Because your expectations have grown too high.

Our game has to be the greatest game ever made to be a big success. The best way to do that is to assemble a team of elite marketers and advertisers. We'll do a showcase for the game, we'll have a game designer list off a bunch of thing that make this the greatest game ever like "immersive", "realistic", and "10 times the size of Fallout 4". After Todd's awkward speech, we show off our amazing trailer. A bunch of explosions then everyone is in awe because we got Keanu in our nonexistent game. People are screaming and losing their minds, then we bring Keanu out. Keanu doesn't know what he is peddling but it doesn't matter, we got them hooked. We give the release date of, I don't know, Spring 2025. Everyone is going feral and we have to increase security but we did it, we have a hype train.

Now that we have the customers excited, we go to our team of passionate game developers who just recently graduated college with dreams of making their own games someday and tell them everything we promised this game will be. The stupid game developers are still smiling but that is fine, I will break them. We have a budget of 350 million and we already spent more than half that just to have Keanu count his abs on stage. We are working really hard and those no good game developers haven't done anything yet but there is something we can do.

We have a big meeting with our shareholder, we did the right thing and put all the blame on the developers for the delay. They are too busy sexually harassing one another and stealing breast milk from the breakroom instead of working on the game. The shareholders are pissed but it is alright because we came with more promises. This game will now be a live service game with a bunch of micro transactions to make up for the game developer's poor performance. Todd Howard quits after hearing this but that is fine, we just got Pierre Hintze to be the new project lead. After announcing Pierre Hintze as our new project lead, Pierre quits but that is fine, we got Joseph Staten to be the new project lead. Shit, Joe quit, that is fine, we don't need them. We'll instead hire legendary game developer B.F. Skinner to be our project lead.

We go back to our less than enthuse game developers and tell them the news. They moan and say it can't be done, so like any good boss would do, I verbally abuse them. Some started to cry and others just walked out, moral has never been higher. We are now understaffed, so I hire a bunch of freelance coders from India. These coders make quick work and we are now back on track for our release date. Now comes the most difficult part, beta testing.

We begin beta testing and come to find out that the game is unplayable. I tell the single programmer that didn't quit to fix it but he couldn't, he can't read Bengali. I send him to the Cosby room to await his punishment and called the shareholders to tell them the news. They are pissed and hell, I am too. We will not be able to release it this year.

I release a tweet to announce that Starpunk 2076 Infinite will be delayed by a year. So many death threats came in, I was a little scared. So we decided to fire John Riccitiello and blame everything on him. Everyone rejoiced and a brilliant idea hit me. I call up the shareholders and tell them that we can make the release if we do a massive corporate wide layoff, clearly we have too many crappy employees and we should cut our losses and hire more cheap freelancers from India. They love the idea and so we fired 10,000 employees and I gave myself a hefty bonus for saving the company.

It is six months until release and I have all the coders from India working on the most important part of the project, the in-game store. We can't have any setbacks, so I decided we will no longer beta test it. Beta testing causes more issues than it solves and by skipping it, we will make release. I give myself another bonus for my great leadership and a sip of breast milk.

It is two weeks until release and we are excited. We have over 14 million pre-orders and we are currently buying great reviews from the game press, a good fifty dollars well spent. We are getting ready for our celebratory layoffs when a coder found a huge bug that breaks the in-game store. This is the worst news I've heard in all of my life. I force the remaining crew to work 48 hour days everyday until release. I continue the hype by talking to IGN about the game and how there was no crunch involved because we believe in work life balance. Things have never been better.

The game is released and everyone is pissed. Most of the games sold have been returned and Playstation removed our game from their store. Microsoft, like a true G, kept our game on their store because they know quality. I lock the doors at the studio so the remaining programmer can't escape and make them fix the game. The shareholders are pissed and have to do a public apology. I hate seeing the shareholders upset, so I call them and pitch them my new idea to fix this mess. I tell them we get Netflix to make a anime show about the game and they love it. Netflix greenlights the show and it is a huge hit.

It is now three years after release and everyone loves our game, all thanks to me and my hard work.

Well its not that I like, buy a Final Fantasy game, then expect some real-time gory hack & slash fest, I'm not THAT stupid.

It's more that games have started to pad out the experiences more and more, by adding 'RPG-elements' into their action games.

Though you could certainly say it's my own stupid fault for not doing my fair bit of research before buying the games.

On the other side, I do think there's a fair bit of deception.

If you take a game like Borderlands 2 for example. Has a really rough Mad Max kinda artstyle going on, it certainly got advertised like it's some high-octane action fest.

