AAA Games -- are they becoming more and more irrelevant?

[avatar! | 1,826]

The recent Redfall debacle made me ponder whether AAA games are basically a relic of a bygone age and mostly irrelevant? To be clear, I'm NOT saying they are going away and that they are completely irrelevant -- you certainly need a AAA studio to produce amazing games such as Ghost of Tsushima, Nioh, Dark Souls, Zelda, etc.

But, if you take a look at "greatest games lists" for basically any system, it includes a ton of indie games! This is from 2021 -

https://vginsights.com/insights/article/indie-games-make-up-40-of-all-units-sold-on-steam

Basically 50% or more games on Steam are indie. Now granted, many of these are likely free and likely to be "shovelware", but even so many are also legit projects and a few become runaway hits as good as most any AAA game. Back when I was a wee lad, if someone said a new Zelda, Mario, Final Fantasy, etc game is going to be released, that was cause for celebration! Now, my attitude about any of these AAA games is "I really hope they don't screw it up!"

Even with the long times in getting them shipped, I'm legitimately excited to see what LRG and other such indie publishers release, and I don't remember the last time I bothered to see what any AAA developer is up to. But, that is me. What about you?

 

[Gloves | 11,816]

The "best" games for a given system, especially newer ones and PC in particular, are often not the AAA releases. However the AAA games still bring profits, and are generally so incredibly mainstream appealing that they are generally sure things. I say this as someone who loves a good indie, but also buys the new mainline Call of Duty game every time one releases, and have done so since the original on PS2 (also on PC, though I played on PS2).

Money can't really buy creativity, but big money can definitely do analytics, and the AAA titles are more popular than ever by the numbers. So we'll continue to get, for the most part, "by the numbers" AAA titles that succeed super well despite how garbage they often end up being. The UI and other stuff about the latest CoD is hot garbage, the maps aren't great (aside from the few re-release maps from games past), and there's a ton of issues with lag, crashes, etc. - but I still play it almost every day and now even have my wife playing it, because they have that patented "FEEL" in the core gameplay that really can't be matched. Smaller studios try, but it's all but patented just how good CoD feels to play.

[Brickman | 4,008]

I went with neutral because to me they are becoming less relevant and less of my gaming time. Some of my favourite modern games are indies such as Celeste, Cuphead, Darkest Dungeon, Shovel Knight and Hollow Knight.

But I do think AAA games are still important in the eco system because we still do get great AAA games from time to time that are fantastic games like Dark Souls, Persona, Zelda, Witcher, God of War and Horizon.

I think the issue is that some studios rush out a product even if it isn't complete. I wish more would take the Nintendo approach, it will come when it is ready. Even if it that means completely re doing things ala Metroid Prime 4. 

[Dr. Morbis | 2,091]

Money rules the world, and based on your charts, AAA games are more relevant than ever: they're 4% of the games on Steam, but 72% of the revenue and # of players... I mean, come on! 

[Reed Rothchild | 9,569]

Kind of like movies, we're reaching a nice equilibrium I think.  For every Elden Ring we have an Obra Dinn.  The best of both worlds.

[avatar! | 1,826]

6 minutes ago, Dr. Morbis said:

Money rules the world, and based on your charts, AAA games are more relevant than ever: they're 4% of the games on Steam, but 72% of the revenue and # of players... I mean, come on! 

AAA games are around $70 a pop. Indie games are typically under $10 (at least digitally on Steam) with many being $5 or less. So if you purchase 10 indie games, that's still less than the price of one AAA games, so of course the revenue will be skewed that way However, I'd also like to point out that a couple of decades ago, AAA games took in 100% of the revenue, so while they're still relevant, I would argue they are LESS relevant than before.

[MrWunderful | 2,927]

As someone who 4+ yrs ago bought every AAA game on every system, I don’t bother anymore because of how bad some were. Shockingly bad. Horrible day one downloads. 
 

I will probably with Nintendo or Steam (when possible). Nintendo is decent day one (outside of latest Pokémon, but didnt play that one so not sure how bad) 
 

Still think they are important, just work on it for a year after “release”(beta?) and Ill buy the GOTY edition for 10$

[Nesmaster | 402]

For every RDR2 or RE4 Remake, there's at least 10 that make me feel this way. Lots go into the "wait and see how it turns out/see what they fix" or deep sale territory.

Lots are still enjoyable, just not worth the ask. Especially day one with all the typical problems.

[YOURTURN | 1,256]

My current feeling is that the more AAA titles that Sony reigns in for the PS5, the more I want I want to focus on both older and indy titles. Regardless if it is on Xbox or on the PC. Especially if those titles give me the same gaming experience that any new AAA title will claim to offer me.

[Jynx | 140]

I never even liked calling it "Triple A" gaming. Triple A games should just be called "huge budget", because the extra budget almost never makes them better. Gaming reviews should start grading things by letters if companies want to use a term like Triple A, and see how many of them actually get that score.

