Why Game Companies Stopped Making Games - How Money Works

[@HowMoneyWorks]

Go to bit.ly/3Bo4vh9 and use code HMW to get 15% off ClickUp's massive Unlimited Plan for a year! Start reclaiming your time for less than $5 a month. Hurry offer ends soon.

[@roxaskinghearts]

The next massive game news on the scale of final fantasy 14 over taking wow is fortnite taking over everything or something of that nature see its already the metaverse when people can trade items game modes event tickets items in a game mode everything for a single currency based on someone elses wants then whats stopping it from happening block chain is going to over take the world TO everyone who says but bitcoin is a energy hog let me ask you something compared to sending trillions of dollars to china alone in just bills im saving you people money by astronomic amounts with that point as my base

[@tompaauwe4565]

Then there's Nintendo, making different IP's whilst holding on conservatively on existing ones. Only bringing change when they need to. There's a lot they do wrong, but right now their games are so beloved you can build an entire successful amusementpark out of it. I don't see a lot of other companies having these kind of views into the future. Even though they take longer to make games, the lack of care for details really gives it a hit and miss risk. It's long term projects with short term thinking. The bigger and more beloved your library is. The more loyal the fanbase. The gradual climb is vastly preferable over investing into the next big trend to hope on another sleeper hit. The reason why those big launches failed is the lack of creativity, story, and engagement. Using an IP does not guarantee success. But as you build upon it with care, reputation is earned. Having one big hit only lasts for a certain amount of time.

[@roxaskinghearts]

@@BenzoEnzoMk2 and yet websites like that are found and reported to be making millions off these websites and thats not a understatement that is a well documented fact happening all the time based on runescape world of warcraft and final fantasies ban rate for these companies and trade volume for these allegations like bots really driving that data home what can you buy with these millions cheap Chinese knock offs to sell on amazon

[@HDTomo]

Ngl isn't that just Google calendar for paying?

[@dundermifflinity]

I blame Apple

[@myopiniondoesntmatter7068]

Save you 14 minutes: Games as a service are vastly more profitable than the initial revenue from games.

[@odeleon24]

You’re doing the lords work!

[@popeo1973]

Wait what this channel is bad?

[@thefirsttrillionaire2925]

Thanks 👍🏽💪🏽

[@glassbirds4153]

@@popeo1973 They make 14 min worth of video while the video could be less than 5 minutes.

[@outlander234]

Even that is flawed. How many games as a service out there that are succesful compared to succesful stand alone pay once releases?

[@ikarosouza]

The reason triple AAA games are becoming so expensive and some are totally failing is just because they focus on tech and not on design. They're treating what were supposed to be enjoyable games as engine demos and not giving enough time to release them properly. You can't just create another GTA V every single year, that shit takes A LOT of time.

[@alphastratus6623]

Yea, game development is the false order of things, especially in big companies. They should make some small, not perfect, not triple A things and validate them intern. When the gameplay is fun and motivating the project get a graphic overdone and stuff and will be released as triple A, the others are released as a small game for 1/3 of the price. This would work very well for studios that make different games and series like Ubisoft. But instead they plan to make 'the next big thing' in the first place, set the designers under massive pressure, and the result may be nice looking but not more than an empty shell.

[@Sweenus987]

I haven't seen a game that seemed to focus on tech in years, as far as I can tell, it's all been about cash grabs with micro transaction ridden live service and battle royale games that no-one asked for, heck, some of it are AAA games that no-one straight up asked for in general. Another big issue is when you have AAA games poorly managed and then released in such a poor state, such as Battlefield 2042 and Cyberpunk 2077.

[@KRYMauL]

A bunch of engines are being sold to indie developers to everyone.

[@tj-co9go]

Exactly. Does this game really need a huge open world area map with a diameter of hundred kilometers, when most of it is just empty and devoid of content. Does it really need to have ultra-realistic HD and 4k graphics, when you could have better lower definition graphics with a distinctive and memorable style? Does it need complex shadow and mirror calculations that my computer cannot handle? Does it really need to release exactly on the scheduled date to ensure the boss gets his performance premiums on time, if the game is an unfinished mess? Does it need an epic 200 hour main quest and 1000 hours side quests if all of them consist of the same boring tasks that are repeated for a hundred times? What about a cohesive story, decent combat, less bugs, a unique vision and more polish to the game overall. Maybe less playing time and less locations to explore, but those done with moee attention.

[@KRYMauL]

@@tj-co9go I really don’t get the whole, we need to make it long thing. If a game has a 6-8 hour campaign it’s fine, and I’ll just go back to playing my current favourite fps multiplayer game. There’s nothing that a publisher can do about except if they add a really cool mode of transit like Flying in breath of the Wild, but even then I’ll get bored after a while.

[@deadlypandaghost]

Another issue is that whenever you sink that much money into a single project, the designers have to give up a significant amount of creative control. Business just won't allow that much money to be spent on an experiment. Everything ends up being the old tried and true so you end up with very samey, uncreative, bland games that look really nice.

[@BergStark]

Yes this is why pretty much no AAA is interesting to me. Sure it's fun to eff around in GTAV for a while but that's pretty much it.

[@stsk7]

That's why smaller publishers might shine and the big boys will become played and stale like the Cod series

[@henke37]

A lack of innovation sucks. But at the same time, you need refinement. Mistakes will be made when experimenting. Taking what works and building upon that is important to improve the quality of games. It's been said that research doesn't have an end, you just run out of time and money.

[@ArtomixCraft]

Horizon Zero Dawn moment

[@Nekrumorfiini1]

Big games have always been overshadowed by small studios in terms of creativity.

[@CertifiedClapaholic]

The problem is that gaming companies have gotten too big to take risks anymore. They make copycat games with subscription-based services and that's safe for them. It's corporate business, investors that don't care about the product itself, only the bottom line. They want guarantees and they don't want the companies they've invested in making risky moves with their money. The companies don't want to make risky moves and risk losing their investors.

[@danielaponte4054]

Thats sad But thats the way business works

[@Halcon_Sierreno]

It's up to us as gamers to speak with our wallets.

[@AK_777]

People always talk about taking risks, what risks do you want them to take? We live in a time period were developers are using the risky shit from the 90s and 00s.

[@ceoofmemes1967]

EXACTLY. its this whole idea where you can't make a game that is just "okay" because your stocks will plunge, investors will dump their stock, the company will close and you will end up in the street as a failure. its so stupid to hear anyone defend Rockstar for any other reason other than board members wanting them to focus on online for 9 years other than them being scared of them failing and thus losing investments.

[@VashTheDamnFiend]

@@danielaponte4054 business doesent have to work that way. thats actually how a business slowly dies

[@ryannygard3661]

I've been telling my friends this for the past couple years. We are going to see fewer AAA games because games not only have to compete with other new releases but all of the pre-existing games as well. There is just so much competition in this industry.

[@adrianafamilymember6427]

Indie games bro

[@mf--]

True. 5 dollars for witcher 3 game of the year edition makes it difficult for indies to compete.

[@adrianafamilymember6427]

@@mf-- wait really. But stray did come out which is a game about felines and is indie got positive reviews.

[@Default78334]

@@mf-- To say nothing of Epic just giving away stuff for free every week.

[@thebighurt2495]

@@adrianafamilymember6427 That's where the real draw is anymore. It's the mid-to-small studios putting out novel, unique and creative games.

[@estacaotech]

When some people say "games from older generations were better" I must agree.. As a kid I imagined how insane the games would look like with so much more options to buy and play with even better graphics and physics. But sadly nowadays most titles are just cash grabs and the fun part is ignored, its hard to find triple A titles with good and fun gameplay without only pay2win features. Thats why I'm revisiting emulation, indie games and a few AAA titles which are worth the money and also the playtime.

[@xaxos9273]

This is as cringey as people saying "music from older generations were better"

[@joaquincimas1707]

@@xaxos9273 No bro. Cash cow games are not fun.

[@nsgames24]

Dude, I'm the same way. I don’t even own any 8th Gen or 9th Gen consoles personally because I can't stand the triple A industry, these days. The closest to new games I play are indies and I'm more than okay with that.

[@PlayshotKalo]

@@nsgames24 God Of War beats anything your Indie game industry creates.

[@nsgames24]

@@PlayshotKalo Who says you can't enjoy both?

[@KevinSoriano]

It’s awful sad to see how stuff goes to thrash when the general public gets access. Look at KZbin itself, with its mandatory “ad friendly content”, social media taking over everything, lack of variety due to companies milking “winning formulas” dry; Game companies noticing that the casual player is not demanding quality at all… it sucks.