And a lot of friends got excited over it, because of the great co-op multiplayer features it had, both local and online (wich are certainly some great features, and there weren't many other shooters with that same co-op functionality around at the time)

But then, when you get a good bit into the game, it's really hard to stay in a nice flow with all of the stats, and effects and stuff flying at yer head, with that game.

It's just that the concept of the 'looter-shooter' was new to this old man. So on that aspect, I was kinda set-up for dissapointment, at least, that's how I felt.

But aside from all of the looting stuff, taking up so much dang time, that game did have a lot of nice things going on.

And I won't deny that modern way of digital games have a lot of advantages, and yes, older physical games have their downsides too.

But the thing with that for me, is that with the old way, I at least have some controll over it, like making sure I keep my discs safe, and clean, and don't lose them. I can take my own resposibility on that part.

And can keep the situation, quite literaly, into my own hands.

But if something actually does go wrong digitaly (smaller chance that it does go bad, but when it does:) then I have barely, if any, controll over it anymore.

If some update messes things up, I'm at the mercy of the developers, or some vigilanty programming nerd, to bring a fix. Or if some game is simply pulled out from an online store, or has to be online and has stopped being supported then I'm practically screwed on that end, or have to resort to piracy or something.

So not like the old games were so much better, but I very much preffer that sort of user experience. And to have that basic bit of ownership and controll over what I buy. Even if it goes at the cost of a bit of convenience on my end.

But I certainly understand the 'okay boomer remark' wich is absolutely fair (though I preffer 'millenioomer' personally, to fit my generation), I certainly won't deny I was having myself a big' ol boomer rant right there.

It's just feels so utterly unnecisary, and a lot of time greedy, that so many games get so 'bureaucratic' for a lack of better words, with the user experience, and so much ownership is gradually being stripped away. And as a result of that, under the disguise of so called 'convenience' is wasting a lot of time to get to the meat and potatoes of what I want to do.

So please try to understand, that some old-timers (when it comes to gaming) like myself, would like to stay in touch with the new things, but don't want so much hasstle to set things up all of the time, for each new game.

I will try to do better, doing research on my part before jumping in, and also search better for some more old-fashioned indie-games on that part.

TL DR of my own:

So alrighty zoomer!

Thx for wasting your own time on me, with some solid counter-arguments. And for taking that time to stay civil and doing a gud job explaining your fair points.

I never touched excel a day in my life (or powerpoint for that matter).

But I suppose I could make due by goig bottoms up with booze, then opening up Flash to stare at that workscreen like a braindead ghoul for a while.

Is that okay too, dad?

To just say "it's game companies want le monee and they make shortcuts to get le monee" is a really really big oversimplification. While I think there are exceptions (EA Sports being the first one that comes to mind for me), I think to pin the problem on greed is a bit much.

I think we should also take into account the sky-high expectations that have been set in the AAA market. Every single AAA game needs to be this HUGE OPEN WORLD GAME WITH THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS OF HOURS OF CONTENT WITH JAW-DROPPING REALISTIC GRAPHICS AND ORCHESTRAL MUSIC and often times companies set out to do this and inevitably deliver half of the product because they don't have the resources to sustain themselves to continue development.

On top of that, companies jump to the "let's make this big game" mentality before fully realizing the seemingly small but infinitely more important details. They have been conditioned by the consumer (us gamers) into thinking that bigger always equals better and because of that jump into making that big big game often times with a weak idea for gameplay, stories, characters, the feel of the world, etc.

My main support for this is taking a look at the indie game scene. Indie games are ultimately a lot more quaint than your average AAA release, but they pretty much always have stronger ideas and gameplay over AAA. Indie games may not have the super realistic graphics or the flashy orchestral music or the thousands of hours of playtime, but they always have a clear vision. The 10 hours or so you spend completing a indie game is infinitely more impactful than the 100 hours you spend in the latest AAA release.

There's enshitification going on in the western AAA sphere, but studios that aren't falling to that Game As Service model are generally getting better, not worse. I think nostalgia blinds a lot of people to how bad most games always were, when all they remember are the good ones.

What you're experiencing is called growing up. No game is going to make you feel that same childlike wonder as whatever you grew up with because you're becoming less of a child. You're just not going to feel that way anymore, even when things get objectively better, sorry.

i think too many hold your hand too much and feel like they have to point you in the right direction every couple minutes

Current industry trends prioritize monetization over user enjoyment

today's moneymaking busines is all about quantity over quality

I don't think they're breaking record lows in terms of quality. The PS2, Wii, & WiiU eras all had some famously bad shovelware so this generation is obviously going to be no different. It feels worse right now because we're bombarded with incompetent PR/Marketing teams doing hours of damage control.

