I have lost a lot of respect for 3rd party AAA developers

[vgmaster831]

I think some of the blame for the trajectory of the gaming industry lies with people who pirate their games. The problem of games being published with DRM and people pirating to get away from game breaking DRM is not a chicken and egg problem. gamers who didn't want to pay would pirate games and DRM practices have been created in response. Game piracy is a hugely negative force in the gaming industry, perhaps not as much as some others, but it should not be ignored.

 

[Lightknight]

So, you've decided to base your opinion of a group on an arbitrary distinction between AAA first party/AAA second party and AAA third party developers? An extremely varied group of businesses that fund large games, all of which differ in quality and scope?

That then means you only respect Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo and anyone that they directly fund or control in some way.

It's always a little bit odd to throw such a wide group when making comments like this. Decisions on companies need to be made on a case by case basis. Valve is not responsible for things EA does anymore than Bethesda is responsible for things Nintendo does. These wild blanket complaints aren't far removed from stereotyping. It's just not offensive because these are large corporations and not defenseless masses.

If I remember correctly Valve hardly makes games anymore. For that reason I really do not see them as a game developer. Possibly a publisher at best.

Valve was merely an example in the overall comment. You are making a sweeping statement about a group without consideration for individuals in particular. There are "isms" entirely devoted to this line of thinking.

As for Valve not making games anymore:

2013: DOTA 2 (Metacritic: 90, won people's choice awards)
2012: Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (Matacritic: 79-83)
2011: Portal 2 (Metacritic: 94-95, HUGE list of awards)
2010: Alien Swarm (77, never heard of it)
2008-2009: Left 4 Dead 1 and 2 (both in the high 80's and both wildly popular).
18 other games from 2000-2007.

In what world is this not making games anymore or hardly making games anymore? We also know three titles they have in the works right now that include a sequel to Left 4 Dead and a sequel to Half-life.

What I said at the end of post is that 3rd party do not deserve the pedestal of Gaming Saviors that fans and media boast about.

It's not a pedastle. 3rd Party development is a HUGE swath of publishers and developers that make an incredibly varied amount of games. 3rd party support is necessary for a complete gaming experience. They are how we get everything from indie games to blockbusters like Bioshock, GTA V, COD (whether you like it or not), Assassin's Creed, Tomb Raider, Borderlands 2, Hitman, Ni NO Kuni (to throw a game in the pot that combines the artwork of Ghibli studios with Pokemon, just in case you're a Nintendo fan which is about the only group that currently wants to think of 3rd party as a bad thing), Skyrim. These are games most people like and they sell in the Millions.

Yes, first party games can be pretty damn good. But they are far and few inbetween at best. So yeah, 3rd party studios, especially the AAA studios, are great and vital to the industry as a whole.

 

[kilenem]

I don't buy video games day one at full price that is how you get passed this new system of DLC and buggy games. The last game I bought at full price was Project X zone for 3DS. That is only because I read the Japanese reviews and it came with a collectors edition. I waited to buy lego Marvel and got it on Black Friday for 20 and Ray Man legends for 25. Its not worth buying a game day one with all the bugs and inflated price.

 

[not_you]

Case in point:

People don't pre-order the X-bone; Microsoft changes policies.

Pc Gamers complain but still buy stuff with DRM; Steam/Origin/Uplay continue to ruin PC gaming

Unfortunately, for the PC gamers, there is no alternative...

And don't go pointing to GoG or W/e...
None of those sites have the AAA titles on release date (if ever at all)

So if PC gamers want to play the newest titles, they don't have a choice (short of pirating) but that was the "excuse" publishers used for creating DRM in the first place, so why feed the fire?

 

[Negatempest]

Spoiler

So, you've decided to base your opinion of a group on an arbitrary distinction between AAA first party/AAA second party and AAA third party developers? An extremely varied group of businesses that fund large games, all of which differ in quality and scope?

That then means you only respect Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo and anyone that they directly fund or control in some way.

It's always a little bit odd to throw such a wide group when making comments like this. Decisions on companies need to be made on a case by case basis. Valve is not responsible for things EA does anymore than Bethesda is responsible for things Nintendo does. These wild blanket complaints aren't far removed from stereotyping. It's just not offensive because these are large corporations and not defenseless masses.

If I remember correctly Valve hardly makes games anymore. For that reason I really do not see them as a game developer. Possibly a publisher at best.

Valve was merely an example in the overall comment. You are making a sweeping statement about a group without consideration for individuals in particular. There are "isms" entirely devoted to this line of thinking.

As for Valve not making games anymore:

2013: DOTA 2 (Metacritic: 90, won people's choice awards)
2012: Counter-Strike: Global Offensive (Matacritic: 79-83)
2011: Portal 2 (Metacritic: 94-95, HUGE list of awards)
2010: Alien Swarm (77, never heard of it)
2008-2009: Left 4 Dead 1 and 2 (both in the high 80's and both wildly popular).
18 other games from 2000-2007.

In what world is this not making games anymore or hardly making games anymore? We also know three titles they have in the works right now that include a sequel to Left 4 Dead and a sequel to Half-life.

What I said at the end of post is that 3rd party do not deserve the pedestal of Gaming Saviors that fans and media boast about.