[@usa-empireis-dead227]

I only look to play high quality free games! Everything else is garbage!

[@rikiishitoru8885]

It's not because of the general public so much as it is soulless corporations led by government cronies using the media to defame what is popular while they take over these industries to make their own vision (backed by psuedoprogressive grifters) the standard of that industry. It's why social media, TV, games, etc. were more enjoyable when more of the people making them had more freedom to show unique ideas without being rallied against by people who wanna dumb down society.

[@irasac1]

​@@usa-empireis-dead227free?

[@brownpunk1794]

Fair to say the golden age of gaming is truly gone..sad really..but glad i grew up gaming in the 90s and early 2000s..sad a lotta kids wont experience the magic we did

[@chillvibed]

Most of the games I have are from the 90's and 00's decades. We saw the peak of gaming! Nothing to be sad about. Screw these kids lmao vice city is still the best, the original not that new nonsense

[@PlayshotKalo]

The era when friends would actually come over to game with us and we’d spend hours playing mini games and laughing our asses off. All the best games today are single player campaigns and it just isn’t the same

[@fawkkyutuu8851]

As far as pure fun , creativity , tech advancements , stacked releases , soundtracks , and Industry health goes... 1985 - 2002 or 2007. Hard to decide where I would end the golden age but I am more of a purist.

[@merkcityboy834]

Especially gaming from 98-04 those were the days man.

[@mattmattmatt131313]

@@merkcityboy834 For 3D games 98-04 is an absolute golden era. Just take a look at a list of best games from 2004, all really heavy hitters. Many of those AAA game series surviving to this day.

[@MrMeddyman]

This feels a bit out of touch... AAA games that bomb do so because they were rushed out of the door and burned trust, not because consumers were over-saturated with other games to play, gamers are always thirsting for the next big thing. In the competitive matchmaking space yes their is usually one giant dominating a space and others vying for that position like League of Legends, WoW, Fortnite etc but that's not true for traditional story based titles

[@songshuntan9122]

yes this

[@davids8127]

I think his point is that they have to compete with previous titles as well as current once. They made a whole different game out of AC for example I gave up after the 4th but 2nd was the best where the storytelling and the engine was just perfect. Never gonna be engaged in a single player like this again cause playing them feels like "been there,done that". I bought PS5 to get sinked into single player games, but I got bored of it after few days and then just played warzone instead

[@josephpurdy8390]

Look at the timeline of game development 30 years ago. Now it takes 5 to 10 times longer. The entire industry is much less efficient and productive today then, it was 15 years ago.

[@merkcityboy834]

They’ll all outta touch American Greed destroys everything in the end.

[@GS-tk1hk]

@@josephpurdy8390 Or look at the effort required to make a large game today compared to 30 years ago. The amount of people involved and the scope of the project is at least 5 to 10 times bigger as well, and players expect every new release to dwarf the previous one.

[@ApurvJyotirmay]

Some of the best games I played are single-player, without micro-transaction, and amazing in-game content - OG Halo, Insomniac's Spider-man, Horizon Zero: Dawn, Tomb Raider, Sub-nautica, Mirror's Edge, San Andreas, Unyarn, Haides (and so many great indies which I'm forgetting the names of). Thanks to these heroes on our side. And more power to them

[@antares3518]

And God of war . RAGNAROK IS COMING SOO TOO!

[@ashketchum1244]

Witcher 3 goty edition, Terraria, rdr2 story mode

[@jveerf8573]

Disco Elysium

[@wrestlinganime4life288]

@@antares3518 and it delivered.

[@memyselfandi2568]

Here is my issue with this. AAA game companies are trying too hard to make the 'biggest game'. Big being, best graphics, biggest worlds, widest variety be in customization, weapons, vehicles etc. Which will need lots of people and technology naturally. Which i could excuse that for big game companies withholding new projects. Except when you have games like Undertale, Minecraft (before Microsofts purchase) Goosegame, Goat Simulator, powerwash simulator, etc. Getting loads and loads of sales when they're developed by small teams. These games are very basic graphically, have a very short play time (minecraft an exception), no big budget, no fancy effects, no extraordinary acting. But just simple fun Heck, id be willing to consider Undertale a masterpiece, and it's a very short game. Players dont want 'big' they want good. Yes the newer games look pretty, but i promise best graphics isn't necessarily what gamers are aftee. Best graphics should be icing on the cake. Not the whole cake

[@PlayshotKalo]

Big is good too when quality is there though. Bethesda games like Fallout 4 just never get old because there’s so many endings, places, weapons and collectibles, but it’s also a great quality game. Games like God Of War are top quality from the PS4 era, but the lack of variation leaves much to be desired and really hurts it’s replayability. Once you beat Sigrun and get your platinum then there’s no reason to keep playing, you already discovered everything in the game that could be discovered. There’s a reason people still play GTA San Andreas Andreas today, a game over 20 years old with trash graphics and controls by today’s standards. It’s because people are still discovering shxt so it has mad replayability. The problem with these big studios is they’re using the same formula for every game in a series and just making it more grindy but still lacking variation so players get burnt out easily, it’s a trash system but it pushes more into micro transactions

[@memyselfandi2568]

@@PlayshotKalo and solo/small teams are still executing this format better than AAA currently. Runescape, very big, graphically dated, but otherwise still playable, with a rather large fanbase, yet a AAA game like bethesda can hardly get 76 functional. For a huge open world game, im fighting three enemies the whole time. Mole people, super mutants, and the scorched. And is significantly boring, unless playing with friends. (Games should be fun without friends, and even more fun with the inclusion of friends. Fun shouldn't be the job of the players, but of the producers.) 343 have released 2 flops, and a mixed review game (halo 4 being mixed review) yet a mod team with less than 100 people can recreate the entirety of halo's old school multiplayer and campaign with the only funding being a handful of donations. Halo Infinite's campaign was fun, the the multiplayer scene is crashing, because 343 cant decide if it wants to be more like call of duty or Fortnite, when the fans want the game to be more like halo. 2010 prior, these companies knew what the fans wanted, and their best to meet expectations meanwhile 2015 onwards, companies ignore fan requests, in chase of money. Big games recently have been failing, because the companies cannot meet the expectations that they put forth. And they've been failing at a rapid rate. And the sad thing about this is very simple. That only small developers been doing. Listen to the fans. Everything else will fall in line.

[@memyselfandi2568]

Also, keep in mind, Nintendo has constantly been making big games, new ips, and remasters, while being mostly successful. Because Nintendo listens to their fans.

[@gamermapper]

It's way better to have an original idea that to try to make graphics constantly the best ever

[@timytimeerased]

This is kinda wrong, apart from Nintendo fans, the biggest audience has been teached to concentrate on graphics and value (AkA bloat/Ubisoft style content to produce more gametime). What sells is technical showpieces (Sony exclusives) and gigantic quest filled tons of « content » games (Assassins creed, Cyberpunk and other open worlds). On both sides you push the enveloppe but you’re spending a gigantic ampunt of dollars for games who have a short revenue window compared to a lower budget Free to Play which can fail but also succeed and when it succeeds be such a better investment its ridiculous. Theres still a market for the old model but the audience is askin for more, and the studios are tied to shareholders who would rather aim for a different demographic (service game players)

[@VinceroAlpha]

Great video overall but you forgot to mention that the reason for big game launches are flopping is due to the fact that they are utterly complete unfinished products that play exactly like their competition. This trains the customers to not expect much but pay more for detreating quality, which is what the current landscape is, a feedback loop of sad.

[@stapleman007]

Back when NES cartridges were shipped, it was all or nothing. Now games get patched every other day for the first couple months. However, NES cartridges never get new content, now any well received game does.

[@cadraf]

This… you buy a 60 euro game, that is half finished, then after one year they sell you a dlc for it with what the game was supposed to come with and charges more than half the value of the original price of the game.. I see this with mh rise sunbreak… i just refuse to buy the dlc at least for now because of this… gonna wait for it to go down on prices. Cd project red with the witcher 3 dlc did a wonderful thing, all new map and story with tons of new content for only 15 euros… thats how you sell a dlc, not how they do now.