Edited May 10, 2023 by Jynx

[Gloves | 11,816]

22 minutes ago, Jynx said:

I never even liked calling it "Triple A" gaming. Triple A games should just be called "huge budget", because the extra budget almost never makes them better. Gaming reviews should start grading things by letters if companies want to use a term like Triple A, and see how many of them actually get that score.

AAA/Triple A means exactly that, according to basically all sources - there's no promise of quality, it only means that the game was developed by a mid to large sized company, and was backed by a huge budget.

"In the video game industry, AAA (pronounced and sometimes written triple-A) is an informal classification used to categorise video games produced and distributed by a mid-sized or major publisher, which typically have higher development and marketing budgets than other tiers of games."
- Videogame Marketing and PR; Vol. 1: Playing to Win
By Scott Steinberg · 2007

[Jynx | 140]

6 minutes ago, Gloves said:

AAA/Triple A means exactly that, according to basically all sources - there's no promise of quality, it only means that the game was developed by a mid to large sized company, and was backed by a huge budget.

"In the video game industry, AAA (pronounced and sometimes written triple-A) is an informal classification used to categorise video games produced and distributed by a mid-sized or major publisher, which typically have higher development and marketing budgets than other tiers of games."
- Videogame Marketing and PR; Vol. 1: Playing to Win
By Scott Steinberg · 2007

It's a strategic term though, because choosing a term with three AAAs implies it's high quality, even if on paper companies say it doesn't. I think it wouldn't have stuck if it wasn't self congratulatory the way it comes off. There's often an official story of what someone in a quote says, and the other part of the story that is found by thinking about it. Often times people on the internet will point to a quote and leave it as that as if it's the only way to look at things, when common sense will show things another way. 

[MrWunderful | 2,927]

50 minutes ago, Jynx said:

It's a strategic term though, because choosing a term with three AAAs implies it's high quality, even if on paper companies say it doesn't. I think it wouldn't have stuck if it wasn't self congratulatory the way it comes off. There's often an official story of what someone in a quote says, and the other part of the story that is found by thinking about it. Often times people on the internet will point to a quote and leave it as that as if it's the only way to look at things, when common sense will show things another way. 

Its always represented large budget, not quality to me personally. Because the majority arent even “A” let alone “AAA”. Its an industry marketing term.  

[Jynx | 140]

1 hour ago, MrWunderful said:

Its always represented large budget, not quality to me personally. Because the majority arent even “A” let alone “AAA”. Its an industry marketing term.  

It's a marketing term, but a clever one. In a world where indie games are often coming out with better games for 10 dollars on computers that people have access to, the console business has been trying to find ways to show their consoles are still important.

"Triple A gaming" is a term to make console games sound like they're still the superior form of video game, and that a "Triple A game" is why you should still buy expensive consoles. It's a term to make them look good, by implying their big budgets produce "Triple A" quality games. If you were to just call them "games" as that's what they are, they're pretty expensive compared to cheaper options that are often better.

If the thread is about are "AAA games becoming more irrelevant", I think the fact they had to invent a term to make them sound good over better options is a sign that they are.

I'm just posting my thoughts for the thread, but you don't have to agree with them. I don't like arguing online, so just leave an agree or disagree emote and don't mind me.

Edited May 10, 2023 by Jynx

[fox | 1,669]

Nobody talking about Deathwish Enforcers.  Where is the thirst for indie games here?

Y’all are going to whine and cry about how awful “AAA” games are but you are going to be first in line Friday to pick up the new $70 elf boy adventure.

 

[Brickman | 4,008]

59 minutes ago, fox said:

Nobody talking about Deathwish Enforcers.  Where is the thirst for indie games here?

Y’all are going to whine and cry about how awful “AAA” games are but you are going to be first in line Friday to pick up the new $70 elf boy adventure.

 

There's a lot of people here that are into indies. I've listed 5 above, I know @Reed Rothchild, @Sumez and @DoctorEncore are also big into indies. We talk about them quiet a bit in the backlog challenge/what are you playing thread. You should join in.

And of course no one is going to complain about Zelda, the series for the most part (let's forget Skyward Sword) have been consistently good games and polished as opposed to other AAA titles that are essentially a Beta test for the first year.

[DoctorEncore | 3,691]

6 hours ago, fox said:

Nobody talking about Deathwish Enforcers.  Where is the thirst for indie games here?

Y’all are going to whine and cry about how awful “AAA” games are but you are going to be first in line Friday to pick up the new $70 elf boy adventure.

 

The problem now is that games are easier than ever to develop so the market is becoming saturated. As @Brickman mentioned, I play a lot of indie games and try to experience the best ones, but there are so many that I can't keep up. I've never even heard of Deathwish Enforcers. I need some curation to help me out and a lot of times that turns out to be Xbox Game Pass.