It's not a pedastle. 3rd Party development is a HUGE swath of publishers and developers that make an incredibly varied amount of games. 3rd party support is necessary for a complete gaming experience. They are how we get everything from indie games to blockbusters like Bioshock, GTA V, COD (whether you like it or not), Assassin's Creed, Tomb Raider, Borderlands 2, Hitman, Ni NO Kuni (to throw a game in the pot that combines the artwork of Ghibli studios with Pokemon, just in case you're a Nintendo fan which is about the only group that currently wants to think of 3rd party as a bad thing), Skyrim. These are games most people like and they sell in the Millions.

Yes, first party games can be pretty damn good. But they are far and few inbetween at best. So yeah, 3rd party studios, especially the AAA studios, are great and vital to the industry as a whole.

I'll give you Alien Swarm and portal 2. Heck if you think I'm giving you DOTA 2 and Counter Strike . I have also looked at their history and they have published far more games than they have made. Not a bad thing, but Valve is far more known as Publisher than a developer.

As for the recent modern games. They are not bad, but they are no where near as varied or as good as the psone-ps2 years.
PSone you can name great games like: Wild 9, Abe's Odyssey, Crash, Spyro, Resident Evil.
ps2 you list: .Hack, Devil May Cry, Jak, Ratchet.
My point being that we can easily see variety in atmosphere and story telling in games of the past. But also go wild with imagination. Some point in 7th gen, the 3rd party shrank tremendously and everyone is chasing the deep and mature game players. We got Overstrike changed to Fuse because Insomniac wanted to chase after that crowd -_-.
http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/09/12/why-did-overstrike-become-fuse
So Overstike, to me, is the greatest example of the deep and mature SIN of 7th gen.

 

[not_you]

Case in point:

People don't pre-order the X-bone; Microsoft changes policies.

Pc Gamers complain but still buy stuff with DRM; Steam/Origin/Uplay continue to ruin PC gaming

Unfortunately, for the PC gamers, there is no alternative...

And don't go pointing to GoG or W/e...
None of those sites have the AAA titles on release date (if ever at all)

So if PC gamers want to play the newest titles, they don't have a choice (short of pirating) but that was the "excuse" publishers used for creating DRM in the first place, so why feed the fire?

There is certainly an alternative: stop buying games altogether they aren't an essential part of your existence, if enough people do this they will change. To use my x-bone example people who wanted the new Xbox games/xbox live experience certainly didn't have an alternative but they still didn't buy it.

And there are thankfully still a few AAA games that haven't given in to Valve's idiocy, like the Witcher series

Yes, but keep in mind that in my post I mentioned that GoG doesn't count... (Which was started by CDPR... the makers of the witcher series)

I do agree wholeheartedly that CD Projekt Red are doing great things for the industry (Which is why I buy from them as often as possible)... But, again, I said that IF I wanted to play a AAA title, there was no alternative...
Going without, (funnily enough) isn't an alternative to actually PLAYING the game...

Again, I agree with you... the DRM practises are bullshit on a cactus, but it's what (PC) gamers have to live with if we want to actually support the games/devs we like, the good and the bad...

Hell, I can live with DRM as long as quality game series like TES, Far Cry, Fallout (etc...) continue to expand and grow...
I might not like some companies policies, but again, to actually PLAY the games, we have no choice...

 

[InfernalGrape]

I don't understand this thread.

1) Why does Steam "ruining" PC? Wasn't Steam "THAT GUY" who brought PC gaming to Renaissance? Also, what the difference between Steam and, for example, PSN? In both ways you have game you bought on your account and can have it when u want.

2) WTF is that "i don't respect 3rd party made games"? What kind of point is it? Are you saying you gonna play only games that published by platform holders? WUT? It's not just "top of iceberg", it's more like "okay i'll skip 90% of games"

 

[Lightknight]

Sorry for the delay, I almost missed that this post was in response to me (my name had been spoilered too)

I'll give you Alien Swarm and portal 2. Heck if you think I'm giving you DOTA 2 and Counter Strike . I have also looked at their history and they have published far more games than they have made. Not a bad thing, but Valve is far more known as Publisher than a developer.

Is there something I'm missing as far as Dota 2 and Counter Strike? I see the so I assume there's some joke in there. Forgive me for not knowing it.

Dota 2 they are the only developers listed but with four publishers.

As for Counterstrike, it is specifically a Valve game since 2000. They developed it alongside Hidden Path Entertainment this time around (CS:GO) but Hidden Path isn't a huge development studio from what I understand.

Perhaps these are two titles you specifically don't like? That's my best guess to your joke here since I'm not fond of them either. But Portal 2 alone is one of the best gaming experiences I've ever had. That and Portal 1.

As for the recent modern games. They are not bad, but they are no where near as varied or as good as the psone-ps2 years.

You may be romanticising your childhood a bit here. Modern games have only gotten more diverse. Especially with the flood of Indie developers.

PSone you can name great games like: Wild 9, Abe's Odyssey, Crash, Spyro, Resident Evil.
ps2 you list: .Hack, Devil May Cry, Jak, Ratchet.
My point being that we can easily see variety in atmosphere and story telling in games of the past. But also go wild with imagination. Some point in 7th gen, the 3rd party shrank tremendously and everyone is chasing the deep and mature game players. We got Overstrike changed to Fuse because Insomniac wanted to chase after that crowd -_-.
http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/09/12/why-did-overstrike-become-fuse
So Overstike, to me, is the greatest example of the deep and mature SIN of 7th gen.

