) and vision."
That is your quote. Its false, and calling ND (and most Sony studios for that matter) as not being stable is🤡
I'm with @Maroxad: on this. AAA games take 100s of people years to make, and the time and manpower required goes up every generation. Most of the current shitty practices stem from that.
"Most AAA games simply lack artistry, bleed employees (leading to lack of talent) and vision."
That is your quote. Its false, and calling ND (and most Sony studios for that matter) as not being stable is🤡
Except that is 100% correct. Do you seriously think these design by committee games that try to do a little bit of everything than sticking and specializing in a single area, have any artistic merit? Does Starfield, Assassin's Creed, Battlefield or these FIFA games have any artistic merit to you? No they don't, it is all pig slop. Does TLOU2 come close to the artistic merits of the part 1? I would argue, no. The game still has some artistic merit though, which is rare among AAA games.
And Naughty Dog has a serious retention issues. A 70% turnover rate is absolutely terrible.
Kotaku’s report revealed that approximately 70 percent of Uncharted 4 designers left Naughty Dog following the game’s release. Worth noting that past stories of Uncharted 4‘s troubled development included reports of high turnover during development so this isn’t unheard of. Cooper seemed to confirm this, adding that the studio is known for its high turnover and severe crunch to the point where it’s becoming harder for it to hire experienced staff. As a result, Naughty Dog settled for junior developers, resulting in project delays.
Do you seriously not see how damaging this is to the industry?
"Most AAA games simply lack artistry, bleed employees (leading to lack of talent) and vision."
That is your quote. Its false, and calling ND (and most Sony studios for that matter) as not being stable is🤡
Except that is 100% correct. Do you seriously think these design by committee games that try to do a little bit of everything than sticking and specializing in a single area, have any artistic merit? Does Starfield, Assassin's Creed, Battlefield or these FIFA games have any artistic merit to you? No they don't, it is all pig slop. Does TLOU2 come close to the artistic merits of the part 1? I would argue, no. The game still has some artistic merit though, which is rare among AAA games.
And Naughty Dog has a serious retention issues. A 70% turnover rate is absolutely terrible.
Kotaku’s report revealed that approximately 70 percent of Uncharted 4 designers left Naughty Dog following the game’s release. Worth noting that past stories of Uncharted 4‘s troubled development included reports of high turnover during development so this isn’t unheard of. Cooper seemed to confirm this, adding that the studio is known for its high turnover and severe crunch to the point where it’s becoming harder for it to hire experienced staff. As a result, Naughty Dog settled for junior developers, resulting in project delays.
Do you seriously not see how damaging this is to the industry?
Artistically, even AssCreed has some nice geography, its everything related to its gameplay that blows. Saying that TLOU is artistically more pleasing over TLOU2 is nothing but an opinion, and i would never agree with it. Way more variety in the sequel, and all looking excellent. I am also not too sure why you have BF in there. BF1 and prior titles all looked great, and its only the two newest entries that absolutely blow, especially the uninspired shitshow that is BF2042. I also don't believe this 70% turnover rate at ND. If this was true, this studio wouldn't be able to release industry defining titles.
Artistically, even AssCreed has some nice geography, its everything related to its gameplay that blows. Saying that TLOU is artistically more pleasing over TLOU2 is nothing but an opinion, and i would never agree with it. Way more variety in the sequel, and all looking excellent. I am also not too sure why you have BF in there. BF1 and prior titles all looked great, and its only the two newest entries that absolutely blow, especially the uninspired shitshow that is BF2042. I also don't believe this 70% turnover rate at ND. If this was true, this studio wouldn't be able to release industry defining titles.
It is abundantly clear from that post, you don't know what artistry even means.
Games like Disco Elysium is art, Rain World is art. Do you know what isn't art? Horizon Forbidden West. Despite the game looking really nice.
Edit: People have compared the credits scenes of Naughty Dog games, and used that to conclude the 70% turnover rate. Interviews with Naughty Dog employees add more credence to this number. Modern Naughty Dog has a horrible turnover rate, and the results are laid bare for all to see.
I'm sick of micro-transactions. Developers are intentionally holding back on the content in order to release it for an additional charge. I thought Nintendo was above this, but they did that very same thing with Fire Emblem Engage. They released their "DLC" only a few days after the game launched. That is disgraceful and it makes me not even want to play the game (it's currently in my backlog). I've been contemplating not even buying the next Fire Emblem game.
