News Gaming industry insiders say cutting-edge graphics cost too much to make for AAA games

[thestryker]

I'm pretty sure nobody is working on just TAA, any more.

I've definitely seen several instances of reviewers saying to turn on upscaling even if you're doing no scaling because it will replace TAA (or just use DLAA when available). I don't think anyone aside from Epic has done anything with TAA really, but even that seems to only be improved when using all of the pertinent UE5 tech together.

 

[thestryker]

The idea that AAA's can't afford to continue pushing graphics isn't much of a concern because graphics have been good enough for the past decade or so.

I see a lot of people pushing this narrative and it's really just not true at all. CP2077 is one of the best looking games of all time, but even that has texture resolution issues (can be noticed in 1080p not just higher res). RT in general right now has noise issues which vary depending on implementation and how good the denoiser is.

The difference between Horizon Zero Dawn (2017) and Remaster (2024) is stark even on PC where HZD looked best in the first place. Consider The Last of Us (2013) compared to any number of the remasters let alone the 2022 (2023 PC) remake. These are significantly improved by better graphics, but they're also good games (whether they appeal to an individual or not) in the first place.

Improved graphics is something most people absolutely will notice, but not when it comes at the cost of gameplay and/or performance. The latter seems to be something Sony discovered when doing their metrics when designing the PS5 Pro. They cited 75% of PS5 users were using performance modes on games so one of their goals was making those look better. Seeing as the PS5 Pro appears to be selling as they expected that would imply graphics do still matter so long as nothing more important is lost.

 

[The Historical Fidelity]

I'm pretty sure nobody is working on just TAA, any more. The industry's solution is to use a neural pass, like DLSS. I think TAA has enough tricky corner cases that fusing it with other techniques, via a model that's optimized to pick the best strategy in each situation, is the way they decided to go.

Well that’s a problem all on its own. Games developed that require “deep learning” or “neural networks” to fix graphic deficiencies….I run modern games at native resolution with anti-aliasing turned off if there are no temporal AA alternatives. None of the new crutches like DLSS, frame gen, etc. are good for this industry in my opinion.

 

[Math Geek]

i don't personally care how far they push it. so long as i can opt out

i hate having to download a 150gb game when i know 120gb of that is 4k related stuff. let me have the game and the 1080p parts so i can download it in less than a day!!

they can make 1 tb 8k games for all i care so long as i don't have to download it.

 

[likeacactus]

Well... All my games are 3 years or older, and I don't need super high end graphics and won't play anything that needs a $2000 GPU to run 4k 60 fps.

 

[tristanx]

Games needs to be a game, not movie focused. Gameplay is much more important than just graphics. As long as graphics are decent and gameplay is good. It will sell. Don't need too much expensive photo realistic cutscenes.

Gameplay these days are stagnant. People running out of ideas.

 

[Math Geek]

not sure they running out of ideas so much as they are not spending any time on the idea. but rather they spend their time on (as this article is about) making it look pretty, or making sure they can nickle and dime for as much cash as possible.

the few games that come out that focus on the gameplay and story line do very well for the most part. if it happens to look pretty as well, then bonus.

 

[bit_user]

Well that’s a problem all on its own. Games developed that require “deep learning” or “neural networks” to fix graphic deficiencies….I run modern games at native resolution with anti-aliasing turned off if there are no temporal AA alternatives. None of the new crutches like DLSS, frame gen, etc. are good for this industry in my opinion.

I'd suggest trying it and then just use what you think looks best. Don't get caught up in the dogma. You can call DLSS a hack, but then TAA is really also a hack, and... well, 3D graphics is pretty much full of hacks.

 

[rluker5]

Wouldn't the problem of the expense of coming up with bespoke cutting edge graphics for games lead to more widespread use of cookie cutter solutions like UE5?

There might be a bunch of games coming out that look like they are all big quest mods of some earlier game. Which would lead to an emphasis on differentiation by gameplay and story and could be weird but not bad if the atmosphere they created was convincing and the story was interesting. Endereal felt like a completely different game than the Skyrim it was based on and CP2077 is quite different than W3.

I wouldn't mind it if developers relied more on ready made game engines and stock assets if they delivered the goods on the other entertainment aspects.