Exclusive 3rd party support shrank. Not 3rd party support in general. Do you want me to make a list of all good 3rd party games I know of that were playable on the ps3? Exclusivity is arbitrary. The ps1 and ps2 had a huge number of exclusive 3rd party titles because the were three and five times the number of consoles sold. They are currently still number 1 and 2 in number of units sold, ever.

PS1 sold 102.5 million. That N64 that EVERYONE seems to remember? It only sold 33 million units.
PS2 sold 154 million. The gamecube sold 22 million and the xbox sold 25 million.

The 7th generation has almost an even split. The 100 million units console is too weak to play most games and the ps3 and 360 are neck and neck with ps3 only recently having overtaken the 360 (despite the 360 having a year head start on Sony and a decent launch).

It made sense to be exclusive back then because porting games cost a lot more money. The 7th generation saw that significantly diminish and this generation will only have x86 environments (not counting the WiiU).

 

[Negatempest]

Spoiler: I use spoiler to a)Shorten a long post. b)I do not know how to cut out specific quotes to use.

Sorry for the delay, I almost missed that this post was in response to me (my name had been spoilered too)

I'll give you Alien Swarm and portal 2. Heck if you think I'm giving you DOTA 2 and Counter Strike . I have also looked at their history and they have published far more games than they have made. Not a bad thing, but Valve is far more known as Publisher than a developer.

Is there something I'm missing as far as Dota 2 and Counter Strike? I see the so I assume there's some joke in there. Forgive me for not knowing it.

Dota 2 they are the only developers listed but with four publishers.

As for Counterstrike, it is specifically a Valve game since 2000. They developed it alongside Hidden Path Entertainment this time around (CS:GO) but Hidden Path isn't a huge development studio from what I understand.

Perhaps these are two titles you specifically don't like? That's my best guess to your joke here since I'm not fond of them either. But Portal 2 alone is one of the best gaming experiences I've ever had. That and Portal 1.

As for the recent modern games. They are not bad, but they are no where near as varied or as good as the psone-ps2 years.

You may be romanticising your childhood a bit here. Modern games have only gotten more diverse. Especially with the flood of Indie developers.

PSone you can name great games like: Wild 9, Abe's Odyssey, Crash, Spyro, Resident Evil.
ps2 you list: .Hack, Devil May Cry, Jak, Ratchet.
My point being that we can easily see variety in atmosphere and story telling in games of the past. But also go wild with imagination. Some point in 7th gen, the 3rd party shrank tremendously and everyone is chasing the deep and mature game players. We got Overstrike changed to Fuse because Insomniac wanted to chase after that crowd -_-.
http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/09/12/why-did-overstrike-become-fuse
So Overstike, to me, is the greatest example of the deep and mature SIN of 7th gen.

Exclusive 3rd party support shrank. Not 3rd party support in general. Do you want me to make a list of all good 3rd party games I know of that were playable on the ps3? Exclusivity is arbitrary. The ps1 and ps2 had a huge number of exclusive 3rd party titles because the were three and five times the number of consoles sold. They are currently still number 1 and 2 in number of units sold, ever.

PS1 sold 102.5 million. That N64 that EVERYONE seems to remember? It only sold 33 million units.
PS2 sold 154 million. The gamecube sold 22 million and the xbox sold 25 million.

The 7th generation has almost an even split. The 100 million units console is too weak to play most games and the ps3 and 360 are neck and neck with ps3 only recently having overtaken the 360 (despite the 360 having a year head start on Sony and a decent launch).

It made sense to be exclusive back then because porting games cost a lot more money. The 7th generation saw that significantly diminish and this generation will only have x86 environments (not counting the WiiU).

Yes, I was mostly joking about Valve.
Yes, the ps1 library and ps2 library was fantastic. I have no idea what comparing the sales of Sony from 5th through 6th gen has anything to do with 3rd party AAA game variety. Indie developers are great and love their variety. But I blame myself for not specifying in my post I mostly speak of AAA developers.
I loved sony in the 6th and 7th gen. They were my games of choice after the sega genesis. So when I think about their former games compared to the more modern ones, it is just sad. Fear of risking new ideas, color or allowing the player to play as they wish to hampers games now. Remember cheat codes? When you could just mess around in a game with infinite ammo and god mode without worrying about ruining the atmosphere of a game?

 

[xPrometheusx]

It should just go into offline mode if you lose internet in games with out always on DRM. It does with mine.

It should, but it doesn't. The worst part of it is when others think the problem doesn't exist because it works for them -.-

No, the worst part of it is when others think that because it doesn't work for them, the problem is universal. I think I can count on one hand the times this has been a problem for me. In recent memory, maybe thrice. Twice, it was just faulty and went back to behaving normally the next time I restarted Steam. The third time I sent in a ticket and the issue was resolved within 5 days. Problem? Yes. Ruining PC gaming? No. Although I can't speak for Origin or whatever Ubisoft's platform is called, both of which I avoid for the same reasons I stay away from a white van with "free candy" spray painted on the side.

If you want to find a real problem plaguing PC gaming, look no further than the quiet, unannounced death of the hard copy. DRM is inevitable with software of any kind - the fact is, digital piracy is a hundred times easier than going to the actual black market (at least, in the U.S.). If consoles went software-only too, you could be damn sure that there would be DRM of some kind no matter what the backlash, on top of the consoles already being locked down like a nun's ass. But they still run on hard disks, and so, outright DRM has more-or-less failed.