The only good parts left of modern gaming is the AA scene, indie scene, and Nintendo. I guess Larian are a capable AAA dev as well.
Nintendo have been making Mario games for what nearly40yrs, Zelda games for nearly as long and Pokemon games for at least 20yrs. Nintendo are void of originality.
The only good parts left of modern gaming is the AA scene, indie scene, and Nintendo. I guess Larian are a capable AAA dev as well.
Nintendo have been making Mario games for what nearly40yrs, Zelda games for nearly as long and Pokemon games for at least 20yrs. Nintendo are void of originality.
It is not about providing new IPs, it is about providing a new gameplay experience. The difference in gameplay experience between Super Mario 3D World and Super Mario Odyssey is much greater than the difference between Fallout 4 and Starfield.
Edit: And while I am at it, Nintendo created a ton of new IPs this gen.
The only good parts left of modern gaming is the AA scene, indie scene, and Nintendo. I guess Larian are a capable AAA dev as well.
Nintendo have been making Mario games for what nearly40yrs, Zelda games for nearly as long and Pokemon games for at least 20yrs. Nintendo are void of originality.
It is not about providing new IPs, it is about providing a new gameplay experience. The difference in gameplay experience between Super Mario 3D World and Super Mario Odyssey is much greater than the difference between Fallout 4 and Starfield.
Mario is the most whored out character in all of gaming. There may be some new gameplay experiences, but it's still Mario, Zelda, Pokemon in the end.
This place is amazing, and by amazing I mean the worst, people complain about the same games all the time, but somehow Nintendo gets a free pass.
The only good parts left of modern gaming is the AA scene, indie scene, and Nintendo. I guess Larian are a capable AAA dev as well.
Nintendo have been making Mario games for what nearly40yrs, Zelda games for nearly as long and Pokemon games for at least 20yrs. Nintendo are void of originality.
It is not about providing new IPs, it is about providing a new gameplay experience. The difference in gameplay experience between Super Mario 3D World and Super Mario Odyssey is much greater than the difference between Fallout 4 and Starfield.
Mario is the most whored out character in all of gaming. There may be some new gameplay experiences, but it's still Mario, Zelda, Pokemon in the end.
This place is amazing, and by amazing I mean the worst, people complain about the same games all the time, but somehow Nintendo gets a free pass.
Putting the same character in vastly different game experiences is not the same as putting the exact same game experience in a different coat of paint... I mean IP.
If it werent for the fact that you play as Mario, you could easily mistake Odyssey for being a new IP.
But with Starfield, virtually everyone is saying the game is Fallout 4 in space, which in turn was Oblivion/Skyrim with Guns. A new IP doesnt fool anyone into thinking anything other than that they are still playing the same Bethesda Open World slop since Morrowind.
New IP doesnt mean squat if it doesnt provide a new game experience. THAT, and ONLY THAT is what I am looking for in a new game. I would rather take a single IP that innovates over 20 games, over 20 new IPs that all play the same.
Not to mention, Nintendo created a ton of new IPs this gen.
You not understanding the complaints, does not mean giving Nintendo a free pass. Nobody is giving Nintendo a pass on Pokemon (Legends: Arceus felt fresh though). And for as good as TotK was, I want to see Nintendo innovate past the BotW formula for the next Zelda. The New Super Mario Bros series was bad as well. But guess what, we are not getting that anymore, instead they are innovating with Wonder. I want developers to create new formulas, whether that is with a new IP or old IP is irrelevant. Just give us new experiences. Rebranding old ideas do not make them new.
The only good parts left of modern gaming is the AA scene, indie scene, and Nintendo. I guess Larian are a capable AAA dev as well.
Nintendo have been making Mario games for what nearly40yrs, Zelda games for nearly as long and Pokemon games for at least 20yrs. Nintendo are void of originality.
It is not about providing new IPs, it is about providing a new gameplay experience. The difference in gameplay experience between Super Mario 3D World and Super Mario Odyssey is much greater than the difference between Fallout 4 and Starfield.
Mario is the most whored out character in all of gaming. There may be some new gameplay experiences, but it's still Mario, Zelda, Pokemon in the end.
