Not sure how this precludes midtier? Both Indie and F2P have games with AAA budgets (for the sake of this discussion, using 10s of milions as a benchmark, though there's no exact definition I'm aware of), and of course - everything in between - meaning they very much cover midtier as well.StevieP said:
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Epic: About 1/3rd as many AAA games in dev this gen, but each with 3 times the budget
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
Time to resurrect Mid-Tier gaming. And get Small-Tier gaming & indie gaming to be big again as well.
The costs of making AAA or AAAA games are gonna get worse & worse.
I definitely agree.
Also agree.
The costs of making AAA or AAAA games are gonna get worse & worse.
I definitely agree.
Also agree.
If this is really the strategy that publishers are going for, then they should spread releases throughout the year so that the less recognizeable titles get a some attention instead of cramming them all into March, October, and November and letting good games get completely overlooked.
Define indie-budget (or really any of these completely arbitrary terms that have no standing definition). Starcitizen is an indie-game, and its known budget likely tops RE4 and DS1 combined (quality remains to be seen of course).Nirolak said:
Also are we talking efficient development or "average" mishmash of production issues?
Indeed. There's a reason why both Nintendo & Sony are pushing for indie titles now.
Hope you & the rest are ready for less "Triple A" budget titles & less "Quadruple A" budget titles this gen.
I wouldn't personally consider Star Citizen an indie game so much as a AAA game funded through non-traditional measures.
Usually the issue here is the types of games mid-sized independent developers made and also b-tier publishers like Midway and THQ.
Those are what struggled and died in large numbers last gen.
If various independent studios can all rack up money anywhere even remotely near Star Citizen then yes it wouldn't really be an issue.
seattle6418
Member
I miss the good old PS1 days. I remember walking into the rental place and every week there was a bunch of new stuff to try on. Then things started going down with PS2, PS3 and now we´re at a point in which there´s not much to play on PS4.
I don´t really see good examples of this indie scene people keep talking about, so i´m skeptical. I´ve said it for months and it seems to be true, publishers were not ready for this gen to start in november of 2013.
There´s only a handful of games coming this year. It´s less and less choices. One thing is still true, good games will sell no matter what, but i don´t like this industry of just a handful of AAA titles and a bunch of indies.
I don´t really see good examples of this indie scene people keep talking about, so i´m skeptical. I´ve said it for months and it seems to be true, publishers were not ready for this gen to start in november of 2013.
There´s only a handful of games coming this year. It´s less and less choices. One thing is still true, good games will sell no matter what, but i don´t like this industry of just a handful of AAA titles and a bunch of indies.
If AAA collapses then the high end consoles will fail since spending $400 on a console just to play indie games is not a good mass consumer proposition. Scaling back AAA development costs will likely lead to smaller sales so ultimately there is no real gain there either.
The situation on the development side will get worse through the generation because assets are the primary cost. So although savings can be made by reusing game engines the increasing quality of games and graphics through the generation will mean that the increase in asset costs will more than compensate.
There's already a collapse on Sony handhelds worldwide and Nintendo consoles worldwide. A major contraction in Japan on everything. Nintendo handhelds have seen a big contraction worldwide and although doing decent for Nintendo 3DS isn't a big platform for western publishers and on its own not enough for Japanese publishers to thrive.
The death of midtier and consolidation even among the big publishers means there's much less diversity on PS4/XB1 than previous generations which will likely lead to lower hardware sales. XB1 is already facing some difficulties and PS4 is already struggling in Japan.
So overall it's a very tough environment for publishers. People might say all is ok because the new consoles have had record launches but that is because they have a apples to oranges comparison with previous console launches. PS2 only launched in Japan for 9 months. Xbox had no existing fanbase. X360 only had mediocre brand value from Xbox and PS3 was $600.
Game consolidation leads to hardware lower sales. Lower hardware sales leads to game consolidation. The fittest survive, and get a larger piece of a smaller pie. But if the pie isn't big enough then no one survives.
The situation on the development side will get worse through the generation because assets are the primary cost. So although savings can be made by reusing game engines the increasing quality of games and graphics through the generation will mean that the increase in asset costs will more than compensate.