So yeah, that's all I really want to add to this discussion. Obviously there's problems that probably should (but aren't) be talked about around every game dev's meeting table. But then, obviously there's a reason why I've had absolutely no inclination to acquire a new console since they launched. If any at all, the next console I buy will be a Wii U, since Nintendo seems to be the only company left in the world that remembers what games are supposed to be about - even if they only remember it because they keep recycling the same stuff. The Steambox is looking like a strong contender for my wallet as well. Otherwise, permamoving to the PC for me, TYVM. Far less bullshit to deal with, as long as I keep avoiding anything that rakes in more than 800 mil that isn't made by rockstar.

 

[Raziel]

There is only one party at fault in this: the consumer. People need to learn to vote with their wallets. Companies do this stuff because they are always trying to expand their revenue, it's our responsibility to tell them when they've gone to far. If you just keep buying into it they'll see no reason to back down from it.

Case in point:

People don't pre-order the X-bone; Microsoft changes policies.

Pc Gamers complain but still buy stuff with DRM; Steam/Origin/Uplay continue to ruin PC gaming

Agreed, its the only why to put a stop to these kinds of transactions. But its not going to work. The problem is the dlc, especially shit like skins is so easy to produce it doesn't need to sell well. The game might need to sell several million copies to make a profit. Dlc is probably profitable with only thousands of sales. Certainly skins are probably profit by like a hundred sales.

Not only that but pump out a 4-6 dlc packs get what sales you can and then release a game of the year edition disc with all the dlc and you have a new round of sales at easy profit.

You'll never get them to cut that out until they start short changing the original game so much they cannot sell it to the original millions of people. And so far that hasn't happened.

 

[Stavros Dimou]

And the Escapist forum members know exactly who I am speak of. I would love to say and used to say, "Hey, there is only just a few bad apples in the basket." What I have to say now is, "There is only a few good apples in the basket." It is just the culmination of so many bad moves done and so many people forgiving them for those moves that now, for myself, I just don't think highly of the developers.
It used to be just EA and Activision people would find fault it mostly just over milking franchises. Fans knowing that those franchises would die out early. That was the worst thing we customers spoke of in the beginning of the generation. But know, milking franchises is one of the least troubling actions the 3rd party developers have done. At the end of 7th generation we are facing so many bad moves done by 3rd party it is insane and we would of never have believed it in the beginning of gen7 if someone spoke out about the future.
We are now buying a majority of our games with bug issues or feel like no one ever actually tested the game for quality. We are finding unlockable content on the disk behind pay walls. DLC cost for simple skins, weapons or maps is getting out of hand. Every terrible choice 3rd parties make is quickly forgotten or forgiven by comparing the choice to other bad choices. Even though those choices were terrible to start with. We have also lost tons of developers in the 7th gen.
I kinda ran into the forum post from Neogaf.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=459131
Blew my freakin mind on how much we have lost in the 7th gen. We have far less the developer variety now than we have in the past and we are stuck with those that just don't care.
The Beta games, the PR speak, the overpriced and exploitable DLC from 3rd party is now, to me, out of hand. I very much believe they do not deserve the respect and reverence they have now. I would love nothing more now than to see Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo depend less on 3rd party titles and focus more on the IP's they have now. We all know Sony and Microsoft do have old IP's they can improve on or even use the studios they have now to make new IP's.

While many of the things you wrote are true,I don't like that you over-generalizing things.
Not all act this way.

I'd like to comment on two things,based on your post.

#1 First of all,it is about buggy games. The reason games end up being buggy is because not enough time is spent fixing them. This isn't though a matter of laziness from the developer. It's a matter of having to ship the game in a specific date,and trying to make the graphics as most beautiful as possible or most content until then.
Things work like this: The owner of the studio says "that's how much money we have to invest in this game. this money is enough to pay the salaries of X number of employees for Y amount of months. that means that we will have X people work for Y months and no more."
Of course the developers could spend that time focusing more on bug fixing than adding details on the graphics.
Or even better,the publisher,or the shareholders could invest more money,so there is more time so everything is made better. But shareholders doesn't need to be people who know of games stuff. They are not gamers. They also don't know how a game is made. They are just people who hold capital,and look to invest on something that will bring them more money.

#2 In recent time we noticed that publishers are trying to find new monetization methods. They want to make more money out of the same amount content,the same amount of investment. They are experimenting. Trying to see what they can do that won't frustrate people and make them make more money.
EA's ideas have been always online DRM,online passes,and day1 DLCs.Some of them didn't passed.
Microsoft's ideas have been always online DRM too with Kinect,no used game sales,and much micro transactions. Some of them didn't passed.
Valve's idea is monetization of user created content - mods. They are planning to make it so people who know how to make mods will sell them through Steam,with Valve and the Developer/Publisher getting royalty cuts for licensing, without making the content themselves.

My suggestion is: vote with your wallet.
Support those who do movements you like,and don't support those who you don't like their movements. Show them how you feel.

 

[TehCookie]

It should just go into offline mode if you lose internet in games with out always on DRM. It does with mine.

It should, but it doesn't. The worst part of it is when others think the problem doesn't exist because it works for them -.-

No, the worst part of it is when others think that because it doesn't work for them, the problem is universal. I think I can count on one hand the times this has been a problem for me. In recent memory, maybe thrice. Twice, it was just faulty and went back to behaving normally the next time I restarted Steam. The third time I sent in a ticket and the issue was resolved within 5 days. Problem? Yes. Ruining PC gaming? No. Although I can't speak for Origin or whatever Ubisoft's platform is called, both of which I avoid for the same reasons I stay away from a white van with "free candy" spray painted on the side.