[@PlayshotKalo]

@@cadraf this is why I wait a couple years before I even buy a game. They usually drop from $70 down to like $15 and come bundled with all content free. I bought the Fallout 4 game of the year edition with all DLCs free for like $9 on Black Friday

[@alexanderackerman3807]

The ability to update games has been the worst thing to happen to video games

[@heychrisfox]

I feel like the analysis on AAA games near the beginning of the video is a bit off the mark. The problem with many of these "stinkers" is not that the company is investing huge amounts of money only to have their title bomb as if it's just customers not caring. The bigger issue is oversight by the companies themselves. They get so wrapped up in making as much money as possible, that they stop making a game and start making a product. For these stinkers, the idea is "make money first, make a game later." It's cynical and stupid, because naturally their games are going to fail, because they're trying to cobble a game together with paper clips and superglue and then sell it as a luxury product, which naturally results in people seeing through the façade and being mad at the result upon the game's release. There are tons of hugely expensive AAA titles that returned huge dividends. The way they do this is by making a good game first. Nobody would be happy if they bought something that was advertised under the Ferari brand, only to learn upon buying it that the brakes don't work, it has a hole in the fuel tank, or you need to pay a subscription for heated seats. Similarly, gamers are very aware that if a game is marketed as the best thing since sliced bread, it actually better be well made. If it's not well made (either intentionally or through raw incompetence), that's on the company, not on the consumer.

[@jasonlib1996]

Exactly this! I have enjoyed gaming for many years. but these days i dont even get excited about any AAA releases anymore, I used to happily preorder a game i was excited about, however the games industry has burned that trust over the years producing poor quality games which are intended from day 1 to be a service platform to sell more things instead of being an enjoyable game itself. So now I never pre-order, and havent for years. im always highly skeptical of new AAA releases, because everyone of them follow the same business model that makes games just unenjoyable to play. The movie industry dones get to repeatedly sell their title multiple times. for them first impressions are incredibly important as theres no fixing it onces its released. Meanwhile game devs have become reliant on being able to fix games post launch with updates and so practically ignore any reasonable QA. and just focus on getting the title out as quickly as possible with little regard to the quality on release. and then wonder why they flop as gamers avoid what is just a buggy mess thats not fun to play or worth the price premium they charge

[@sybrandwoudstra9236]

"We are checking"

[@kacperkubiak2995]

literally this

[@socratesa2536]

Meh i don’t buy the profit argument first, that’s the typical easy go to argument that grows bc everyone on reddit circle jerks that argument together. The same can be argued under the opposite belief of plenty of successful triple AAA games that were focused on profit first (bc everyone of them is, otherwise why would a major corporation green light the project?). So what separates the two? It has more to do with the leadership of the team. Anyone that has worked under anyone, especially in a company that gets larger, knows very well that there are inefficiencies of bad managers, bad culture, and/or bad environments in a company that will drastically weigh on performance. For example, I worked for a major fortune 50 company that I respect plenty, but our district performance in the midwest drastically outperformed the west coast region. The management for this particular company was much more laid back in the west coast and had lower standards, management were far less driven relative to our division (had plenty of on site visits), the culture would bend and break the rules, and the numbers clearly showed it. Another district south of us had great leadership, but was growing drastically every year that all available resources had to be sent there to support them and they would still come up short bc they couldn’t build enough factories fast enough to support the drastic demands. Naturally putting out that fire would hurt other teams smaller fires. Managing a major company is not easy and truly is a competitive workspace as it grows, which is why you see some giants grow larger or eventually crash hard. This is true in everything in life. From governments, militaries, even households. I guarantee you if you were a fly on the wall for any of those failed AAA developments, you would see some interesting drama that would explain a lot from poor managers and team leads.

[@heychrisfox]

@@socratesa2536 You've stated the heart of my argument though. These AAA companies put their entire focus on earning money. There is no other focus. Of course they're big businesses, and of course they only want to make money, that's obvious. But they're in the entertainment industry, one of the potentially most profitable but also one of the most competitive. So you would think that they would put a great emphasis on being careful with their product rather than just throwing anything at the wall to see what sticks. The problem is they don't do that. They so often tend to treat their product as throwaway. They don't care if people like their games or not, so long as the game makes money hand-over-fist. Not even movie studios do this; they at least care if their movie flops, because it's an embarrassment to their "good names." The rot in these companies goes straight to the top. I would agree that it's circlejerking if we didn't see the same situation replicable so many times, and doubly so if we didn't have so many counter-examples to the way it's handled in the AAA space. Diablo Immortal, Anthem, Star Wars Battlefront, Fallout 76, the list goes on and on. And it's not because the teams at these companies aren't ultra talented, because they are. It's not because there is lots of drama at these companies (although sometimes that's certainly true). It's usually because the teams tow the line for the CEOs, lack a general understanding of what makes games fun, and would rather release some homogenized crap than something valuable as a piece of art. And it's also why those companies who put that extra effort in - almost exclusively out of the AAA space, but there are notable exceptions here and there within the AAA space - that get the claim they usually deserve, and are rewarded for it.

[@spoogerification]

Video games took all the issues in the film industry and was like “how do I make this worse?”

[@موسى_7]

Games companies have a marketing problem. They don't know what consumers want. They seek to satisfy investors before consumers, which is the goal of business, but it is actually against the investors' interests. That's because investors have trouble understanding the long term and understanding marketing and satisfying consumer demand, so they shoot themselves in the foot. The marketing department needs more power if these companies want to do better. Nintendo has better marketing than the rest, which is why their customers display loyalty; Nintendo knows how to make the games which are in demand. BotW, Odyssey, etc.

[@kelton6649]

I think nintendo is also a public company but yes, there should be a better balance between satisfying consumers and investors. It just so happens that it's more difficult in the gaming industry

[@heychrisfox]

Absolutely. This is a particular problem with American companies. They focus group games to death. They find their target demo and ask what that demographic wants in a new game. That demographic naturally says, "Like the old game but better," and all the company hears is "like the old game!" So they release a new game that's basically identical to the old game and wonder why they're not the most popular kid in school anymore: zero innovation.

[@XLR8bg]

I don't think swapping one corporate overlord for another is going to solve the problem. I think the problem is a lot simpler - video games are an art, and like with any art form there's is an inherent risk it will not be a hit, but the only way to achieve something outstanding is to let the artist do his thing. Restricting the artistic vision with corporate red tape, no matter from which department, doesn't sound like a recipe for success. We often see that in new IPs. They usually have a lot of freedom as it's a smaller investment and thus less risky overall. But if it's successful, there's pressure for faster and bigger releases, the budgets grow, and basically the corporate minds micromanage it to death within one or two sequels.

[@artarealmblazer]

What a stupid comment.

[@mushrifsaidin]

Nice try Nintendo employee

[@kaltinhomer4853]

This is yy no man sky's developers have my utmost respect,,despite the bad launch they pulled up their pants and fixed the game and added soooo much to it *FOR FREE*

[@abetts123]

If the indie game industry says anything, it’s that games should have compelling gameplay not just be a series of cinematic trailers

[@Guy-cb1oh]

Most indie games are just as bad as the AAA games.

[@britishguy54dx]

I’d say the massive presence of indie games is its own problem. They essentially killed AA gaming.

[@jeveritt8398]

@@britishguy54dx double a seems to be resurfacing with the likes of thqnordic

[@siluda9255]

@@Guy-cb1oh what indie games have you being playing ?

[@siluda9255]

@@britishguy54dx thats a good thing, fuck the big companys

[@lephtovermeet]

This is mostly a problem with AAA games. It's also been an issue since like EverQuest 2: developers and marketers (especially for publicly traded companies) are far too in love with graphical and cinematic achievements over game play. OooOooOOO look how pretty it is - but game play is buggy and less than engaging. Then some small team of independent developers or some little passion project department of a larger developer comes out with a gem out of no where with graphics from 5-10 years ago, and people eat it up. Just like big companies have trouble innovating and taking risk, big developers have trouble doing anything other than crunching the numbers for the highest projected ROI.

[@taku6157]

Point taken. Especially on the technological advances. Now they care a lot about advances in graphics and cinematic elements more than the gameplay. Still today I prefer playing Need for Speed most wanted the 2005 version more than the newer version, a masterpiece both in storytelling, gameplay and good real like graphics. These new ones look straight up CG. This thing I doubt its affecting the game industry only. Bad management, not giving artistic the creative control amongst other factors. Its affecting the film and the software development industry too. I once saw a video here on KZbin doing a comparison of the first Jurassic Park and the newer ones, most people prefer the first JP's. Unlike the newer ones, the old one is not graphic intense they focused more on the storytelling, plus made an effort to not make everything CG.

[@CahyoPrabowo]

Video games should be made on low spec machine, so the developer can focus on gameplay and visual art and music and stories, and put graphical technology as bonus.