There's already a collapse on Sony handhelds worldwide and Nintendo consoles worldwide. A major contraction in Japan on everything. Nintendo handhelds have seen a big contraction worldwide and although doing decent for Nintendo 3DS isn't a big platform for western publishers and on its own not enough for Japanese publishers to thrive.
The death of midtier and consolidation even among the big publishers means there's much less diversity on PS4/XB1 than previous generations which will likely lead to lower hardware sales. XB1 is already facing some difficulties and PS4 is already struggling in Japan.
So overall it's a very tough environment for publishers. People might say all is ok because the new consoles have had record launches but that is because they have a apples to oranges comparison with previous console launches. PS2 only launched in Japan for 9 months. Xbox had no existing fanbase. X360 only had mediocre brand value from Xbox and PS3 was $600.
Game consolidation leads to hardware lower sales. Lower hardware sales leads to game consolidation. The fittest survive, and get a larger piece of a smaller pie. But if the pie isn't big enough then no one survives.
metalmachine
Member
This is already happening. I think most of us knew this going into this gen. It doesn't change the fact that for me it's a change that will take getting used cause I love me my AAA games!
I'm opening myself up to the indies!
I'm opening myself up to the indies!
Ps4/xbone might be the last console i ever purchase, there isn't really much that interests me anymore. The fact that many local multiplayer experiences are also being cut doesn't help my perception of things, one of the main reasons i buy a console is for local multiplayer.
I have no problems with indies but i can play majority on my laptop
I have no problems with indies but i can play majority on my laptop
In that Dumbest videogame related shit thread.
I'm pretty sure someone even said Next gen development getting more expensive was baseless......
:/
Seems like Nintendo are willing to foot the bill for some of their less well known series at least if they've shown signs of greater success. Where that leaves F-Zero is for them to decide although it's probably safe to say that Starfox on the other hand might be done and dusted at least in it's current form as an IP?.
I'd be inclined to believe that the success of FE:A coupled with their new willingness to use their IPs in collaborations led to something like FExSMT
Microsoft?
Nintendo and Sony are most definitely are pushing for Indies but Microsoft?
Wasn't it only a short while before the launch of the XBO that Indies could self publish during the entire 180 period?
jhmtehgamr20xx
Banned
Should've said PS1/N64/Saturn. 6th gen actually saw quite a bit of sequels in comparison.
If people are still worried about indies being this "low quality" bar of pushing tech, people should keep in mind that scene has been expanding in size for years now. Slowly but surely, what people considered once AAA or mid-tier a gen or two ago is now becoming a part of the indie classification. Consortium and Rime are two excellent examples, in fact those games would've been considered AAA-level back in the early 00s'.
Tidus_Great
Banned
ps3/360 will probably stay alive for a while because of this. or maybe a shift to handhelds or phones. gaming is entering movie territory with the budgets.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
I remember one of the arguments on why costs wouldn't rise was because devs already make assets at much higher res (textures in particular) and then scale back. And while that is true in degrees, most content was still be created at a reachable res. They weren't starting with a 8192x8192 pixel texture and pairing down to 512. They were starting at 1024 or 512 and pairing down if necessary. They were never starting at such a high bar.
Now though? They've got the memory not only to up asset individuality, but also texture resolution. This in essence increases workload by a metric fuckton. Where more creation is needed they find more people, where more people costs sky rocket.
It was never a question of if dev costs would increase, but by how much. This is a relatively meager increase over the huge increase of the prior generation Average production cost almost went up 10x from the PS2 to PS3.
But when you're talking about multipliers the higher you get the smaller the multiplier necessary to incur even larger costs.
Now though? They've got the memory not only to up asset individuality, but also texture resolution. This in essence increases workload by a metric fuckton. Where more creation is needed they find more people, where more people costs sky rocket.
It was never a question of if dev costs would increase, but by how much. This is a relatively meager increase over the huge increase of the prior generation Average production cost almost went up 10x from the PS2 to PS3.
But when you're talking about multipliers the higher you get the smaller the multiplier necessary to incur even larger costs.