If the problem was universal they'd fix it or it wouldn't be as popular. So you don't have problems and I shouldn't hate it because it works for you even if it's a piece of shit for me? If you haven't had issues and you like it, that's understandable. I don't see how it's any less understandable to hate it for having problems.

If you get constantly get food poisoning at a restaurant are you going to keep eating there because other people don't get it?

 

[carnex]

So many topics in so little space. But lets go by the numbers spewing my own opinion

1) Publishers and developers exist to make money and provide this employees and owners with means of living. Provided, the lower you are the more abused and less provided you will be but that is corporate reality everywhere. And when you take data into account going with market analysis proves much better bet than going with wishes of vocal part of video game consumers. We adore Planescape Torment but it lost money hand over fist for example. That's why they will go with what earns money over what pleases people that are involved enough to state their opinion.

2) Turnover of studios was always big. That is nothing new. I can think of maybe 20 game development studios that I'm really sorry that they got closed like System 3, Bullfrog, Origin... but even with me being sad about it, often problem came from the fact that they just didn't adapt to the fast evolving environment. It's evolution baby. But just as you are preparing to cry, look at all new studios that are emerging and filling up the ranks. Kickstarter, while constantly being abused, is perfect showcase of how many new developers enter the market almost daily.

3) So much of DLC is quick, easy and dishonest money grab these days. And even more than that it's used as means for players to pay for developers patching up their own mistakes and/or misguided tendencies. You can get game you were promised and for which you spent your own money, just buy this add-on (Diablo 3, cough, cough). But again, companies are there to make money and consumers are there to force them to have moral values consumers demand. They cut contend to sell it as add-on, consumers buy both. They release bug ridden mess of game, consumers buy it in droves. They release hardware that carps itself if you look at it wrongly and people buy it over and over. They take away any ownership rights. You do not own it, have no right to complain, have no right to bring it with you everywhere you go and consumers adore them like gods. We even invite them to listen to our homes 24/7. Why would they stop doing that? I wouldn't. Nobody sane wouldn't. It would be pure loss.

All in all while big publishers are seen as steaming pile of manure for a good reason they didn't became that way to mock us. They became that way because consumers tolerate that behavior and reward them for such behavior with purchases. They know that if Battlefield 4 missed its projected release date it will loose up to 50% of sales, market share and media presence. They also know that even if game is buggier than cockroach nest if they patch it up in first few months it will all be forgotten by the time Battlefield 5 comes out in two years. They know patches attached to DLC will drive DLC sales. They know nothing bad will happen to them so why would they care?

Only meaningful debate would be how do we make them care. How do we hurt them enough that they will pay attention to those issues we have with them? They have far stronger mass media presence then people who care about medium enough to think about it twice? Or perhaps we could realize that just like with movies, books and music there is place for both crap and diamonds. That there is place for 50 Shades of Gray and for Cloud Atlas. There is room for Ke$ha and for Motorhead. There is room for Fast and Furious 5 and for Inception. There is no "quality police" anywhere because that would be impossible without totalitarian system and medium exist to provide what people want to buy?

Petty picture it is not. Not really an ugly one aether, more like disturbing. My solution would be to praise the best, criticize the worst, pressure people who should act like out public voice, do your best to increase yours and theirs public presence and hope for the best.

 

[Negatempest]

And the Escapist forum members know exactly who I am speak of. I would love to say and used to say, "Hey, there is only just a few bad apples in the basket." What I have to say now is, "There is only a few good apples in the basket." It is just the culmination of so many bad moves done and so many people forgiving them for those moves that now, for myself, I just don't think highly of the developers.
It used to be just EA and Activision people would find fault it mostly just over milking franchises. Fans knowing that those franchises would die out early. That was the worst thing we customers spoke of in the beginning of the generation. But know, milking franchises is one of the least troubling actions the 3rd party developers have done. At the end of 7th generation we are facing so many bad moves done by 3rd party it is insane and we would of never have believed it in the beginning of gen7 if someone spoke out about the future.
We are now buying a majority of our games with bug issues or feel like no one ever actually tested the game for quality. We are finding unlockable content on the disk behind pay walls. DLC cost for simple skins, weapons or maps is getting out of hand. Every terrible choice 3rd parties make is quickly forgotten or forgiven by comparing the choice to other bad choices. Even though those choices were terrible to start with. We have also lost tons of developers in the 7th gen.
I kinda ran into the forum post from Neogaf.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=459131
Blew my freakin mind on how much we have lost in the 7th gen. We have far less the developer variety now than we have in the past and we are stuck with those that just don't care.
The Beta games, the PR speak, the overpriced and exploitable DLC from 3rd party is now, to me, out of hand. I very much believe they do not deserve the respect and reverence they have now. I would love nothing more now than to see Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo depend less on 3rd party titles and focus more on the IP's they have now. We all know Sony and Microsoft do have old IP's they can improve on or even use the studios they have now to make new IP's.

While many of the things you wrote are true,I don't like that you over-generalizing things.
Not all act this way.

I'd like to comment on two things,based on your post.

