Triple-A games invest lots of money into developing, advertising, and publishing a video game. When this much money is on hand, you have to play it safe to keep investors on board. This is why all the top notch games appear to have the same story line with different characters. It works and it will continue to work. Don't demonize these developers as capitalist pigs quite yet, some companies in turn use their funds from their top notch games to produce games with a bit riskier of a set-up. This isn't always the case, but don't judge a company by their fore-running product. Would you bet $20 on 1:20 odds? Maybe, if you felt adventurous. Would you bet your entire life's savings on the same odds? Probably not.
Triple-A games are kinda vital to the industry as well. By kinda, I mean there wouldn't be any video games if there were these games. Triple-A games constitute the majority of video game sales. It is rare, but not impossible, that an indie game will gross near as much as a Triple-A game. So take away Triple-A games and what do you have? With less money flowing through the industry, small and medium sized companies are going to have a much harder time finding investors to launch their projects. Less people will be willing to purchase new consoles. Console development will shutdown and pretty much the whole video game industry will stall to a sad plateau. I know that sounds like a slippery slope fallacy, but its not. Its just how economics works.
![]() |
Battlefield 4. Just look at those HD textures. Mmmmmm, right? |
I wouldn't want to live in a world without bacon cheeseburgers, would you?
I definitely agree that they're necessary and they do look and feel amazing to play; I play plenty of titles and keep up with franchises. However, I was just saying that the lack of care for a game's story that seems to be arising. I enjoyed playing campaigns and story modes, and it seems like we're starting to get rid of those items in favor of multiplayer experiences. While the push is definitely a valid one, we've had both single and multi-player choices for years. It seems cheap to move away from that. And sure, indie games and smaller companies don't make as much; but they're much more promising and important today. Rocksteady is a tiny company that made considerably some of the best games in the past 10 years with the Batman: Arkham series. Economics is a regular excuse, but I think that we as consumers should be pushing for products that aren't just churned out for the next installment in a shooter series. You can make a good game with a great story and still have a good multiplayer experience. And it'll make the $60 tag feel worth it again.
ReplyDelete