[@indianaliam1]

yeah hey when indie games stop being just metroidvanias and earthbound like rpgs, get back to me. the only reason AAA games destroy indie games at every opportunity is because dudebros don't wanna play a 2-D game with a SNES artstyle, REGARDLESS of how easier that is to make. fuck unity too. and unreal.

[@Katanalein]

The best games are still the ones where you have the feeling that the developers really want to play it themselves.

[@josesosa3337]

I like this quote.

[@UH1Phil]

Now go watch Nintendo make a great AAA title again and again with no microtransactions, no selling off technology, and relatively simple games. That's because they know the recipe and they know what a game should be at the end of the day. Good visual art (not graphics mind you), good music and rewarding gameplay with a cohesive story makes you hooked. They cater more to the end consumer and less to investors.

[@redice6439]

Not with their "free updates" in their sports games

[@moister3727]

Tell that to every stupid decision Nintendo has make the last 10 years. They make good games, but the rest on their side suck as much as the rest if not more.

[@Illeea]

nintendo and their 2nd party studios have made some incredible games on switch. but not all of them are the games you describe. botw, splatoon 2, mario odyssey, smash bros ultimate, animal crossing, links awakening, metroid dread, FE three houses and kirby and the forgotten land. these 9 games are the great triple A original games nintendo has put out for the switch. the first 5 were developed in house by nintendo and the other 4 were developed by grezzo, mercury steam, intelligent systems and hal laboratory. 9 games in 5 years is pretty good. looking forward to botw 2 hope it lives up to the hype. although nintendo do rely on their exclusive games to survive. so if they didnt make great games theyd of died out years ago.

[@experience_point6233]

They can afford no microtransactions and all the other stuff plaguing other AAA games because their games sell at much higher price and very rarely go on sale so the revenue from copies sold is actually much higher than you 3rd party AAA game which drops in price 2-3 months after release.

[@fcbFreack]

Are you talking about those Wii U Games which are sold a second time as switch games with zero effort?

[@David.Marquez]

I also find it interesting that with the very few AAA releases that are supposed to make money as-is companies usually want home runs instead of singles, return has to be exponential, and if it isn't sequels and teams get cut.

[@heychrisfox]

It's just the predatory nature of AAA games at the current moment. Why make more money than you can even conceive of if you could also make all of the money that ever existed? It's just greed, pure and simple. That's why you'll get games that sell record profits for the entire industry and the company will be like, "sorry guys, this best selling product was a failure." They've lost touch with reality.

[@selectionn]

@@heychrisfox Red dead redemption 2 is a shining example of this behavior. R* just completely abandoned it (even though its been left at the wayside for a while now), just because not enough people were playing it, despite such a dedicated diehard community who also buys MTXs constantly.

[@heychrisfox]

@@selectionn To its credit though, I don't think Red Dead had as much sticking potential as GTA multiplayer. GTA has so many different appeals: roleplay, simulation, exploration, challenges, races, and then just random chaos. Red Dead mostly has "run around and shoot guys," and there's just less variety all around. So I don't really bemoan them for letting that game's multiplayer fall by the wayside.

[@ferinzz]

not to mention the frankly unrealistic sales goals we keep hearing about. Games failing to be a financial success despite selling millions. Though I'm starting to wonder if part of that is some Hollywood Accounting. If they make a loss, they don't have to pay taxes in the same way.

[@Beregorn88]

There is a big gaping hole in your analysis, and is the same thing that many AAA developers keep missing: new features are NOT the only thing that can "justify" a new game (using your words), and new features alone are usually not enough to make a good game (unless is something ground-breaking, and even then you have to be careful). A good story is often enough to carry a game on its own, if you don't botch the rest, and a stellar writing will make a classic of videogame out of a buggy mess (see the RPGs of old, for example). Books, films and TV series have had the same "features" for decades, but people keep enjoying them; the same applies for videogames.

[@justinwhite2725]

Films and TV series are starting to lose that, though, because the stories are starting to suck in favour of political messaging. Which actually proves your point.

[@lynco3296]

If I just wanted good writing I would read a book or try to find a good tv show. Good writing is very cheap to produce and widely available if you know where to look. People expect great graphics and groundbreaking features from a AAA game because these games are supposed to push the industry forward and raise the bar. Halo had a good story, but that was definitely not what made it the groundbreaking game it turned out to be.

[@larion2336]

@@lynco3296 " Good writing is very cheap to produce and widely available if you know where to look." Tell that to Netflix, Hollywood, most AAA devs, etc. I usually find better stories in RPGMaker games than I do in AAA corporate trash.

[@microdavid7098]

@lynco writing for a video game is harder than writing books. Trust me.

[@NotmyRealname847]

This is just not true anymore.

[@2Sor2Fig]

6:15 - I think this is a really important point worth mentioning, that as time progresses the core game engine actually becomes much easier to use (bug fixes, security patches, better documentation, etc). That's how most mods come about, anyway. Plus, it's easier to write new code when your already have an existing framework to build off of.

[@tylerw.1414]

In any software, there’s a sweet spot for number of engineers. Go under that sweet spot and it takes longer to build, but go over and the software becomes buggy and loses its most valuable asset; it’s soul.

[@houghwhite411]

Spot on

[@cliffh.3279]

I was starting to notice this the past few years since it was starting to feel like not as many good games were coming out each year. Might just be that I’m getting older and can’t find them, but I remember playing a ton of new and fun games just a few years ago

[@somethinglikethat2176]

I disagree, sort of. I think the amount of good AAA games has decreased but the amount of Indy and small to mid sized studios releasing good games has increased imo. Some of the small team games coming out on Steam, GOG, ect have been quite competitive with the major studios in terms of graphics and sound while doing interesting things in game play.

[@heychrisfox]

It is most likely that you can't find them, or just aren't looking. There are more banger games than ever before, because the whole market is saturated with good stuff. The key is that most of the best games aren't the most expensive, highly marketed games. Just like when we were kids and had to comb through the aisles for those hidden gems, we as adults have to do the same.

[@17michaelboyd]

It's been a steady decline for a decade since the birth of primarily online games

[@mffuniverse3806]

@@somethinglikethat2176 stop with the double a single a pedaling, those games are ass only a dozen out of 20 is decent at best

[@ponternal]

AAA game companies need to realize that fancy expensive technology does not always equal fun

[@Krawcu_]

It's confusing when you're talking about Rockstar and showing only GTA V footage saying how they released the last game 4 years ago. You should've also used some clips from their latest game which is Red Dead Redemption 2

[@موسى_7]

People don't think much when choosing stock footage. Not usually at least.

[@heychrisfox]

GTA V is their breadwinner though. Red Dead Redemption 2 is their newer game, yeah. But the money it makes is infinitesimal compared to the returns GTA V still gives to this day.

[@klobiforpresident2254]

@@heychrisfox The claim made was that their last game was released four years ago.

[@heychrisfox]

@@klobiforpresident2254 As it turns out, history extends beyond 4 years.

[@TonyDeCoste]

As an editor If I add b-roll that isn't directly related to what is being discussed I would be told to change it. In this case I would be told to use a clip of RDR2 to avoid confusion.

[@justamanofculture12]

The problem with Success is that it's hard to beat the things you accomplished in the past. For a GTA6 to be created, it would need to be better than GTA5 and rdr2. Like a decade advanced then them. It's hard but not impossible. And the fact that GTA5 is still bringing millions of dollars even after 9 years makes it hard for rockstar to release GTA-6 etc.

[@mffuniverse3806]

These mother fuckers makes 900M a YEAR that’s annual for a 13+ old game bruh that’s 2 cod titles a year

[@Croz89]

I think we're seeing a lot more competition in the gaming industry. Digital distribution and crowdfunding models have dramatically lowered barriers to entry. There are far more games now for niche audiences made on smaller budgets, but there's enough money sloshing around that even a small studio can produce something that only a AAA studio would have been able to manage 10-15 years ago. So now these AAA games have to compete for customers who now have a lot more choice in what they play. It's like buying food at a supermarket, back then you'd only have a few varieties of each product, mostly by big name brands. Now you have dozens more by smaller producers, and you have more new products catering for niche tastes. The existing products are going to lose market share.