#1 First of all,it is about buggy games. The reason games end up being buggy is because not enough time is spent fixing them. This isn't though a matter of laziness from the developer. It's a matter of having to ship the game in a specific date,and trying to make the graphics as most beautiful as possible or most content until then.
Things work like this: The owner of the studio says "that's how much money we have to invest in this game. this money is enough to pay the salaries of X number of employees for Y amount of months. that means that we will have X people work for Y months and no more."
Of course the developers could spend that time focusing more on bug fixing than adding details on the graphics.
Or even better,the publisher,or the shareholders could invest more money,so there is more time so everything is made better. But shareholders doesn't need to be people who know of games stuff. They are not gamers. They also don't know how a game is made. They are just people who hold capital,and look to invest on something that will bring them more money.

#2 In recent time we noticed that publishers are trying to find new monetization methods. They want to make more money out of the same amount content,the same amount of investment. They are experimenting. Trying to see what they can do that won't frustrate people and make them make more money.
EA's ideas have been always online DRM,online passes,and day1 DLCs.Some of them didn't passed.
Microsoft's ideas have been always online DRM too with Kinect,no used game sales,and much micro transactions. Some of them didn't passed.
Valve's idea is monetization of user created content - mods. They are planning to make it so people who know how to make mods will sell them through Steam,with Valve and the Developer/Publisher getting royalty cuts for licensing, without making the content themselves.

My suggestion is: vote with your wallet.
Support those who do movements you like,and don't support those who you don't like their movements. Show them how you feel.

As I said in end post. Third Party developers (mostly AAA) are getting undeserved credit for keeping consoles alive they no longer deserve. It is like they hit a wall at the peak of their game during early gen 7 and are sliding slowly down that wall to the bottom.

Yes games are not easy to make, but I realized a few things. The 7th gen consoles have been out for nearly a decade and the same annoying bugs are as rampant as before. As well as 3rd party shooting themselves in the foot forcing pretty graphics over a functioning game. I see those decisions and I do not respect them anymore.

 

[Lightknight]

Yes, the ps1 library and ps2 library was fantastic. I have no idea what comparing the sales of Sony from 5th through 6th gen has anything to do with 3rd party AAA game variety.

I was explaining why Exclusivity was almost null last generation but not the 5th and 6th. The Ps1 and ps2 sold SOOOOO many machines and porting games was so difficult back then that exclusivity was viable, easy even. Then when the ps3 had such a rocky start and the most popular machine was so weak, things started being multi-platform out of necessity. Now, with x86 being the architecture, it doesn't matter how many units consoles sell. They are so easy to port between that there's realy no reason not to.


Indie developers are great and love their variety. But I blame myself for not specifying in my post I mostly speak of AAA developers. No, you did specify that quite clearly. I was only including them in discussion and saying that indie developers have their own niche areas that AAA developers aren't necessarily needed in. Sure, a game like minecraft makes "runaway-and-buy-an-Island" money, but the vast majority of those games don't make anything close to what AAA titles make on a bad day. In some way, complaining about AAA developers not being more niche can be a little like complaining that a 5-star restaurant doesn't also serve hotdogs and spaghettios. Not that indie games are the hotdogs and spaghettios of the gaming world, just that they are incredibly cheap to make and usually don't make anything close to the return other things would. The thing you're forgetting is that AAA typically refers to the kind of budget behind the game. All the small and innovative games you like aren't typically AAA titles anyways. So to say that AAA devs aren't making them is kind of axiomatically true.

I loved sony in the 6th and 7th gen. They were my games of choice after the sega genesis. So when I think about their former games compared to the more modern ones, it is just sad. Fear of risking new ideas, color or allowing the player to play as they wish to hampers games now.

Yes, their former systems had a lot of exclusives. But I don't see what that has to say about AAA development as a whole besides that they are capable of multi-platform development.

3rd party AAA games of the 7th gen (I'll stick to games that are available on the console) that were popular and at least tried something new (such as being a new IP):

Alan Wake
Army of Two
Assassin's Creed (the first game debuted here)
Batman Arkham Asylum
Bioshock
Bayonetta
Borderlands
Crackdown
Crysis
DarkSiders
Dark Souls
Dead Island
Dead Rising
Dead Space
Dragon Age
F.E.A.R.
Left for Dead
LittleBigPlanet (This was 3rd party when created, Sony didn't purchase them until 2010)
Mass Effect
Mirror's Edge
No More Heroes
Portal
Saint's Row
Sleeping Dogs

Etc.

I guess I'm just not sure what you think is missing. Major game titles are just getting more and more numberous to the point that a sane person can't play all of them even if they wanted to.

Remember cheat codes? When you could just mess around in a game with infinite ammo and god mode without worrying about ruining the atmosphere of a game?

Sure, I remember that they weren't in every game back then either.

Games like:
GTA IV and V
The new FFTactics version for the psp.
Metal Gear Solid IV
Assassin's Creed III
Dead Space

I mean, they're all over the place. Some are literally cheat codes. Some are cheat actions. Even Skyrim could be on that list with so many exploits. These not being included in several games isn't because they're cheap. It's because cheats can easily kill games. I like the way MGS does it, where it's usually something that you have to earn in one playthrough.

 

[Negatempest]

Spoiler

Yes, the ps1 library and ps2 library was fantastic. I have no idea what comparing the sales of Sony from 5th through 6th gen has anything to do with 3rd party AAA game variety.

I was explaining why Exclusivity was almost null last generation but not the 5th and 6th. The Ps1 and ps2 sold SOOOOO many machines and porting games was so difficult back then that exclusivity was viable, easy even. Then when the ps3 had such a rocky start and the most popular machine was so weak, things started being multi-platform out of necessity. Now, with x86 being the architecture, it doesn't matter how many units consoles sell. They are so easy to port between that there's realy no reason not to.


