Modern Gaming Sucks!!! Or Does It?
- Thread starter CriticalGaming
- Start date
Don't let Charlie into the gang, this ************ can't even beat Ludwig in Bloodborne. I bet he gotta have his momma beat up Bowser for him!
Not necessarily. A lot can go wrong or right during the production of a game (or movie). Something that is a labour of love can completely fall apart during production, and something that started out as done solely for money can come together or find an identity.
Also, games are usually both labours of love and done solely for money. They honestly kinda need eachother.
I do think there is a difference between indie and AA games; While both can deliver quality experience, I do feel AA has that right balance of having enough content to keep the playerbase alive while maintaining creative freedom. Indie games USED to be great, but I also think there are way too many low-effort works. Thank god they usually fall into obscurity, but I also think they overshadow the few good indie games that exist.
Also, as I've mentioned in the general gaming news thread regarding Alan Wake 2, the budgeting for AAA has become really wonky; How does game like Suicide Squad KTJL, costed roughly around $200M (my estimation based on the costs of other games in the genre), but barely had any contents to delve into? Where did all that cost go?
I also think lack of proper leadership causes AAA games to fail; Remember Redfall? Yeah that game apparently had no clear lead to set goals on how the game should look like. Starfield may be lackluster, but I also gotta give Todd Howard credit for taking leadership, and creating a game that HE ENVISIONED. I actually think SF is a lot more concise and consistent when it comes to experience, and not all over the place.
Also, as I've mentioned in the general gaming news thread regarding Alan Wake 2, the budgeting for AAA has become really wonky; How does game like Suicide Squad KTJL, costed roughly around $200M (my estimation based on the costs of other games in the genre), but barely had any contents to delve into? Where did all that cost go?
I also think lack of proper leadership causes AAA games to fail; Remember Redfall? Yeah that game apparently had no clear lead to set goals on how the game should look like. Starfield may be lackluster, but I also gotta give Todd Howard credit for taking leadership, and creating a game that HE ENVISIONED. I actually think SF is a lot more concise and consistent when it comes to experience, and not all over the place.
The Room was a labour of love. Allegedly most things hanging in modern art galleries are labours of love. But you can pour all the love you have into something and have it not matter because you’re a flipper-handed gibbon who lacks some basic skills to translate your ideas into reality. Or your idea is just dumb from day one and everyone but you realises it.
I skipped through it and I like Act Man in general, but he’s regurgitating the same info we’ve been aware of for quite some time now. He’s def. a bit slow to the punch on this one.
I stopped watching at the halfway point earlier. I am not wasting the rest of my evening on this. Ironic, because he does a "I'm not like those other AAA/Modern Gaming Sucks videos" unironically. When in fact, Act Man, yours are like the other ones, even if you gave me a few laughs at the beginning.
Ultimately these videos and discussions are all pointed at a very select set of games that come out. We all know which games those are and which companies they come from, however even that isn't indicative of what modern gaming actually is like. Even EA puts out games with no MTX on occasion.
I feel like you can lump the trash of the modern era into a few simple categories, and leave them in their own dirty little pile in the corner.
War Shooters
Sports
Live Services.
That's basically it, and live service tends to technically cover everything but I would call them games that aren't sports or shooters that fall into the live service trap, like Avengers, Justice League, Diablo 4, etc.
The reason why it appear like Modern Gaming sucks is that these select games have such a big impact, especially when they fail (and they usually do), so the general impression of the state of gaming is tainted by them when they are not really the majority of games that release year to year.
I feel like you can lump the trash of the modern era into a few simple categories, and leave them in their own dirty little pile in the corner.
War Shooters
Sports
Live Services.
That's basically it, and live service tends to technically cover everything but I would call them games that aren't sports or shooters that fall into the live service trap, like Avengers, Justice League, Diablo 4, etc.
The reason why it appear like Modern Gaming sucks is that these select games have such a big impact, especially when they fail (and they usually do), so the general impression of the state of gaming is tainted by them when they are not really the majority of games that release year to year.
If the captain flying the plane is piss drunk, it doesn't make the passengers any more comfortable knowing the rest of the crew are teetotalers.I get what you're saying, but the key word in my statement is "select".
If the worst of it has a "big impact," the whole is called into question. We already had our back and forth in this thread a long time ago about the hyperbolic nature of the thread title; it seems like you were fishing for absolutes to be refuted with any shred of evidence to the contrary. I'll say gaming in its entirety is not completely irredeemable, but it certainly has a "big" problem, as you yourself have now agreed.
The biggest problem with the AAA end of industry is the constant screwing over of people not in executive nor executive adjacent roles. Suits in charge who know nothing about video games 99% of the time. The constant crunch. The screwing over of developers, regardless if the goals were accomplished or not. Even when the devs doing everything they're asked demanded to do, they get laid off even when a game is a 1000% success. Say what you will about Iwata before dying, but he knew crunch doesn't work, actually played video games to help get in the high exec role he had, and didn't treat those under him like a shit nor infinite machines.
Last edited:
Modern gaming must really suck if all you care about is AAA tho. Because the AAA output is kind of anemic compared to yesteryear. I've checked, some of the major publishers used to release as many games or more in a single month than they do now in a full year. There were generally more games a month worth picking up, and the variety of genres was greater too. Sure, plenty of them were duds, same as now, but it was relatively rare to be lacking in choice. Now tho?
Take last month. Stellar Blade was really the only thing happening AAA-wise. Controversies aside, if I'm only into AAA, but not into that specific genre, I was kind of shit out of luck in April. Maybe next month will suit me better. Unless Senua or Homeworld are not my thing either, of course. And that's all provided they don't turn out one of the inevitable duds. Oh, they suck? Well, shit. Guess I'll keep waiting then
Or maybe I should just go back to playing some more Destiny, or Fortnite, or CoD or whatever other major GaaS/live service.
Take last month. Stellar Blade was really the only thing happening AAA-wise. Controversies aside, if I'm only into AAA, but not into that specific genre, I was kind of shit out of luck in April. Maybe next month will suit me better. Unless Senua or Homeworld are not my thing either, of course. And that's all provided they don't turn out one of the inevitable duds. Oh, they suck? Well, shit. Guess I'll keep waiting then
Or maybe I should just go back to playing some more Destiny, or Fortnite, or CoD or whatever other major GaaS/live service.
Thank you. I pointed this out before on here and a few different threads. If these publishers don't care or only focus on a few games I am not invested in, then why should I care when the indie and AA have so much more to offer?
I think the issue with AAA games is just that they're too safe and risk-averse. And when they piss off the fans, they do so in only a certain direction that is corporate-friendly and can be used to virtue signal, when instead they should be doing that to push the game itself forward and not the people making it. Though this is mostly a western issue, cause Japan and Korea now have been killing it this year.
Sony’s current state is concerning too. I like Hulst and he’s always seemed like a decent guy, but either he doesn’t have enough pull or he kinda let his new role go to his head a bit. Sony was firing on all cylinders when Shuhei and Shawn were in charge, because they both genuinely had a passion for games.