[@mushbeck]

Missed pretty hard on this one ngl. Games used to be measured based on how enjoyable and well made they were not purely on how profitable. It was always about trying to innovate and break new ground in order to deliver something the player has never experienced before. Even if that just meant perfecting an existing concept. Now its clearly driven by bottom line thinking, chasing trends, optimizing play time with shady mechanics and so on . (note there are a few exceptions to this in recent years etc PUBG ) Devs make fewer games becuase it far more risky to dev a bunch of new content on the hopes that it will generate an audience than to churn out some lifeless corpse of a game which ticks all the coporate boxes. Games used to be works of art. Now they are primarily treated as a product to push. Makes sense why it has turned out this way but that doesnt make it any less sad.

[@LEFT4BASS]

We can blame the companies, but we as consumers are the ones who punish them for taking risks. Take Age of Empires 2 vs Age of Empires 3. AoE3 for the time was an incredibly well-designed game, making full use of new technology and taking the series in a new direction. Fans hated it. They didn’t want a whole new game. They wanted an upgraded AoE2. The developers gave in and released new editions and expansion packs for the old game, and they succeeded wildly. We’re the ones who punish them for taking risks, and reward them for the safe route.

[@SergeantSarge]

@@LEFT4BASS Unfortunately the manufactured hype machine is going brrr much more successfully these days it seems.

[@TTCnoobyProductions]

@@LEFT4BASS I loved AoE3 Q,Q sad it is so hated

[@MamoMark]

It's always been profit driven. But when tech advancement is tapering out and when the budgets are ballooning of course it's not going to be like it was 20+ years ago with more extermination, smaller teams, smaller budgets, etc. We've been advancing at this unsustainable rate since the HD era of consoles.

[@Kaimax61]

you're delusional if you think they've never been "for profit" since day 1. IT'S the whole reason why the gaming industry is so big now.

[@rexxthunder]

Many game studios don't make money on the sales of the game, they make money on building a game for a publisher. It's like a housing contractor, they just build the house, the owner sells it.

[@NigzBlackman]

It's almost like....we don't need a 300 million dollar game...we just need something fun XD

[@MiketheNerdRanger]

Sadly you're in the minority. No one wants a new PS2 game. Most people that play want an emersive, fun experience, and that cannot come cheap for the most part. I can only think of a few examples of AAA games that cost less than $100,000,000 that weren't jank as shit (Horizon Zero Dawn was one).

[@TheSense13]

@@MiketheNerdRanger Considering how well indie games have been doing these past few years, he is most definitely not in the minority.

[@Weremole]

@@MiketheNerdRanger just remove an A.

[@TheYaq]

Sad thing is paying in that game is fun rather than playing ..

[@TheMrfoxguy]

Industry: what is this fun 🤨🥴

[@mdshoreboy]

Games have always been an industry driven by greed. Once a new format or mechanic is found profitable it is repackaged with different stories and copied by others until it’s oversaturated and done to death. Every decade is defined by one big thing. Micro transactions are just another version of DLC that has been a staple in the industry since the 1990s. Also, we just lived through two long years of being stuck at home, so it’s no wonder these big companies made insane money in their online games. Not sure there needs to be a black and white take on this. These companies are big enough to invest in both their online games and self contained adjacent games as I’m not sure the audiences are even the same.

[@tree2992]

You got a lot of points right about the trend towards live service games, but that's definitely not the whole picture. There are definitely more games getting released now than ever, and many AAA developers still rely on box sales for money. Notably, EA Sports and the CoD franchise use both new releases and microtransactions, contrary to your point in the video about GTA. Also, the meteoric rise of indie games has transformed the bottom half of the industry and has pushed AAA devs towards a higher-end niche.

[@larion2336]

Yeah, this video does seem to just glaze over the existence of indie developers entirely somehow. All of the things mentioned as being negatives for big companies here are largely positives for the lone (or small team) developer. I think the key as a gamer is to focus your attention more on smaller titles and ignore big corporate trash. That is how I have naturally tuned my interests over the past decade and it has revealed to me some of the best games I ever played, and I don't think any of them were made by big companies.

[@aesir1ases64]

We have more games than ever but the average quality never was lower (at least not pre 90s), look at a sample of 100 games from today and compare to 2005 for example, you would be amazing how we could easily find 50 great games but today you would have a hard time finding half of it.

[@LOLxUnique]

@@aesir1ases64 do you have actual examples instead of relying on recency bias?

[@Elya_0_0_7]

COD said that next year we won't see a new cod lmao.

[@GOHST13ly]

As farm as AAA games are concerned, no. We have been getting less and less of those since the ps4 came out. PS3/360 era, you got 4 AAA games from Rockstar, 4 AAA from Naughty Dog, 3 mass effect games, 3 gears of war games, 4 Halo games, the list goes on. We are at a point where studios release 1-2 AAA game per console generation. i.e. 1-2 games every 8 years, a far cry from the ps3/360 era.

[@timbomb374]

It's crazy that games like where on the N64 could be made so dang easily now but nobody really does it. Honestly they can keep their hyper realism 1000+ hour games. Just give me a bunch of games with low poly graphics that are fun and I can actually have a hope of finishing in a reasonable amount of time.

[@ltee1233]

Okay you make a few good points. But they way you phrase certain things make it seem like your putting blame on the consumer when a game fails for not working. That’s not on the consumer. If a company can’t make a game that works on day one then that game deserves to fail. Regardless of the potential it has. That’s on the company not the consumer. Cp77 anthem fallout 76 etc where complete unplayable messes from day one and months afterwards. Games are not risky these days. They have always been a risk. But why would a big company take that risk when they already have a cash cow out there. I’ll use gta as an example,.. but my point is. As long * as your game works as advertised and is made with love and passion it will be well received. I’ll use stray as an example for that. Your reason for why developers don’t make games is overly complicated and you actually mentioned the reason at the start of the video. It’s micro transactions. No matter what argument you bring to the table it will always be micro transactions. Because why actively create something when you can passively generate money from a game your current developers didn’t even work on originally. Again I’ll use gta as an example

[@xanderlon3072]

I would add even more, that AAA companies are only interested in maintaining their game-services that suck off all money from players by microtransactions, bc it generates huge profit with not so much effort in creating new content. And the games that they are still releasing are just nothing more then a conveyor trash without any significant progress from game to game. In reality they getting even worse cause the workers stably kept in underpaid and overworking conditions without any freedom of creativity, so any talented and skilled developers are washed out from those companies to the indi-gamedev sector, and newbies with lack of exp or skill take their places. That's why all those brand new AAA games with hundread of millions in their budget suck so much on the release. But managers dont realy care about quality of their games cause they know that how much money game earns doesn't depend on its quality but mostly on marketing. Need to mention that to make nicely looking trailer is much cheaper and safer then an actual game. And who really cares about mount of zeros on metacritic if those stupid monkeys will again see a new cool looking trailer and buy same shit in the next year, playing in the microtransactioned mobile trash in between.

[@Kaimax61]

Because it is the truth, that consumers also makes the industry worst. Like one thing I always like to cite is Nintendo's first entry to mobile games. They made 2 different game models. One was Mario Run, the other was Fire Emblem Heroes. Mario Run was a Free to try game, with a $10 price tag for the full version. No microtransactions. Fire Emblem Heroes was a Free to play game, with Microtransactions. Guess which one got shunned and which one is now earning millions? Mario Run was shunned because people think it's too simple of a game for $10 while ironically, FEH which has it's gameplay simplified, is raking in millions with microtransactions. So Yes, General Consumers is also at fault for how successful Games of a Service can be.

[@CRT-5826]

Lmao you just looped this back to being the consumers fault. At the end of the day microtransactions aren’t profitable if people don’t buy them, but they do so companies continue to push it.

[@mirunapopescu]

Honestly, all the crap Sims 4 is displaying just made me go start playing the Sims 2 for the first time ever. No regrets. So....congrats to them. No more money from me, ever. And that wouldn't be a big loss, but I know I'm not the only one.

[@karhammer]

Just buy the game and pirate the expansions. that's what I do for incomplete pieces of shit games anyway. I'll pay for what I was supposed to be getting, plain and simple.

[@henryjohnson-ville3834]

@@karhammer But how do you properly pirate without getting an virus or malware?

[@karhammer]

@@henryjohnson-ville3834 Well, can't really explain it on a comment, at this point it's just plain intuition and to know what sites are usually safe or not to download stuff from. Been doing it for 12+ years now. If it looks sketchy it probably is, look at file size and compare it to what the original says, be sure to download that an nothing else. Those points would be my advice.

[@AhmadWahelsa]

@@henryjohnson-ville3834 arr slash piracy. Trust me, haven't virused for 15 years.