Indie developers are great and love their variety. But I blame myself for not specifying in my post I mostly speak of AAA developers. No, you did specify that quite clearly. I was only including them in discussion and saying that indie developers have their own niche areas that AAA developers aren't necessarily needed in. Sure, a game like minecraft makes "runaway-and-buy-an-Island" money, but the vast majority of those games don't make anything close to what AAA titles make on a bad day. In some way, complaining about AAA developers not being more niche can be a little like complaining that a 5-star restaurant doesn't also serve hotdogs and spaghettios. Not that indie games are the hotdogs and spaghettios of the gaming world, just that they are incredibly cheap to make and usually don't make anything close to the return other things would. The thing you're forgetting is that AAA typically refers to the kind of budget behind the game. All the small and innovative games you like aren't typically AAA titles anyways. So to say that AAA devs aren't making them is kind of axiomatically true.

I loved sony in the 6th and 7th gen. They were my games of choice after the sega genesis. So when I think about their former games compared to the more modern ones, it is just sad. Fear of risking new ideas, color or allowing the player to play as they wish to hampers games now.

Yes, their former systems had a lot of exclusives. But I don't see what that has to say about AAA development as a whole besides that they are capable of multi-platform development.

3rd party AAA games of the 7th gen (I'll stick to games that are available on the console) that were popular and at least tried something new (such as being a new IP):

Alan Wake
Army of Two
Assassin's Creed (the first game debuted here)
Batman Arkham Asylum
Bioshock
Bayonetta
Borderlands
Crackdown
Crysis
DarkSiders
Dark Souls
Dead Island
Dead Rising
Dead Space
Dragon Age
F.E.A.R.
Left for Dead
LittleBigPlanet (This was 3rd party when created, Sony didn't purchase them until 2010)
Mass Effect
Mirror's Edge
No More Heroes
Portal
Saint's Row
Sleeping Dogs

Etc.

I guess I'm just not sure what you think is missing. Major game titles are just getting more and more numberous to the point that a sane person can't play all of them even if they wanted to.

Remember cheat codes? When you could just mess around in a game with infinite ammo and god mode without worrying about ruining the atmosphere of a game?

Sure, I remember that they weren't in every game back then either.

Games like:
GTA IV and V
The new FFTactics version for the psp.
Metal Gear Solid IV
Assassin's Creed III
Dead Space

I mean, they're all over the place. Some are literally cheat codes. Some are cheat actions. Even Skyrim could be on that list with so many exploits. These not being included in several games isn't because they're cheap. It's because cheats can easily kill games. I like the way MGS does it, where it's usually something that you have to earn in one playthrough.

Honestly, I am still trying to figure out where you are coming from. Are you saying 3rd party are as good as they have ever been? My point of Sony and Microsoft making their own games over drooling over 3rd party is that 3rd party are not as good as they used to be. Since they are nowhere near as good as they used to be, they are not the sink or swim supporters of consoles from the past. 3rd party is very much eating it's own tail and expecting to get bigger. If 3rd party was as fantastic as before I would not be posting this. But their own failure to make a 100% complete game is just sad and depressing. For example, when you get a buggy game. Do you come up with your own excuses for why it may be buggy? I used to come up with excuses for them. After the 3rd party developers have had nearly a decade of experience with a console you'd think that bugs wouldn't be as rampant...right? Compared to a PC where each individual having the same hardware is unlikely at best. So PC bugs very understandable, always different hardware. Console excuse? For the same hardware for nearly a decade?

 

[Lightknight]

Honestly, I am still trying to figure out where you are coming from. Are you saying 3rd party are as good as they have ever been?

Third party in general? Good and better than they've ever been. 3rd party AAA specifically? Bigger and better than they've ever been before. In a world where I can easily play games like The Stanley Parable, Bastion, Double Fine's exhaustive list of awesome titles (or are they considered a AAA company? I certainly consider them one of the best if that's all that's required) and then go and play Hitman, GTA, COD, and Borderlands? This is a good time to be alive and be a gamer. It's easy to look back on our golden age when everything was new and fresh and think that those were the best times.

In fact, those may legitimately be so. But the age of new and exciting experiences were more born out of rapidly advancing technologies and the lack of existing libraries (either out of fewer games being made or out of difficulties in emulation until now). It's not a credit to the game that it was early though. The games of today can often have much better writing and development than anything we had in the past. There were some developers who really stood out in storylines back then, but those guys are still around and have been given new life through sites like kickstarter.

Even the list of first party games has never been better. Though I think Nintendo may have taken a little nap at the wheel for the last hundred miles.

Looking at the games objectively, I am much happier with modern games. Have you ever really gone back and played those games at any length? Even games as recent as FFVII can be hard to play again. Fallout 1, which I loved the first time I played, is almost unplayable to me now. Fallout 3 though? Entirely playable.

Things are only looking better as the major consoles have opened up for indie development

My point of Sony and Microsoft making their own games over drooling over 3rd party is that 3rd party are not as good as they used to be.

I categorically deny that. Nostalgia is a mind clouder if ever there was one.

If anything has changed to the disadvantage of us oldschool gamers, it's perhaps that gaming has become so popular that we are no longer the largest demographic that gaming companies cater to specifically. As with movie fans of any particular genre, we have to wait our turn. This is inevitable in any such industry.