This place is amazing, and by amazing I mean the worst, people complain about the same games all the time, but somehow Nintendo gets a free pass.
Putting the same character in vastly different game experiences is not the same as putting the exact same game experience in a different coat of paint... I mean IP.
If it werent for the fact that you play as Mario, you could easily mistake Odyssey for being a new IP.
But with Starfield, virtually everyone is saying the game is Fallout 4 in space, which in turn was Oblivion/Skyrim with Guns. A new IP doesnt fool anyone into thinking anything other than that they are still playing the same Bethesda Open World slop since Morrowind.
New IP doesnt mean squat if it doesnt provide a new game experience. THAT, and ONLY THAT is what I am looking for in a new game. I would rather take a single IP that innovates over 20 games, over 20 new IPs that all play the same.
Not to mention, Nintendo created a ton of new IPs this gen.
You not understanding the complaints, does not mean giving Nintendo a free pass. Nobody is giving Nintendo a pass on Pokemon (Legends: Arceus felt fresh though). And for as good as TotK was, I want to see Nintendo innovate past the BotW formula for the next Zelda. The New Super Mario Bros series was bad as well. But guess what, we are not getting that anymore, instead they are innovating with Wonder. I want developers to create new formulas, whether that is with a new IP or old IP is irrelevant. Just give us new experiences. Rebranding old ideas do not make them new.
I'm not arguing about Starfield, I specifically quoted the Nintendo bit because, it's still Mario, still chasing after the princess, fighting against the same baddy etc. Been there, done that.
Nintendo always get a free pass for using the same characters for decades.
@last_lap: So your premise is rooted in characters and story.
Meh, who cares? I am all about the gameplay.
Edit: And I am using Starfield vs Mario as an example, because even though Starfield is a new IP, it is far more derivative than Super Mario Odyssey was. Making a new IP doesnt mean squat if the game is as derivative as any standard sequel would be.
@last_lap: So your premise is rooted in characters and story.
Meh, who cares? I am all about the gameplay.
Edit: And I am using Starfield vs Mario as an example, because even though Starfield is a new IP, it is far more derivative than Super Mario Odyssey was. Making a new IP doesnt mean squat if the game is as derivative as any standard sequel would be.
No, I don't care about its story, its just the same old characters doing the same old thing. Gameplay is king in my world, but if I see a game with a character that's 40yrs old with no evolution, i'm not going to touch it no matter how good the gameplay is.
I think it's largely been downhill since the Ps3/360 . The internet and pursuit of better graphics being the biggest reasons. Wish it hadn't gotten so popular.
@last_lap: So your premise is rooted in characters and story.
Meh, who cares? I am all about the gameplay.
Edit: And I am using Starfield vs Mario as an example, because even though Starfield is a new IP, it is far more derivative than Super Mario Odyssey was. Making a new IP doesnt mean squat if the game is as derivative as any standard sequel would be.
No, I don't care about its story, its just the same old characters doing the same old thing. Gameplay is king in my world, but if I see a game with a character that's 40yrs old with no evolution, i'm not going to touch it no matter how good the gameplay is.
Did you miss the part where I highlighted how Super Mario Odyssey plays nothing like Super Mario 3D world? Among the 3D Marios, the closest any 2 games play together is SMG1 and 2. Aside from those 2, the 3D mario series has had plenty of innovation and evolution.
The AAA market is busted, but I think the average gamer these days are waking up and seeing the bad consumerism and lack of diversity for what it is and it will continue to become a greater challenge for the biggest offenders in the AAA market and they will have to change or close doors.
With that said, there's so much more out there in the gaming world than AAA games and it seems like more people are growing a preference for AA developments and indies. Big budget games have gotten out-of-hand and absurd for the stability of long-term success. Big budget games can destroy everything a studio has going for itself when such risks won't always level up to reward.
There's a robust amount of quality games out there these days whose presence and awareness is diluted by the bad offenders of the market. But they're out there and ready to be played.
The biggest issue with modern gaming are people like the op, and I'm not joking. Other than that there's plenty of good stuff continuously being released.
To me what modern gaming is missing are AA games from AAA developers. I'm talking unique ideas and gameplay mechanics that can be tested out on smaller budget games with new IPs. Then if something clicks we get a new franchise
Armored Core 6, while not a new IP, is a great example of a AAA developer making a AA game. I don't consider it a AAA game, it's too niche and gameplay focused. But it's a breath of fresh air to play something different from a known great developer.