[@Lionel212001]

The few triple AAA games that I am excited for include Stalker 2, Maybe GTA 6, and Resident Evil VIII. A far cry from the days gone when every game would have little punk me visiting the nearest gaming cyber cafe.

[@KastaRules]

When mobile gaming entered the market everything started to escalate quickly. I mean, we were already headed towards the SERVICES direction but the mobile industry accelerated the process. And I am sure this applies to pretty much everything nowadays (BMW subscription model to have your seats heated pops to mind) Not just Video Games.

[@r.a.6459]

Apple pioneered this practice. They started with Macbooks and iPhones with everything soldered to motherboard (even batteries) with no way to repair or replace parts. They're now planning on selling iPhones on a subscription-only basis where you have to pay every month rather than just one-off payment. Literally every other stuff we buy is slowly turning into subscription services, even our food and clothes. World is becoming LaaS (Life as a Service) and soon even EaaS (Existence as a Service).

[@ercules711]

Love the video, the DJ Khaled reference at the end killed me, I used to play that song on repeat and did not expect to see it clipped here

[@WitchMedusa]

I think the issue with many companies is mindset. Games should be a medium to tell a story similar to a book or movie, instead they focus to much on research & development as they believe cutting edge technology is what the consumers want. We dont want cutting edge for the most part, we just want well built, give your software engineers time to finish the project well, don't market the game as near complete if it's not then be pressured to release an unfinished product. Why invest all that time & money just to push it put 10% sooner then end up with a flop & bad publicity, just put in the extra time to make sure the game is good. Also optimize your stuff, you don't need 100 GB games, all of Oblivion was about 4-5 GB, all that content, quests, heck even the hours of voice recordings were all able to to fit in such a small package. This is why goal oriented task are better for development workplaces, lots of people think more code is better when it's the complete opposite. I want the least amount of code possible without making it ugly so that another programmer can just look at it & understand what its suppose to do without notes, the goal isn't to fit it on a boot sector lol. But making an efficient program is hard, it takes time & mental energy because there are SO many ways to accomplish the same task when dealing with more abstract goals. Okay it's not hard, but it's more work yet despite its immense value, adding features & content is always at the front of the list even though optimizing the existing game can provide fat more value to many players with less powerful hardware & broaden your target customers.

[@lesterjones2397]

Seems like you’re of the gospel of clean code😅 - 100% agree

[@user-xo5zu1lw2w]

>Games should be a medium to tell a story similar to a book or movie no

[@xx-wp3mq]

I sort of understand from a business standpoint, the way you're talking is very unwitting and not indicative of how any business operates. The key thing you're missing is these companies are funded by VCs. If you put a lump sum into a product and were told for literally years "it'll be done when it's done", then surely that would raise red flags, right? And with the optimisation point, when is literally enough? I work in the industry and know first-hand that when you're given deadlines (assuming you can maintain a decent framerate + file size), there's often not enough time to be doing trivial optimisation and testing on decade-old hardware - EVEN then you talk as if it's rare but it's really not. Off the top of my head franchises such as AC,and FIFA has had vastly different versions released and supported for older generations (heck it took over two years for next-gen FIFA to come to PC, as they wanted the hardware to keep up). Even if you've somehow got dream aritecture the technical debt increases catering for varieties in devices. Every quarter that's missed brings a LOT of tense meetings and necks are on the line, there's a massive risk - for even medium size companies - going bankrupt after losing funding, so whilst the "best practices" and niceties come after, putting a date on the game is the best way to ensure you're still able to pay staff.

[@theucheao]

Facts. Simple. Muhfuckas talking about how you’re points aren’t related to business… I don’t *give a fuck…* As you said, what’s the point in all that business, money-mumbo-jumbo if it’s inevitably going to result in a poorly made, poorly optimized game. Games have been poisoned by this notion of “good graphics=good game”… *no…* Good games=good games. Graphics are just the cherry on top. Innovation. Creativity. Passion. Artistry. Storytelling. Rewarding, intelligent and meaningful gameplay. *That* is what all games should strive to be. Games should be an experience, whether fun or emotional- or both. Not a business dilemma. If there isn’t a way to create good video games without pandering to capitalism, *find a fucking way.* Or say goodbye to video games as a powerful medium. Is that what people want? For video games to die off and just be a soulless greedy husk of what it used to be? Forget all that came before it turned into a twisted capital addiction? We are humans. We must evolve. *For the better.* We need to be better and strive towards creating a better future. Stop allowing money to be the sole factor of gaming and instead bring it back to what it used to be. Fun. Enjoyment. A celebration of life; humanity; friendship; family. *Not addiction… and money…*

[@vincentthendean7713]

14:03 Unfortunately? It just sounds like we're going back to the PS2 era where mid size games are made to be sold through their innovation rather than brand name.

[@r.a.6459]

There's a lot of good games for PS2 FFX-XII Kingdom Hearts GT3, 4 Metal Slug Metal Gear Solid 2, 3 Gradius V (a.k.a the hardest shooter ever existed) Raiden III Giga Wing Generations (where 18 digit scores are common) and a lot more... enough to keep you occupied for life, pandemic or not.

[@trentonhamilton645]

Back then, Quality Content was essential to advertise when making Video Games, companies had more variety when getting talented developers on board providing aesthetic and substance to master their craft, but with the change of both management and monetary value, it doesn't have personal touches like they normally used to. 😔

[@householdhacks]

here is the main problem nobody seems to be brings up. the insane production costs are mainly due to the top 10 highest payed people in the company earn over 80 percent of the entire company's payroll. add in the public stock market trading and the company having to turn a profit every single quarter that is unsustainable. then the problem of nepotism where people who are not gamers making the final decisions on feature that gamers might want. when a indie developer can make a playable and enjoyable game with a few grand and less than 10 people succeeds and battlefield 2042 when released would often crash on launch fails. it's everyone in the company that doesn't actually program the game that's the problem.

[@karl0ssus1]

This is kinda misrepresenting a lot. AAA releases of big IP are slowing down significantly, but many of the studios mentioned, R* CDPR, Bethesda, Bungie/343 industries have actually been releasing pretty consistently throughout the last 10 years. AAA games take 3-5 years to make these days, and those studios have multiple IPs and tend to only have a single major project on the go at any one time. R* put aside GTA for a bit and made RDR 1 & 2, now GTA 6 is in development, Bethesda have largely shifted to publishing, but still made fallout 4 and are working on project starfield, Bungie made a couple of Halos and destiny's, then decided they didn't want to make games any more and torpedoed their reputation with anthem, CDPR made the Witcher 3 and Cyberpunk, and are already working on their next project. Developers didn't stop developing games in the 2010s just because GTA V and Skyrim proved single titles could have very long shelf lives, they just diversified and slowed down releases of IP popular enough to sustain that kind of longevity. What we saw instead was a handful of significant developers bench their best IP and bring out new stuff. And really, we're utterly glossing over the mainstay periodic releases here, CoD, Battlefield, Fifa, Ubisoft jiminy cockthroat, have all had pretty frequent releases in the last little bit. Those guys saw no need whatsoever to stop releasing the annual update, they just shoehorned in some extra mtx and kept going.

[@prodantech]

I have a copy of the original Halo that all lives in a single executable. I can play it on my PC without installing it. It works so well and is such a blast to play.

[@OhNoNotAgain42]

I wrote a complete plot to “Half Life 3” in my head while taking a one hour walk every day since Covid began

[@dmitriyobidin6049]

4:06 That is not true in a slightest. Cyberpunk was released in 2020 and only on pre-orders they made around 8 million sales. Considering the initial price of $60, it would add up to almost $500 million gross, even before sales started.

[@thestudentofdhandho5302]

Loved watching you cover some gaming content. I’d definitely watch more like this. Thanks for the hard work!

[@paulbennett6914]

All the examples you provided of triple A games flopping weren't due to them launching with a bunch of features that didnt work, they flopped because they were rushed out the door once they reached a minimum viable product. I would argue the success of games like Elden Ring prove there is a profitable market for artistically driven and well crafted games, but these companies are satisfied with profitable, they want all of our money and they want it all the time.

[@dietibol]

the 1500 dollar per year for epic games is for non-game project that want in depth support and help from the Epic staff, if you just wanna make a game and ship it, it's just the 5% royalties you pay.

[@nielsbishere]

it's also a "seat" which is not always per dev afaik. At least our software doesn't require that iirc

[@platomanchi]

Its 5% after 1million the game makes. If your game makes 1 million 100 dollars in a year, you pay 5% of the 100 dollars, so 5 dollars to epic. This makes unreal engine practically free for small developers who make small games whos revenue never cross 1 million

[@SeanDezoysa]

@@platomanchi Any idea why they do that? Positive PR I guess?