A lot of the complaining might also have something to do with people just getting jaded since they have seen so much already. That is a lot tougher for game devs to deal with imo. Sometimes those awesome memories may also be built up to be more than the experiences they actually were. For example last year I got my daughter playing Wolfenstein: The New Order. When I played it the first time that early part where Blazkowicz gets up in the hospital, Machine Games had my heart on a string, I was so hyped to take down the enemy, and that carried me through the game. Several years later playing the same game again, it just seemed underwhelming. It may just have been the right game at the right time for me. It is tough for a game to be as awesome as some inflated memory of mine if it is in any way different. Sometimes too many expectations lead to too many disappointments. I enjoy games more if I don't listen to the complaints too much.

 

[Schattenjaeger]

I've gotten to the point of being very budget conscious with my gaming. Paired with the fact that it's become harder than ever to find AAA games that I actually want to play, I have no desire to shell out $60+ for a new and very unproven game. So a lot of my gaming these days is Indie, Older, or new A/AA games instead, which generally start at $40 or less to begin with. If I buy a AAA title, it's only at a fairly steep discount (which usually means that it becomes 'older' first, anyway).

 

[txfeinbergs]

I throw my money at games that have great graphics, sound, and story. I have no interest in pixel games or even most indies (with a few exceptions). I grew up in the time of arcades and had my fill of low rez games eating my quarters. The so called Game of the Year (Metaphor Refantazio) is not even remotely appealing to me due to this and I love RPGs. I would rather play a buggy game such as Stalker 2 that makes use of my hardware.

 

[txfeinbergs]

I don't think 4K needs to be part of the equation necessarily. If I put on HD (720p) film/TV or even a DVD (~480p typical), I'm not guessing if it was filmed with real people or not. Put on a modern "photorealistic" game at 4K such as the new Indiana Jones one or others mentioned, and you can tell it's virtual. Graphics seems to have entered an uncanny valley. It will take an enormous amount of resources on both the hardware and software side to get out of the valley, and raytracing isn't a magic bullet but only part of a comprehensive solution.

Meanwhile, pushing the graphics boundary does nothing for gameplay, and the industry is oversaturated with games that nobody wants to play or pay for.

I don't think the entry-level cost of getting into gaming (1080p) is such a big deal. It would be great if GPU and other hardware prices improved, but even the post-Cezanne APUs alone (e.g. 8700G or 6800H in a mini PC) have credible performance. You can find ways to get under the $700 mark, such as a refurb office PC + low profile GPU combo. You can pick up a discounted Steam Deck for <$400 and play at 720p. Any general purpose PC is useful and there are folks who are going to be using it all day every day.

But the games? Is anyone here paying hundreds of dollars a year for AAA titles? There is a massive amount of F2P, giveaways, and discounts, before you even consider the effects of piracy and emulation. 90% of the gaming industry could collapse overnight, and we would still be good... FOREVER.

As my one and only hobby, I probably spend closer to $500 on AAA games each year. I also spend a ridiculous amount on HW which is why I want that HW worked over hard!

 

[watzupken]

This is a bubble waiting to explode sooner than later. 2024 is a good example of AAA games that prioritize graphics over storyline and game play. The irony is that the better graphics can only be enjoyed by 5% of gamers as it requires top end hardware. So in the end, 95% of us gets crap graphics, performance, story line and game play. So what is the point of buying these? In fact, indie titles are flourishing because of the bad AAA games. I’ve not bought a single AAA title since 2023.

 

[The Historical Fidelity]

I'd suggest trying it and then just use what you think looks best. Don't get caught up in the dogma. You can call DLSS a hack, but then TAA is really also a hack, and... well, 3D graphics is pretty much full of hacks.

I definitely don’t care about “dogma”, and I never called DLSS and TAA hacks….i called them crutches. Big difference, one is a solution, the other is a tool that allows incomplete unoptimized graphics design because they know DLSS and TAA will cover up the “rough edges”. The example that comes to mind is hair in Alan Wake 2, it glitches and strobes constantly when TAA is forced off.