Since they are nowhere near as good as they used to be, they are not the sink or swim supporters of consoles from the past. 3rd party is very much eating it's own tail and expecting to get bigger. If 3rd party was as fantastic as before I would not be posting this. But their own failure to make a 100% complete game is just sad and depressing. For example, when you get a buggy game. Do you come up with your own excuses for why it may be buggy? I used to come up with excuses for them. After the 3rd party developers have had nearly a decade of experience with a console you'd think that bugs wouldn't be as rampant...right? Compared to a PC where each individual having the same hardware is unlikely at best. So PC bugs very understandable, always different hardware. Console excuse? For the same hardware for nearly a decade?

So your argument is that all 3rd party games don't work?

From what I've seen, it's only a handful of companies that have trouble with this. Bethesda and EA easily come to mind. Bethesda I at least understand somewhat because of the size/scope of their worlds but EA's failure usually sprouts out of their insistance on treating real customers like criminals. And, while I am generally ok with most of Bethesda's mistakes for the reason I mentioned, I QA'd the PS3 version from home and IMMEDIATELY noticed that Dungeons weren't resetting along with any other assets in the world. I even caught the nirnroot bloom stacking issue right away. There's no way Bethesda wasn't aware of that well before launch.

But there's a few things here.

1. No software that has ever been made is entirely without bugs. I've worked on software dev cycles before, primarily as a QA engineer. We often have large lists of tests to perform with every build as well as some time set aside to just explore and break the product. Even then, things fall through the cracks and clients use the product in ways we simply didn't anticipate. The more complex the software, and video games are as complex as it gets, then the more liklihood that something will slip through. Perhaps even something I tested for in a previous build that wasn't a problem then but was introduced by a build meant to fix another problem that I did find. But then I never retest that one thing I tested on a whim.

The sheer number of issues makes it pretty much impossible to fix everything or to even know every issue. The job of a product manager isn't to release the game when it's perfect. It's to release it when there are no significant bugs that ruin the game. Good enough. That's the way it has to work. The problem comes when they fail to catch major bugs or release anyways, that is their fault then.

2. Most of the major titles I listed went off without a hitch. Any patches were small things fixing regular issues that consoles used to not be able to fix, ever. Does anyone remember that FF gameboy game that had a critical glitch at the end of the game that prevented finishing it? I can never remember which game it was other than the cartridge image was red. Games absolutely did release broken and bugged back then. Bungie released a game that would crash your computer if you tried to uninstall it. So I'm sorry, but your perception of things is off. The only difference today is that things can be fixed afterwards which does lead to premature releases and that media is far more readily avaiable and does focus on broken games because that IS news and a game working as expected is not.

3. This isn't a criticism of the games themselves unless. Major problems are usually fixed in a week to even a few days (most of the time, the first patch takes care of them and so the big problem is never seen). So, while frustrating it isn't the norm and isn't anything against the game itself once fixed.

 

[aozgolo]

To be honest I feel the divide between Indie and AAA is narrowing, I mean many indie games you can still clearly tell are "indie" but they have a level of polish that AAA game developers 10 years ago could appreciate, and that's with shoestring budgets and skeleton crews.

Sure we've lost plenty of developers, but that happens in every generation, not just this one, and that talent doesn't really "disappear" it just moves on to new jobs and new projects.

This whole issue of "respect for game development" seems isolated to the console market, perhaps as a predominantly PC Gamer I don't notice it as much. Yes these are changing times and we have plenty of companies wanting to milk the DLC cow but I'm finding the plus side of this is that they are no longer the only options, and generally speaking at least to my own interests, I find the games I most enjoy being put out by game developers who actually do put considerable investment into the game itself and deliver a full experience right from the get-go.

 

[Shpongled]

It should just go into offline mode if you lose internet in games with out always on DRM. It does with mine.

It should, but it doesn't. The worst part of it is when others think the problem doesn't exist because it works for them -.-

No, the worst part of it is when others think that because it doesn't work for them, the problem is universal. I think I can count on one hand the times this has been a problem for me. In recent memory, maybe thrice. Twice, it was just faulty and went back to behaving normally the next time I restarted Steam. The third time I sent in a ticket and the issue was resolved within 5 days. Problem? Yes. Ruining PC gaming? No. Although I can't speak for Origin or whatever Ubisoft's platform is called, both of which I avoid for the same reasons I stay away from a white van with "free candy" spray painted on the side.

If the problem was universal they'd fix it or it wouldn't be as popular. So you don't have problems and I shouldn't hate it because it works for you even if it's a piece of shit for me? If you haven't had issues and you like it, that's understandable. I don't see how it's any less understandable to hate it for having problems.

If you get constantly get food poisoning at a restaurant are you going to keep eating there because other people don't get it?

You're not obligated to like Steam, and you're welcome to share your opinions about it, but you should understand that there are reasons far beyond Valves control why offline mode might not work on your PC. If you can understand that, you should probably be able to make the logical leap as to working out why your specific problem probably isn't going to spell doom for PC gaming as a whole.

To use your analogy, if you constantly get food poisoning from a restaurant, and no one else that goes there does, you're probably better off assuming the problem is with you and going to the doctors and getting yourself checked out, rather than assuming its something the restaurant is doing and publicly decrying that particular restaurant to be ruining food retail.

Also, just so i can add something actually OT: ~2008 the world entered a Global recession. This is far more likely to explain why so many companies have gone out of business since then than any sort of DRM/DLC/etc problems.