[@platomanchi]

@@SeanDezoysa Unreal engine is a AAA engine, likes of CDPR is shifting to unreal engine. So they are making good enough money. It might just be a move to encourage people to use unreal for any 3D projects. I like to think the same way gabe is lord and savior of PCMR, Tim Swenney (CEO of Epic) is trying to be the lord and savior of game dev. I like to believe that he wants to empower indie devs and it is shown in how epic pays creators to make their assets free and also awarding mega grants to projects not just game projects but also to blender and godot engine. Many will disagree but I think that is what he is trying to do.

[@GamerEddy1]

@@SeanDezoysa also trying to become the premium app store.

[@kylespevak6781]

I don't really the freemium model or microtransactions, but devs doing things like running stores and allowing people to license their engine is GREAT for the community

[@svandesder25]

This is why I only play single player offline games, no matter how old they are. Safe from being milked by the company, and saves me the headache of keeping up with the latest titles. Plus, I got tons of games to go through and have the chance to really enjoy each game.

[@r.a.6459]

Plus every modern AAA titles have spyware in it. They can sense if you don't take the COVID-19 💉 the gameplay suddenly becomes too difficult, or they can detect your fingerprint on your mouse or keyboard and sending that data to other parties. I also heard that game developers start to use DNA fingerprinting to register for a game.

[@DouglasHollingsworth1]

14:00 - "big budget games are going to become less and less common" THANK GOD. I'm so exhausted from all these AAA+ studios and their publishers pushing mediocre "product" just because they have to hit some earnings forecasts. Getting the investor class out of the gaming industry as much as possible is the only way to move forward with new good games made by folks who actually care about trying new systems, new mechanics, new stories and new settings. Pressure from investors + capital ultimately corrupts and stunts artists from doing great, profitable work .... because they're always being pushed to maximize profit in as short a time frame as possible vs making great products that happen to be profitable as a byproduct of being GOOD WORK. I've been primarily buying indie games for almost 2y now bc the majority of the work product being pushed through Big Game these days is clearly rushed and lacking any soul/passion.

[@personnesenki4521]

It's funny hearing the same people complain that GTA6 hasn't been released yet, or that there is no single player DLC for GTA5 or RDR2, but they still keep paying to play GTA online.

[@PeopleWatchingMarcus]

another excellent video. I start thinking I can predict the video and by the end you always blow my mind and teach me 10+ things

[@mordsythe]

So you weren’t going to mention the fact that all of the games you used in your examples are unfinished pieces of shit?

[@garrettgreen242]

Excellent content as usual! Thanks for fixing the volume level of the background music, it is much better now that we can hear you talk 😀

[@rudeboy6627]

Call of duty: “hold my beer”…

[@midnightshadowz12]

I'm still playing ps2 ;). The library of games is so huge I have what to play for my entire life ;)

[@SkiiYacht]

Making video games was all about a passion for being able to control your imagination in real life. Making money was the least of your problems because you know if you made something with passion and love, the money would follow.

[@theucheao]

Exactly.

[@Bobywan75]

It's even worse because big companies are buying out small companies preventing them from making games as well.

[@ev.c6]

That’s a very interesting take on this! It indeed makes sense that as things become more complex, the maintenance cost skyrockets. CD Projekt learned that lesson the hard way. So I guess the current business model will be a thing until some innovation comes along that allows companies to profit without having to assume these huge projects.

[@neen4456]

Another big problem with 'competing with old games' is that often the entire original team that made a franchise is gone and the approach is not "design and create a new, amazing thing", it's "bring back halo" when the team doesn't even seem to prioritize understanding why halo was good or how it was made good. There's a handful of franchise reboots where the studio brags "we got people to write this who HATE this franchise" as if it's a guarantee of innovation when it in fact means you end up with something only related to an original, beloved product by name. Halo: Infinite did not 'need' 100 voice actors. Voice actors are incredibly important, of course, but it doesn't take 100 voice actors to successfully make something like Halo. These days, when a game goes over a certain budget, it just feels like an indicator that the main character's skin is going to have realistically rendered pores, that the game will cost 70 dollars, and that there's going to be an option to buy $15 worth of some extra currency or "great value" skin pack the second you start playing. In general, blockbuster game titles have not innovated on the behalf of the consumer in a decade.

[@Arindam_Gaming]

Gaming Industry Problem = Greed & the pitfalls of Capitalism, how much is enough etc. Thankfully, there's still gamers like me who would love a creatively made Indie game like Subnautica. On my Rig (RTX 3060Ti), I am playing Avernum 3 now (which requires a Pentium 2 400MHz) & I feel great how immersive it is.

[@luxushauseragency]

One of your best. Well done.

[@waifubreaks1572]

And on today's episode of "Why retro gaming is on the rise"

[@stapleman007]

Games that were fun when they were released will always be fun to a new player. Even if the game is 30 years old.

[@ChocolateMilkCultLeader]

Another phenomenal video. You put out gem after gem

[@MovieMan119]

Cyberpunk 2077 was actually a financial hit. It sold 18 million copies in 2020 and 2021 alone. I think you were only thinking of the 2020 sales which would equate to about 250 million like you said. Just a minor error

[@damedesuka77]

You just gotta dig deeper. Move away from the AAA game studios and try games made by smaller developers. Yes, those games might not be graphically hyper realistic or carry a big name franchise, but usually they're not burdened with over-hyped marketing, sky-high expectation. Ditch the big name franchises if they've stopped being interesting, support smaller game developers with unique ideas.

[@ThePindar]

Did you ever think that most people find those games boring? The majority of indie games are 2d and most people don't like it because the mechanics are limited

[@damedesuka77]

@@ThePindar Not really. Have you looked at what Larian and Owlcat done in recent years? They're filling the Western CRPG niche that big players like Bioware and Bethesda have abandoned. Even text-heavy games can be fun if people could just stop being fixated to 3D realistic graphics that obviously cost millions of dollars to make. If you can't enjoy a video game if it doesn't have an AAA game studio's game slapped on it, with realistic graphics DLSS, raytracing, 60 FPS and so on and so forth, then that's too bad.

[@ThePindar]

@@damedesuka77 if people don't like they don't like it

[@MrDezokokotar]

@@damedesuka77 Pathfinder WOTR is a great RPG. BUT - it would be much better if it looked like The Witcher 3. I can still enjoy it, but it doesnt reach its full potential. I had the same problem with Baldurs Gate back in the day. It has a vastly better story than lets say Elder Scrolls games, but the latter were still very enticing because of their realistic look and immersion. Ideally a game should have both. Thats why the Witcher 3 is one of the best single player RPG's ever made. It combines both better than any other game. A massive budget allows for the possiblity of the game looking and feeling epic, even though its not a guarantee. With a small budget, the worldbuilding may be good but seeing the environments in realistic detail would make it feel much more epic. The writing may be good but seeing detailed faces and expressions of the characters would enhance your connection to them greatly. A game doesnt HAVE to have amazing visuals, but its always better if it does - and specifically for story and character driven games its pretty important.

[@damedesuka77]

@@MrDezokokotar "Ideally". That's the keyword there. In a perfect world a video game would have great graphics, great writing and also great gameplay. But realistically, how many years and how much money would it take to make that kind of game? Baldur's Gate 3 is trying to do that and that game's been stuck in beta for over 2 years after it's first release. I applaud Larian's determination and patience to create a game like that, but not all video game can be made that way. Definitely not if there are investors closely hovering over the developers and want to make some money.

[@wavydane]

well if they made quality products eventually the sales will catch up, so its up to them, they chose to not make good games

[@kunstderfugue]

they chose to focus their efforts on ways to make us spend more money instead of better gameplay, all the AAA companies

[@heychrisfox]

@@kunstderfugue One problem that comes with that though is that people DO spend the money. Even trashy games like Diablo Immortal is making record profits for Blizzard, even though the game is vilified by the entire gaming community. Customers can be so mindless and pay oodles of money for games they don't even like.

[@somethinglikethat2176]

@@heychrisfox absolutely. We (the consumers) are the ones who taught them that these shitty practices are ok.

[@kunstderfugue]

​@@heychrisfox I absolutely agree. We need to get together and help each other become aware of the issues with these companies and collectively decide to stop supporting them. That I think starts at home, in the inner circle of friends and family. The thing is we can complain as much as we want but if we give them our money anyway, we are rewarding them for their behaviour, not discouraging it.