We need more of that. More Army of 2, Armored Core, Psi Ops, Mercenaries, Remnant, etc...but it has to come from AAA developers and publishers.
Modern AAA gaming, with some rare exceptions, is a cesspool atm but should we really blame them? I prefer to blame the f*ckin whales that ruined gaming for everyone else. Those who spent their life savings into barebone games and overpriced skins gave the green flag for these companies to continue f*ckin the average gamer.
I mean, if I was running a AAA game company I would be doing the same, most of us would. Its business. The market said it was fine for overcharging comestics and release games/expansions with the minimum effort put into them. The market said it was fine for them to not "overdeliver"... they were sneaky, sure, but gamers ate it all when it was obvious what they were doing and they let it slip. Gamers could have voted with their wallet yet they didnt so yeah... gamers only have themselves to blame
"Its just cosmetics!"
"Its just a remake/remaster. If you dont like it, dont buy it."
Artistically, even AssCreed has some nice geography, its everything related to its gameplay that blows. Saying that TLOU is artistically more pleasing over TLOU2 is nothing but an opinion, and i would never agree with it. Way more variety in the sequel, and all looking excellent. I am also not too sure why you have BF in there. BF1 and prior titles all looked great, and its only the two newest entries that absolutely blow, especially the uninspired shitshow that is BF2042. I also don't believe this 70% turnover rate at ND. If this was true, this studio wouldn't be able to release industry defining titles.
It is abundantly clear from that post, you don't know what artistry even means.
Games like Disco Elysium is art, Rain World is art. Do you know what isn't art? Horizon Forbidden West. Despite the game looking really nice.
Edit: People have compared the credits scenes of Naughty Dog games, and used that to conclude the 70% turnover rate. Interviews with Naughty Dog employees add more credence to this number. Modern Naughty Dog has a horrible turnover rate, and the results are laid bare for all to see.
Loading Video...
Again, your opinion, and you try to pass it as fact. Many would argue that Horizon has a nice art direction going for it, just like Gost of Tsushima would. Don't try to make shit up saying i don't know what artistry even means. Both of these titles has an artistic style to them. Not because they happen to have nice visuals on top of that, that no artistry went into creating these games. You're probably the kind of a person that would say that no artistry went in the Bioshock series🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️Cringe every time, Maroxad.
The biggest issue with modern gaming are people like the op, and I'm not joking. Other than that there's plenty of good stuff continuously being released.
Its been decent, sure microtransactions are a plague, live service games need to DIAF and PC gamers are still in denial that devs can optimize a game for thousands of potential PC combinations.
I'll take the last 6 years than any other year besides 2003-2009. I'm just glad we don't have those years where 90% of games being released are shovelware games
It stinks. Almost everything is trying to be way too ambitious (than they can handle- nothing wrong with reasonable ambition), way too emotional, take all your hard earned $, or is just flat out sucks for one of those reasons I just said or something else.
It's not 100% terrible. But the vast majority of big games are lacking or charging for things that old games didn't before.
They really do need to reduce costs in video games. Start by not insisting all these characters need to be voiced by people. Go back to text! Most of these actors suck anyways.
AAA gaming is awful in its current state. Suits who have no idea what they're doing and pushing for cringe games. Or suits who know exactly what they're doing and going for cash only (loot boxes, skins, useless add-ons), throwing enjoyment and good gameplay out the window.
Another issue with modern gaming: the gamers themselves. Gamers who whine alot on what is wrong with modern gaming, but do nothing to improve it or act hypocritically and against what they are whining about. All talk, but no action.
Instead of whining on how bad modern gaming is on message boards or on social media, gamers, do something productive and be part of the solution, not the problem. That means being principled and not supporting anything that is wrong with modern gaming. It also mean not being downright cynical and taking a "sky is falling" attitude. The cynics and naysayers are no better than the talkers.
They really do need to reduce costs in video games. Start by insisting all these characters need to be voiced by people. Go back to text! Most of these actors suck anyways.
Makes me wonder how much it cost them to develop BG3. There is so much voice acting in that game that its ridiculous, and they even have J.K Simmons to voice act, and he did a 11/10 job.
Log in to comment