IDK if you have seen any of Threat Interactive’s video explanations, so I’ll post them below. Very good info and testing within:

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lJu_DgCHfx4

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Te9xUNuR-U0

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=M00DGjAP-mU

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=07UFu-OX1yI

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6Ov9GhEV3eE

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UHBBzHSnpwA

 

[halfcharlie]

Avatar isn't the best example, beautiful game yes, but having completed it I saw there isn't a huge amount of in-game assets, same few repeated bases and enemies and models etc. In terms of assets the scope is actually fairly small, maybe 1/3 of something like AC Origins. It's not just quality but also quantity, people don't realise how many tens of thousands of objects need to be made for a big game and all consistent with eachother. So that being said going for a less realistic art style doesn't make as big of a difference as one thinks either, if the scale of the project is the same. No point mentioning Fromsoft, only Fromsoft can do Fromsoft lol they're nuts.

Optimization is definitely an issue, everyone in the industry knows it could be better, and raytracing isn't helping things with its huge performance hit on top of that, but that's not something low-mid-tier systems should be trying to do anyway. What I'm trying to say is, how about we reign in the scope a little bit to keep costs more reasonable? As someone who isn't an unemployed trust fund kid or parent's basement dweller, I do not have the time or desire for every single game to be a 20-30+ hour epic I have to spend a month playing!

 

[halfcharlie]

This is a bubble waiting to explode sooner than later. 2024 is a good example of AAA games that prioritize graphics over storyline and game play. The irony is that the better graphics can only be enjoyed by 5% of gamers as it requires top end hardware. So in the end, 95% of us gets crap graphics, performance, story line and game play. So what is the point of buying these? In fact, indie titles are flourishing because of the bad AAA games. I’ve not bought a single AAA title since 2023.

Wrong. Embarrassingly wrong. 2023 was regarded as the best year of gaming since the legendary 2013, and 2024 has been just as good, 2025 is looking great too, we could be on a hell of a golden three year run. You clearly don't play anything or have a clue. Fake gamers mindlessly bandwagon-jumping and repeating vitriol sure do like to make fools of themselves huh.

 

[The Historical Fidelity]

Wrong. Embarrassingly wrong. 2023 was regarded as the best year of gaming since the legendary 2013, and 2024 has been just as good, 2025 is looking great too, we could be on a hell of a golden three year run. You clearly don't play anything or have a clue. Fake gamers mindlessly bandwagon-jumping and repeating vitriol sure do like to make fools of themselves huh.

Honestly, I have the same sentiments as watzupken. The last AAA game I was even interested in purchasing in 2024 was Mechwarrior 5: Clans.

I’ve actually found the Indie games much more entertaining than the majority of AAA games recently. In my opinion, the 90’s and early 2000’s were the golden age of gaming, back when games didn’t hold your hand, had to focus on story and mechanics to make up for primitive graphics, and were tailored for just the gaming enthusiast. Today’s games are made to be accessible to the maximum number of consumers, and that just sucks the life and energy out of the experience from my point of view (probably why I don’t like modern Marvel and superhero movies as well)

 

[The Historical Fidelity]

I throw my money at games that have great graphics, sound, and story. I have no interest in pixel games or even most indies (with a few exceptions). I grew up in the time of arcades and had my fill of low rez games eating my quarters. The so called Game of the Year (Metaphor Refantazio) is not even remotely appealing to me due to this and I love RPGs. I would rather play a buggy game such as Stalker 2 that makes use of my hardware.

I had the same attitude toward Indies as you, except that now I’m addicted to “Turmoil”. It is the most entertainment I’ve had playing a game in a decade probably.

 

[The Historical Fidelity]

Wouldn't the problem of the expense of coming up with bespoke cutting edge graphics for games lead to more widespread use of cookie cutter solutions like UE5?

There might be a bunch of games coming out that look like they are all big quest mods of some earlier game. Which would lead to an emphasis on differentiation by gameplay and story and could be weird but not bad if the atmosphere they created was convincing and the story was interesting. Endereal felt like a completely different game than the Skyrim it was based on and CP2077 is quite different than W3.

I wouldn't mind it if developers relied more on ready made game engines and stock assets if they delivered the goods on the other entertainment aspects.