AAA releases are much less frequent and have fewer direct competitors, so it's much easier to keep track of them. It also used to be the case that AAA games would release with a certain threshold of quality that indie games couldn't reach.  However, lately it seems like big budget games launch as betas for paying customers to do the QA. I actually trust indies to be less buggy and more complete than AAA games at this point.

[Link | 2,725]

9 hours ago, Jynx said:

It's a marketing term, but a clever one. In a world where indie games are often coming out with better games for 10 dollars on computers that people have access to, the console business has been trying to find ways to show their consoles are still important.

"Triple A gaming" is a term to make console games sound like they're still the superior form of video game, and that a "Triple A game" is why you should still buy expensive consoles. It's a term to make them look good, by implying their big budgets produce "Triple A" quality games. If you were to just call them "games" as that's what they are, they're pretty expensive compared to cheaper options that are often better.

I believe the more accurate term is "blue chip" games. #Estil

[a3quit4s | 4,124]

I probably spend most of my gaming time playing AAA titles for this generation so they are still very important to me. I don’t know that I really keep track of all them besides the ones I was really interested in. Recent examples RE4 remake, hogwarts legacy, GoW Ragnarok, Horizon Forbidden West. I’m generally suspicious of new IP I guess because you never know how it’s going to go. I’ll wait for reviews on those lol

Although I was all in on CyberPunk and had it on XSX on launch day and it was a fantastic experience. 
 

People also get way to hyped when they see a trailer for a new game that doesn’t even have actual gameplay footage in it. You might as well be getting hyped for a new movie, not a game. 

Edited May 10, 2023 by a3quit4s

[Reed Rothchild | 9,569]

Yeah, there's such a flood of Indy games that I wait until after the fact so that the cream of the crop rise above everything else.  Otherwise it's impossible to tell which ones are gonna be worth your time.

For AAA I know I'm buying Zelda, Pikmin, and most likely stuff like Final Fantasy and Silent Hill.  For Indies?  Who knows, I'll have to get back to you once we know which one is this year's Inscryption or this year's Baba is You

[a3quit4s | 4,124]

9 hours ago, fox said:

Y’all are going to whine and cry about how awful “AAA” games are but you are going to be first in line Friday to pick up the new $70 elf boy adventure.

You are goddamn right I am!!

[G-type | 2,500]

The only AAA games I can think of since the PS2 era, that held my interest for more than 30 minutes is Mario Galaxy and Portal 2

Edited May 10, 2023 by G-type

[TDIRunner | 2,764]

I usually don't have time for AAA games anymore, so I usually don't buy them at launch.  By the time I can get around to trying them, they have been out long enough for me to know whether I should bother or not.

The only exceptions from recent memory are the following:

• Breath of the Wild - Pre-ordered this game back when you got 20% off for preordering on Amazon.  I played the hell out of this game right at launch and I'm well over 400 hours into this game today.  I definitely got my monies worth out of this game
• Resident Evil 2 Remake - This was the last game that I got 20% off for pre-ordering before Amazon got rid of that deal.  I also played this right at launch, but I only played through it once.  I've been wanting to do more playthroughs, but I haven't touched it since
• Horizon Forbidden West - I pre-ordered this game and while receiving it on launch day, I haven't even opened it.  I feel like this one was a waste of money considering I can get it much cheaper now.  I still plan to play this someday since I loved the original
• Tears of the Kingdom - I also pre-ordered this and I PLAN to play this on day 1, but we will see.  

This list makes up my most recent AAA titles purchased at launch and keep in mind that Breath of the Wild was years aso.  So it's extremely rare for me to purchase AAA titles at launch.  Also, as you go down the list, I played each game less and less.  I'm hoping to break that trend with Tears of the Kingdom.  

[Link | 2,725]

↑ I've never cared about AAA games, except for the obvious. 

[Tanooki | 4,946]

Without poisoning the well here, I put neutral.

At this rate I've moved on from enough of the FOMO antics and the big fish things because it's all become some homogenous mess largely.  I don't ignore AAA but honestly most of it is not worth AAA prices anymore to me, and I'd rather look at something that isn't some mass mindset hive mind feel it's a must play must have or you're like 'out' of the in group.  I'd rather find something fun, if it's a day old or a decade old.  I'm to where I've given up on modern dedicated consoles, Nintendo with its handheld the exception and instead I'd rather have a solid PC and enjoy that stuff because those AAAs(and not) that console get go to PC anyway too in no small part due to MS being part of that world and its overlap to PC.

Zelda I was ticked with the price, felt I could have gone second hand but had a gift card.  Going back in the year we have the stunning remaster plus quality Metroid Prime and then the super late Wii Kirby re-release. Beyond that not much I've picked up this year AAA that I've cared about, and what I have has been not AAA or old releases like Valis Collection.