BioWare: Developing Triple-A Titles Is Pointless

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
well if mass effect 2 isn't considered a triple A title i would want to see what a real triple A title is like for them!
 
Yes, but remember when games weren't as complex with Hollywood B-rated scripts, text vs voice acting, and graphical immersion came from all nighters laden in Mountain Dew?

It's somewhat regrettable to admit, but what he says is true. If we want to see AAA titles, by today's standards, only the largest game studios have the capability to make it happen. Sure, there's talent everywhere, but this is a matter of quantity vs. quality. AAA game development takes years, something that would put smaller studios under.

There's still a myriad of lesser titles out there that are still fun to play. They're just not up to par with the AAA standard. I've played a lot of great games from smaller studios and they're still fun. They may not have all the bells and whistles of the AAA titles, but they're also cheaper. A few that come to mind recently include: Braid, Ceville, Machinarium, Mount and Blade, Torchlight, and Trine.
 
[citation][nom]maigo[/nom]Remember when they would just make a game and release it when it was ready?[/citation]

Oh how i miss those day's.. i could go to the game store every week and see something new!
 
[citation][nom]nukemaster[/nom]I miss those days. Now we get to buy games to finance the patches to make them work right[/citation]

you mean finance the $15 "DLC" or $30 "expansion pack"
 
I think titles like Tropico 3, Ruse, etc are what keep me gaming. Not entirley AAA titles, but big enough to have a good balance between Community and Developer Support.
 
Before the internet took over, there wasn't really a decent way to get patches to people so the quality control had to be higher.

These days we have things like OnLive where you don't even get the game itself.

I do miss games like Full Throttle...but I'll trade that in for the Matrix when we finally develop that.
 
What he meant to say is:
"There is enough money to go around for all of us (companies). Lets make more budget games and not compete, the gamers buy our sh*t anyway."
 
Some of the best games I have ever played are games that hardly anyone heard of. Remember when game-play was the main focus on a game as it should always be? It doesn't take much of a budget at all to achieve making a fun game with good game-play heck even some flash games have achieved this and in some cases they are made from a single individual.

As long as the game is fun to play gamers will buy it. Not every game has to be the most graphical thing ever. Not every game has to have voice dialogue and especially does not require a celebrity to put their voice into it. As long as the music within the game matches the atmosphere and sounds good it does not require a giant professional orchestra or the music of real life big name performers.

Last but not least escape try to stay independent and not be bought out by a publisher. This has turned into hell for so many developers.
Sure the publishers big money sack they offer to the founders of the dev team is tempting and sure they have more money to fiance your games but the only devs that ever get bought out are the ones who met success already and if they did it before with even less money they could certainly do it again with the profits they made previously. Publishers also never push to be innovative instead they push to imitate.

With the age of the digital distribution and less and less physical copies being sold publishers are no longer needed to make mass copies of the games and ship them around the globe. So what exactly makes them a publisher once this is no longer needed nor practiced anymore?
What I would like to see is games being made by independent developers
and the games being disturbed by Xbox Live, PSN, Steam and such.

If that was how games were delivered to the gamers then the developers would keep a much higher % of profits. Microsoft and the others couldn't go and try to screw them because failure of the developers means failure to them as well. They require these developers to make the games otherwise their console fails or in Valve's case with steam the program fails. In fact the PC would be the easiest way to achieve this as nothing stops anyone from developing for the PC and there is no cost to release it for the windows OS. Dev's could even create thier own method of distribution and not have to use steam or similar
services. Or perhaps even a PC dev co-op project for a nonprofit digital distribution program. Meaning a small amount of sales goes to the program and not a specific company.
 
I'd say they're Kotor series was Triple A for me, the story was enthralling, and listening to what people had to say, and learning the "history" kept me in game.

Needless to say... What the hell is Revan DOING?! I WANT TO KNOW! T_T
 
damn bureaucrat, they make everything complicated, even the assembly based, software rendering days of old seem like child's play compared to all this complicated mess...
 
[citation][nom]LATTEH[/nom]well if mass effect 2 isn't considered a triple A title i would want to see what a real triple A title is like for them![/citation]

That's exactly what I was thinking. That and Dragon Age.
 
Master of Magic, the one game with smart AI not "SMART" AI like devs make today, it could win without cheating, extra knowledge etc. most games have glorified aimbots or a simple build que component to start up a base.
 
Mass Effect 2 is still fresh in my mind, that is better then any triple A title I have played in a long time.

I am still not sure what happened in modern warfare 2, well besides nukes, Russians, nukes, lots of people dying, Russians, killing civilians, Russians. End game....... It is like watching Die Hard 4, Transformers, and twilight all at the same time.
 
Ironic coming from the company wasting their time and money developing the riskiest game investment possible: an MMO, rather than making a proper sequel to the KOTOR franchise.

I've always been a fan of Bioware games, no matter how you'd classify their titles. It's hard to argue their RPGs being anything less than triple-A. They make the best story-based RPGs along with Obsidian.
 
the problem is, with so much money involved, developers aren't taking any risks. all the originality lies with smaller developers, while the 'triple-a' developers are releasing cod/wow clones that quite honestly don't make the cut...

the trend has been to take old generic gameplay, add voice acting and some really good artwork (which has been the only aspect that has improved over recent years)... the result is a generic boring game that isn't worth the amount of money they put into it...

if they only put the same amount of time and money into innovative gameplay as they do into marketing and the bullsh*t b-movie voice acting skit, they might actually make some sales... this 'me too' business model has turned videogames from something entertaining into nothing but business... most modern 'triple a' developers only care about making their money back, and making games that they would want to play is not on the agenda...

so ya, i'd rather they didn't attempt to make a triple-a title at all than clone another game i've already played and put a $60 price tag on it...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom