Has AAA game development become unviable?

>competing with multi-million jews and their multi-million marketing and advertisement
>every non-AAA game getting shit on
>everyone into high graphics
>represented by vocal deranged faggots
>buying / not buying because of devs / games politics

yeah, that's about it

>>380847913
is this how kids have fun in india?

>>380847913
I don't want to play shitty indie games but I don't need AAA games pumping millions into a shitty games either.
I wish they would go back to smaller teams and faster releases so we are getting more games and experimental games as well instead of "playing it safe" and just making a new AC for example.

>>380848724
that's a test to see if you can be a programmer/coder or not since you need strong fingers to constantly sit in front of a pc

Indian here

>>380848724
They are wearing some kind of uniform, I think it's just some sort of public punishment by the school.

I mean there is a good chance they are breaking a finger or two but welp it's india.

>>380848724
They're being punished for pooing in the loo. Everyone knows they're only allowed to shit in the designated areas (beaches/streets)

Middle size productions are dead. Indies are commercially viable when they use NES-tier tech and extreme cost cutting measures. AAA is commercially viable because the companies are gigantic and their flagship titles essentially carry the hardware. The middle is not commercially viable because they need a real budget but don't have the corporate power to have a guaranteed sales base.

It's pretty simple really, AAA-game development has fallen into the same pit as the movie industry.

Production costs are higher than ever, and companies don't want to gamble with their money so they go for sequels for franchises with heavy brand-recognition.
Lower budget games and movies have a chance of receiving critical acclaim and cult followings due to their significant flexibility in terms of how the creators want to shape their work, but ultimately it's far more profitable as a rule to release a sequel to something that has already proven to be financially successful.

Unlike the movie industry however, indie-games have filled the (debatable) void in originality that AAA-developers have left in their wake.

Vote with your wallets, etc. The gaming industry isn't a malicious, autonomous organism with no regard for its customers, it functions and behaves in accordance to what's profitable.

>>380847913
I think the problem is, too many devs/publisher jump into the AAA market for no good damn reason. Probaly to justify a $60 price tag. On a side note, I still don't know how the hell Persona5 worth $60, that game's technologically stone age, compared to HZD. I liked the game but, I just can't pinpoint how and where the $60 price tag comes from.

File: Buffy_the_Vampire_Slayer_Coverart.png (165KB, 256x363px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 256x363px

>>380849307
>he thinks equally the graphics quality justifies a $60 price tag.

Most triple AAA games are designed and meant for causals. All they have to do is work on the graphics, spend most of the money marketing and music licensing for trailers and add hype to sell the game. No game now a days have no charm or uniqueness to them because they all have to be the same to be as profitable as possible to avoid heavy losses. I wish thq and midway were still around for this generation.

All the faggots who shat on Nintendo for making sequels are eating crow these days.

>>380850245

Well yes it is? Budgets are what dictate price tags. It' got fucking nothing to do with quality. It doesnt matter if you have the best combat system ever but if you spent only a million bucks on your game, it's not supposed to be fucking 60 bucks.

All I look forward to now is Bannerlord and MHW. And they're barely AAA. Fuck western publishers.

>>380847913
I think the price of games need to be upped
We are at a point where established titles "fail" in the eyes of the publisher, if they upped the price for games they could lower the sales needed in order to turn a good profit on something, with more money they feel more secure and can give out more chances to people making something new or cool I think
Just a theory i am tossing around right now, it might be completely wrong desu

>>380847913
AAA games are still viable, provided they stop trying to push the goddamn graphical and technological envelope quite so hard and just keep up with development, rather than trying to lead it.

This keeps costs down and either lets them shovel out more games faster, or allows them to spend time on gameplay and story, which in the long run mean more to a game's popularity than some new flashy lighting or physics engine

>>380850245
Not only graphics, the game barely physics in it, the writing is not THAT great, the gameplay's not THAT much of an improvement, but to be fair, even Pokemon games cost just as much.

>>380851601
AAA budgeted games could up their price a bit, but we all know how that'll pan out.

>>380850245
>Most triple AAA games are designed and meant for causals
Have you considered that they're designed that way because of the budget to make one is fucking high and the margin for profit ($60 per copy) isn't viable? In other words, if it ain't casualize, it ain't gonna sell. And I do to a certain degree, agree with >>380849307. There are AAA games that offer more than games like P5, Pokemon, but somehow have the same price tag. Would a higher price tag keep the publishers quiet while the AAA devs do their work? The possibility do exist.

>>380847913

>"all cultures are beautiful" theme plays

>>380847913
theyre doing fine. youre not their target audience.

File: 1431434224283.jpg (71KB, 365x363px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 365x363px

>>380847913
Certain publishers just need to get out of the capitalist 'always need to grow and expand' model

Look at Ubisoft. They totally fucked themselves by trying to compete with companies like EA and Activision while not quite being able to afford it. Now they're trapped having to make shitty annualized everything because they're locked onto that trajectory and it's too late to turn back

>>380854760

>playing a long game isn't a capitalist model

Are you retarded?

>>380854870
>long game is getting fucked in the ass by Vivendi because they expanded too fast trying to be EA

lol

>>380849231
>Unlike the movie industry however, indie-games have filled the (debatable) void in originality that AAA-developers have left in their wake
They really haven't, since most indies are just imitations of other indie games, old games, or watered down AAA games. Creativity means something new or interesting, not reusing something with an 8bit retro or untextured polygon style.

>>380848868
Cant tell if you're being serious

Aren't days gone, anthem and detroit become human new AAA IPs?

File: 6-corporations-that-own-media_5814.jpg (76KB, 574x379px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 574x379px

>>380847913
Short answer - yes.
Companies will merge like Activision - Blizzard did. Will buy out other companies (Bethesda(Zenimax) - Id), and will/are make(ing) silent deals to pretend to be rivals.