Yes, which was the point of my question of what "indie" really stands for - since this is made by (or at least was when it started) an independent studio.Nirolak said:
There's also the question of how budgets get used - projects without publisher umbrella tend to avoid scope over-inflation just because of "industry expectations" (although dev-egos sometimes do just as much damage, but large-projects aren't immune to that either), which can have significant impact on costs.
Part of the 3x multiplier is of course increased graphical fidelity & expanded game world scope, mitigated somewhat by only two consoles to port to with similar, PC-like architectures.
Yet I suspect the estimated 3x cost increase has a lot to do with publishers/developers consciously focusing development and marketing resources on fewer IPs in hopes of getting it right the first time, over and above incremental costs of creating a next generation game.
Yet I suspect the estimated 3x cost increase has a lot to do with publishers/developers consciously focusing development and marketing resources on fewer IPs in hopes of getting it right the first time, over and above incremental costs of creating a next generation game.
Yeah, I forgot about that.
MagnaderAlpha
Member
Hollywood has a mid tier, it's those direct to video knock offs of major motion pictures.
Would you settle for a AA market akin to this? I'm being serious here. These are relatively cheap and profitable.
I would say Oren Peli produced and Blumhouse movies would be considered mid-tier(the equivalent of modern lower AA/A/Upper Indie games). Movies like Paranormal Activity, Insidious, The Conjuring and The Purge.
Asylum's movies are the equivalent of shovelware.
I think people would throw a big stink if they didn't go for the most realistic of realistic graphics. I can understand it, because the industry has conditioned people to expect that, but personally speaking, I wouldn't have a problem with a multitude of graphical quality(if that means the lowest quality is around high PS360 quality), I can do without the most realistically rendered skin flakes and aphids rendered on a single leaf. I said this in another thread(I think it was the "perfect gaming world" one), I'd rather have a focus on technology and improving the gameplay, framerate, loading, squashing bugs, than aiming for the most realistically cinematic experience ever. I'd happily sacrifice graphics for that(maybe even a few babies, as well, muahaha!).
And most of them look really uninteresting so far. This is just sad
Reminds me of early Hollywood:
"our films aren't making money, what do we do?"
"up the budget, that'll fix it!"
That's not exactly the reason why. When you have a movie like Avatar or Avengers, you can't put out a movie that has the quality of CGI, large scale type film as these two without spending the same money.
Don't blame devs, blame gamers. Ubisoft makes annual Assassin's Creed games because they said they'd be stupid not to with how much they sell. Because gamers buy them like crazy. That one large scale release will outsell like 20 indie titles. It's going to be like gamers spending full price on a few AAA games that EVERYONE will buy, and the rest will be smaller or indie releases.
They can slash budgets, but when you're used to top notch visuals and motion capture and audio, how much shit do you think they're going to get when people say, it looks like an original Xbox game etc. The budgets are so high not only because they keep throwing money at the game, but because they need 200-500+ employees making top notch visuals. They bring in more than one studio, they outsource, games development is more time consuming than ever. More and more studios are going back to 2-3 year development cycles. Releases may still be annualized like CoD, but they'll have 3 different studios making them every three years. EA wants to do the same with its titles like battlefield, titanfall, star wars battlefront.
That makes me sad. Him passing away is so weird, he always looked immortal to me.
On topic: good to hear, the less AAA the better. AAA stands for cinematic, low risk taking, focus on presentation over gameplay and more of the same.
Your post is why I relish it. Why do you say, "Lower their standards," and "consume worse games with a smile"? I don't see what this has to do with the topic at all. I don't want people to enjoy worse games or lower standards, but I don't see what that has to do with indie or AAA gaming. I enjoy people that make this association being miserable. I'm not ashamed to say that.
What does this have to do with the AAA or indie designation (you even highlight later that you're blind to such a distinction)?
I'm upset that we've gotten to a point where AAA development has to shrink dramatically to be sustainable. That is a genuine tragedy.
Not that there is anything wrong with that, but I just find that... odd. There is so much out there that I find so much more interesting, exciting and genuinely engaging and fun that are not AAA games, and also not necessarily indie games. Although this is coming from someone who is currently a PC gamer only, I'm not sure if this is a common thing or a console thing
flyinpiranha
Member
1080p and 30fps+ has been done on PC for years and years, why is console development so different?