[@wavydane]

@@kunstderfugue wont happen, brainrot is too far, ppl will keep buying no matter what

[@AmazingOwnage]

I am a bigger fan of indie games than AAA games lately, so that’s cool with me. I just hate the idea that now that large video game companies are buying the smaller ones and possibly affecting their creative process that made their indie games so special and enjoyable in the first place.

[@twitchayedits9764]

Why do you do the analysis if there are reliable Cross Staking platforms such as Cross Staking?

[@gy407]

I really like your videos. But you should really think changing the music in the background; it's annoying and loud. Other than that, great content 👌

[@kumosi9437]

RDR2 literally raised the bar so high for me that the other games I like to play seem just not enough and boring.

[@Rackstack234]

Try tlou2

[@giggleanthropisticon7061]

Did you get an editor? Because the improvement shows

[@asliceofloaf1984]

There was a saying around early 2016ish that is even more true today: "Companies used to make games, now they make money"

[@Articulate99]

Always interesting, thank you.

[@クローマーアックスエリク]

One reason are the gamers itself. It can be overwhelming to adapt to new games with all the different mechanics. People are looking for their digital place to be.

[@StormRaid417]

Growing up as a kid in the early 2000's I would always get excited about new games every year but when the next gen Xbox one in early 2010's came out games never were the same and always felt rushed. Assassin's creed Black Flag is probably the last best game I have ever played and almost everything after that felt boring. Stories felt short and multiplayer felt empty. All multiplayer is now a few missions here and there and some side objectives. I remember when you could play every aspect of story campaign games with your friends, and it was an amazing experience to share. Also, DLC's need to be free and in game purchases need to disappear. Fortnite is the worst about this and there really isn't a way to earn the characters you have to pay for and yes you are having to pay and then grind to unlock the characters you paid for in battle pass.

[@UcheOgbiti]

One way AAA games can jusity their relevance apart from features and graphics is story. Last of Us 1 & 2 had minor feature differences but people play them mostly because of their love for the story. This is specifically for story driven games.

[@BowlOfHotDogs]

Love the little skit at the end with the plain bagle shout out

[@theodoresmith3353]

“its impossible to make a game that makes money from all of these gamers at once” Actually, that’s called a sandbox.

[@Koopagamelouda]

I'm really happy you put Sonic Adventure on the thumbnail.

[@redcrown5070]

Maybe if they started being more ambitious with the project they could see more revenues from selling the game. And I'm not talking about making huge ass graphics that no RTX can handle no. I'm talking about creating new, innovative gameplay and storytelling. Just look at Spec Ops the line, that game shooting was terrible, but the story and how it was told made the difference. Companies don't need to be more creative, they just need the guts to let the developers do their job and let them free of making games instead of imposing them to do microtransactions.

[@heychrisfox]

A big problem is that AAA games reject innovation, generally. Sure there are some ambitious titles here and there. But dumping hundreds of millions into a game that could fail is a risky proposition, especially when they know full well if they release the same game, with the same mechanics, people will buy it like crazy. Because the customers ALSO dislike change, and dislike ambition. You see the same thing in the film industry; they COULD make a super ambitious, wild movie that blows everyone's minds. Or they could just make another Marvel film and make more money than they thought possible because everyone mindlessly wants to watch boring superhero films that have very little originality.

[@somethinglikethat2176]

I don't think they can. With the large teams the big developers have, the overheads and shareholder pressure they need to make games with broad appeal to work. There is also the individuals making the decisions, if Call of Battlefield: Origins underperforms they can blame a shift in the market, the economy, whatever. But if they make something like Subnautica or Stray and it doesn't work, that's their job gone. Game optimisation takes time, time costs money. A game released in a poor state starts to make money back while work is taken to fix it. Is this a good thing? Fk no, but until people get upset enough for it to impact the bottom line the publishers wouldn't care.

[@redcrown5070]

@@heychrisfox there's always been a thin line between the customer complaining because they changed the game too much and the customer complaining because the game didn't changed at all indeed. But even so, companies should know that a good innovative game can create not only a good serie, but also a new trend, just like the souls like. Innovation is necessary for their survival and yet they despise it, their short-sightness makes me sick.

[@redcrown5070]

@@somethinglikethat2176 I'd blame the hype and the preorder culture, companies nowadays just need a flashy looking trailer and some good words (16 times the detail!) for the customers to make them buy a product in a ever-beta state . A part of the issue is us, as always, the customers.

[@songshuntan9122]

put those foolish ambitions to rest

[@7F0X7]

Everyone who bought shark cards are the actual reason we still don't have a GTA6. It's not Rockstar's fault or the investor's fault. It's predominately the fault of people who pay for microtransactions.

[@00HoODBoy]

not hmw´s best work to say the least

[@ThinkscapeVideo]

Hey mate, please make sure to bring down the bg music next time, and consider normalising volume on the clips (some of the interviews et al are too quiet)

[@mouseii88]

I didn't do the research but I do feel that AAA games publishers that implement microtransaction tend to not develop new games to replace the current one, except FIFA and 2K I guess. It is true the risk of a new AAA game is way too high, but releasing no games are mostly due to secondary revenue overtaking the sales of games, be it DLC or services. What makes games considered AAA are pretty subjective too. Animal Crossing, Pokemon, DQ, CK3, Civ probably fit the definition of triple A, but they don't necessarily appeal to most gamers, or perceives as triple A, or appeal to the general public like CoD. Maybe we could include that into the data set to get a better idea.

[@britishguy54dx]

All the games you listed are AAA games, it’s just where the general public is from. DQ is huge in Japan, while CoD is huge in the West.

[@jeremyquentin42]

The interview at 6:13 is a bit weird, as it kinda says the opposite of what the voice was saying the second before.

[@moneytalks7142]

DLC rakes in the cash. It’s frustrating. I liked the old way 😞

[@vladyslavkorenyak872]

I really like when DLCs are good. Also, todays games are simply too complex to be good on first release, they need the continuity to fix all the bugs and make the game the greatest version of itself.

[@moneytalks7142]

@@vladyslavkorenyak872 yea that’s a fair point. Hard to pump out games this good so quickly

[@stapleman007]

Why release a new game in a series, when you can just add onto the current game? NES cartridges VS Internet computers.

[@jonathanfletcher9757]

Game companies stop making new games Call of duty: hold my beer 🍺

[@Halcon_Sierreno]

So basically the opposite problem of what happened in the 80's. When will companies learn? Video games are art and art is only good when passion and talent are poured into them. There's definitely going to be another video game market crash happening soon.

[@theucheao]

Let’s hope so. All of this bullshit needs to burn so passion can rise up again. And stay…

[@aronseptianto8142]

and ngl, i don't think that's a problem there is enough back catalog of not even old games, just games from the past 5 years and there will be hundreds more indie hidden gem for years to come so much so that it'll cover any niche or itch i might have

[@aronseptianto8142]

as an added bonus, i can actually finish a whole game before I'm bored of it

[@Thatoneguykid]

The problem starts with us, the consumers.

[@stapleman007]

Yes, our corporate overlords demand we play less GTA 47 and put in more time in the factory.

[@NekoBoyOfficial]

Outside of nostalgia, more people are playing older games to escape microtransactions and buggy games. Why pay $70 for a sub-par experience?

[@milesdunstan-daams4855]

nintendo barely ever makes buggy messes the companies just need to be ok whith delaying projects that is normally the problem

[@MasterofPokemonGing]

this aged like milk

[@milesdunstan-daams4855]

@@MasterofPokemonGing if your talking about the new Pokémon game that's made by game freak.

[@EarlHare]

Corporate consolidation is playing a large part in this problem. Big publishers have bought out and stripped so many smaller game studios of their talent and then given them projects which do not compete with their AAA offerings. This has resulted in an industry that just churns out cookie cutter games with little to no originality or innovation and just funnels the majority of the players out there back into the same persistently online rigged matchmaking skinner-box hellscapes they have been stuck in for over a decade. How many times have you quit league of legends, fortnite and FIFA (to name a few examples) only to then try and find a new game to binge on in the same fashion, only to realise that those same titles are STILL all that's really competing at that level, everything else is an indie game.

[@mr_m4613]

So basically in a nutshell, gaming companies are scared to take risks and spend the money to innovate and bring in more people.

[@NicEeEe843]

No they’re not scared as much as they are comfy with the cash they’re raking in already. For them it’s like why change something if it’s not broke