A lot of the complaining might also have something to do with people just getting jaded since they have seen so much already. That is a lot tougher for game devs to deal with imo. Sometimes those awesome memories may also be built up to be more than the experiences they actually were. For example last year I got my daughter playing Wolfenstein: The New Order. When I played it the first time that early part where Blazkowicz gets up in the hospital, Machine Games had my heart on a string, I was so hyped to take down the enemy, and that carried me through the game. Several years later playing the same game again, it just seemed underwhelming. It may just have been the right game at the right time for me. It is tough for a game to be as awesome as some inflated memory of mine if it is in any way different. Sometimes too many expectations lead to too many disappointments. I enjoy games more if I don't listen to the complaints too much.

Probably once a year I will start a new campaign in Black Mesa Source which is a remaster of Half-Life in the Half-Life 2 engine. To me, this is the perfect blend of graphics quality, story, and gameplay mechanics to keep me coming back time and time again. All time classics like Half-Life, Deus Ex, etc. lack modern graphics fidelity yet remain relevant because the more important variables are brilliantly executed. Modern games may look incredible, but they have no “staying power” because all the other variables were under-developed in pursuit of “the best graphics”, which literally puts an expiration date on the game as graphics will always get better.

 

[YSCCC]

Sure as hell, I started gaming since DOS era, while realistic graphics and open world is a plus for some type of games, most AAA titles with best graphics have so overdone it to sacrifice the fun and content, like in single player PS2 games, graphics are getting to very good category and still, studios are putting a lot of fun content and Easter egg bonus missions for gamers to enjoy. Or say RPG with different endings or character death/ joining due to your unlock of secret side missions or choice of answers.

Those are what attractive to players to play for a long time and long for pre purchase of certain sequels.

Nowadays they only push graphics with all sort of weird bugs and no fun gameplay… as such who would want to watch the grass waving in the wind all day long?

 

[bit_user]

I definitely don’t care about “dogma”, and I never called DLSS and TAA hacks….i called them crutches. Big difference, one is a solution, the other is a tool that allows incomplete unoptimized graphics design because they know DLSS and TAA will cover up the “rough edges”.

Eh, I don't agree that DLSS is designed to cover up "rough edges". The model is trained to estimate what the image would look like at a higher resolution. If your low-res image contains inaccuracies, then they should be visible even with DLSS on.

IDK if you have seen any of Threat Interactive’s video explanations, so I’ll post them below. Very good info and testing within:

No, haven't seen, but thanks for sharing.

 

[mj-88]

Cutting edge graphics in AAA are completely feasible when the game in question is not reduced to a checklist to fulfill quotas. Recent AAA sales flopped solely because it felt forced and lacked depth story or gameplay wise, sometimes both with your occasional sprinkle of bugs.

 

[The Historical Fidelity]

Eh, I don't agree that DLSS is designed to cover up "rough edges". The model is trained to estimate what the image would look like at a higher resolution. If your low-res image contains inaccuracies, then they should be visible even with DLSS on.


No, haven't seen, but thanks for sharing.

DLSS at its core is still temporal supersampling + anti-aliasing and acts much like TAA in covering up inaccuracies, otherwise, broken graphics at native resolution + no AA would be present with DLSS on (since DLSS forces TAA off to run its own version of temporal AA.)

The vast majority of modern console games force TAA on and do not allow TAA to be turned off by the user (unless you know how to turn it off via command line). According to Digital Foundry’s TAA/DLSS deep dive, they found that one of the most common reasons why TAA is required and forced on is to hide low quality detail and graphical glitches that are able to be cleaned up by sampling over time (Ex: like floating pixels, pixel crawl, shimmering, and flickering due to unoptimized Hair shading techniques) instead of fixing the actual glitch. PC ports of TAA required games usually offer an added DLSS option as it corrects graphics in the same way as TAA.

 

[Kondamin]

Make a decent compelling game with ok graphics and provide tools that allow modders to work on it.

Saves cost on the eye candy cost and you have a game that will be sold for 12 years and longer just like Skyrim

 

[heffeque]

Batman Arkham Knight is a 2015 game (almost 10 years), using Unreal 3 engine from 2006 (almost 20 years), and still looks 10x better than 90% of AAA games launched this year.

Here's a very visual example:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iocRbdvUgJ4


Just sayin'!