Thunder Monkey
Banned
There is a large contingency of gamers that view anything not trying to set a visual and mechanic bar as lesser (not saying that's you Riposte). If it's not setting that standard it's at best a diversion.
Honestly I think it's the perfect end result for gaming. Using the tech out there to experiment with lower budgets and riskier concepts. Sad thing is we aren't really seeing too much of that. Most indie games using archetypes popularized before. Some adding their own flourish, others adhering rigidly to old play styles.
As the tech advances (and asset production becomes simpler) this will lead to more of these indie titles reaching a higher bar. Someday maybe even living up to the midtier developer standard of yesteryear (some are getting close as it is).
Expectations of gamers must change though for this to work. They'll have to begin seeing indie or lower budget titles differently if the industry is to survive. We're probably looking at a generation where GTA costs 300+ million. So few studios are equipped to fight that.
Well, the move to x86 and unwillingness to loss lead meant that the machines could only reach a certain spec due to cost and size restraints, but that has nothing to do with increased AAA game budgets and reducing quantities of those games
I couldn't care too much about AAA games, it's the mid-tier games going away that really sucks... but then again that happened in the middle of last gen so I've had time to deal with it. I don't think indie gaming is a suitable replacement for the mid-tier, at least as of now. (Seems there's a dearth of indie games in the genres I enjoy, and the ones that are there are usually highly compromised compared to even mid-tier releases in them)
vinnygambini
Why are strippers at the U.N. bad when they're great at strip clubs???
That is a huge increase in terms of development funding.
No wonder publishers are actively courting gamers in purchasing DLC packages & Season Passes.
Furthermore, it seems that the video game market is the only medium to my knowledge where prices have been relatively stable (59.99$) throughout the years and yet games are more expensive to produce over time.
In 2002 I paid 5.50$ to go to the movies; today, I pay 10.75$.
In 2002 I paid 59.99$ for Super Mario Sunshine. I recently paid 59.99$ for Super Mario 3D World.
It's simply not sustainable.
No wonder publishers are actively courting gamers in purchasing DLC packages & Season Passes.
Furthermore, it seems that the video game market is the only medium to my knowledge where prices have been relatively stable (59.99$) throughout the years and yet games are more expensive to produce over time.
In 2002 I paid 5.50$ to go to the movies; today, I pay 10.75$.
In 2002 I paid 59.99$ for Super Mario Sunshine. I recently paid 59.99$ for Super Mario 3D World.
It's simply not sustainable.
Forsaken82
Member
I don't exactly agree with this. District 9 proved you can have great looking CGI for under 50 million. Even a movie like Oblivion, which likely added 10 million just for Cruise was around 110 million, and that movie is on par.
The bloated budgets have more to do with Star Power and Marketing (which Avatar and The Marvel films get in spades)
I should mention that I don't think District 9 is on the same scale of Avatar or Avengers, however, my point is that if it needed to be a film that took place in a lush jungle environment or an exploding new york skyline, it wouldn't have cost an additional 150 million to make it happen. Blompkamp proved he could make a low budget CGI Action film that still had high production value. Elysium, which had the added star budget from 2 oscar winners, needed an additional 100 million, and there are moments in that movie where the CGI is mind blowingly good.
The problem is that people have to pay MORE for a good midtier title to break even - it's still got all the QA and large portions of the engine costs (possibly even more due to heavier changes!), but makes deliberate decisions about what gets included that are going to alienate a lot of people, so the costs don't scale down as far as the revenues do.
When you allow game prices to float freely, combined with a relatively well-informed market, you get something like the Japanese market, where AAA Final Fantasy is $95, midrange Tales is $85+heavy cosmetic DLC, mass-market NSMBWii is $55, superniche imports like Terraria are $35, and local PC indies are $10-$20.
Those prices compare very closely to the US market (counting the $30 in DLC you'll buy for an AAA title now) except for two exceptions:
a) PC indies, which in the US are sold on Steam at $5 rather than sold on disc at Comicon with the expenses of pressing and flying the devs to San Diego; and
b) midrange titles which are expected to be $40 tops and have no DLC monetization.
So why don't we have the midrange segment we had when we weren't the only market that mattered? It's because we've convinced ourselves that games WE PERSONALLY love are only worth half what a huge blockbuster everyone can like is, rather than a similar base price and a lot more tie-ins.
Riposte
Member
Let's describe it like this: Someone is looking for a certain kind of game and, for one reason or another (e.g., expense, time, developer pedigree), they feel the games marketed as indie they are coming across fail to meet their expectations based on previously set standards. Their reaction, naturally, is that they are vocally unsatisfied with these games as successors or that this brand marks the beginning of a return (these are the "haters"). Perhaps in lack of this kind of game, they become miserable, but that's neither here or there (though I have my own feelings on that). What's important is that this is simply what they feel when they come across a game; "this isn't what I wanted"/"this isn't as good".
You must relish in their disappointment because you think they are doing something wrong. I can only understand it as you are ridiculing their reaction to these unsatisfactory games. So, what can they do right? Change how they feel so they are not longer unsatisfied? That's the disconnect right there.
You know, I can't help but characterize your posts with the tone of a defeated cynic, someone who is agitated by the hopeless/ignorant optimism of those who wants things to continue as they have with previous generations after being made to understand that isn't possible. The relishing in being proven right makes sense, then.
I'm not in a rush to state what this will ultimately mean 5, 10, 20, and 50 years from now, but I believe that videogames will evolve in such a way over the next century which makes any loss, no matter how lamentable, seem necessary. I can believe this, because I see games like Grand Theft Auto or Far Cry not with disgust, but, instead, potential.
If anything, when looking at the context of today, I just hold a slight distaste for the developers who want to flee into their garages to make tiny games instead of taking hold the industry they built now when there is so much consolidated power on the line. No small feat (likely exceptional), I know, but that is what it will take to make greatest (most immersive, engaging) games of this century. I also find it rather disappointing when someone in such a situation blows it all up for themselves (e.g., Ken Levine). Not to say I don't respect those who do not fit the narrative of extremes (ignoring the fact people would have everything not made by four or five publishers called "indie"), who are, somehow, doing great work in their genres that may not fit the big-budget model - after all, they have made my favorite games, even in 2012 and 2013, despite having long since been declared dead.
Cave Johnson
Member
Right ahead of you mate. I've withheld purchasing a PS4, I constantly use my Vita as my main gaming device to play indies and PS+ freebies, most of my playthrough on my gaming rig consists of: Revered classics I've never got the chance to play, mods, and alternate indie titles. Can't even be bothered to finish Skyrim despite the enhancement mods I've applied. Glad, I bought it for cheap.
So yeah, to hell with the AAA industry if they can't even get my attention. The last AAA game I've bought is Beyond: Two Souls, and that is because it's different from the rest of the garbage out there.
Natureboy99
Banned
Publishers need to stop letting programmers write story and scenario. Games need dedicated writers who have actual literary training. I think games would gain better traction if the story and scenarios were a little more thoughtful and tasteful. Shooting and killing things and EPIC BATTLES are generally only interesting to an immature mind.And most of them look really uninteresting so far. This is just sad
Reminds me of early Hollywood:
"our films aren't making money, what do we do?"
"up the budget, that'll fix it!"
Which is who the publishers are marketing to. There was market expansion in the previous generation, and most of the publishers failed to take advantage of it. Now we're at the point of further consolidation into those demographics.
Canis lupus
Member
Surely he must be talking about games using their engine lol. There are a lot more and cheaper options to choose from than last gen.
Then say goodbye to the traditional videogames industry, because if AAA disappear, consoles will disappear, or vice versa.
Then say goodbye to the traditional videogames industry, because if AAA disappear, consoles will disappear, or vice versa.
They don't have to do shit any differently because people are buying it. Publishers aren't in it to make better games, only better selling games. When the mass market wants different, then the publishers will respond acordingly.
Consoles, etc. won't disappear because the AAA budget model might be going under. People are just gonna have to get used to it. How do they think that most companies got themselves to where they are now? Through indie gaming.
The thing is, to some degree the mass market does want things a bit differently. Some of the games with awful stories get panned if the rest isn't amazing, while those with great stories get a mild pass. I'm not saying it needs to be citizen Kane, but something that would be even halfway acceptable in other media would be good.