Quality AAA titles take a lot of time to make but the publishers either don't understand or they simply don't care because they know that whales will buy anything. The indie scene is getting better with each passing day, meanwhile. I'm constantly finding these zany fun weird little titles that the big guys wouldn't publish out of pity.

This has probably been said, but: hardly anyone in the gaming industry is in it for the art. They just want money or to push a agenda. And the few who probably DO want to make games for a living aren't realizing what made the games that inspired them, fun to play.

One could go on and on about it, but to get to the point: nobody is serious about making something entertaining and the lack of passion shines through the graphics, stories, FPS and everything else that isn't actually gameplay (because there probably isn't any)

Honestly, this is the kind of question which annoys the hell out of me, partly because it always seem to be the same echo chamber of puppets saying the same simplified answer. While there might be some truth to them, it dosen't change the fact that there seems to be a mix of sour grapes, jealousy and nostalgic bias that always percolates in this conversation.

It's easy to reeeeee on AAA games for their bloat and supposed crippling buginess on launch, (which most of them don't actually have) but from a game quality standard, they are in a far better place than in the 90's and into the 2000's, where bad movie tie-ins and shovelware was blisteringly common even from AAA studios themselves. (AA studios do this from time to time, but at least they usually put in more of an effort)

Unlike AAA, which are easy targets for criticism, even when they do meet up to normal standards, (not including the constant goalposts shifting) indie games don't have that problem, even if they are cloaked in problems themselves, namely in wrapping themselves in nostalgia and/or art for art's sake mentality. Sure, there are some indie games that are worth playing and can be close to the level of the big boys, but in the end, roughly 80% of them are disposable and forgettable, and only about 10% are honestly worth it, and 10% in the grey area, floating around the proverbial Mendoza line.

Yes, but the ones who know better don't go in that path. Stardew Valley is a great example.

On the bright side, we are in an unprecedented moment in our beloved hobby where we have access to all sorts of games since the 70s. Hell, you can even get an emulator to play old DS and Gameboy games! We also got a burgeoning indie game scene, and I've been enjoying Binding of Isaac again. I think it's why the Anime/Manga Industry is curbstomping Western Comics; when the corpos can only deliver soulless junk, people will look elsewhere for meaningful stories.

I think Yahtzee Croshaw put it best in these two videos:

*reads this while thinking abt playing cookie run*…well shit he’s right and I’m part of the problem

At 10/26/23 11:56 PM, BCSADER wrote:

Short answer: Workplace abuse and budget cuts.

video games are getting suckier because i can't SUCK DICK in any of them!!

Companies  make cheaper shit & gamer buy it

Corporate greed seems to be at an all-time high.

Ehhh, I wouldn't say that games as a whole are getting shittier. Are there certain trends that rise up that detract from the quality of gaming? Yeah, there. Are there big triple AAA games that are barely or not even worth the initial price tag? Yeah.

But if you're only looking at gaming from the triple AAA layer, then you're truly missing out on so many smaller quality games. Heck, even games that have rough edges but still show heart and care.

Heck, Baldur's Gate 3 and Armored Core 6 are good recent examples of good quality games!

It was said earlier about Hi Fi Rush, and I just want to second that game. It is a ridiculously good beat rhythm action game. And you know what? I'm going to throw out some other good smaller games as well.

Gloomwood - Immersive Sim game where you're a doctor crawling through a city going to the hounds

Signalis - Take an isometric Resident Evil and put it in a dystopian future in the stars.

Songs of Conquest - Isometric strategy game in a somewhat similar vein to the Heroes of Might and Magic series

Lunacid - If you've ever played or heard of the King's Field series (Something very early on in FromSoft's catalogue of games), this game is a good modern version of that.

And keep in mind, these are the more "well-known" smaller games that are quite good. Triple AAA has the advantage and disadvantage of being so widely seen and known, and for setting bad trends other game developers follow. So if there's some big blunder, it's going to be known about.

But dig just a little deeper, and you'll find the good games that are out there.

I think it's simply because games are getting longer. I want more high quality content in a shorter period, rather than content stretched over a staggeringly long amount of time. It dilutes the gameplay. Give me something short and brilliant!

Probably things taking longer to make and more games playing things safe. Probably the suits in charge. MTX/Mobile/F2p have a big part to play in all of that too, though there's still good games out there.

I actually don't think games are getting shitter. In My opinion, i believe it depends to were you look at.

Of course, many studios have taken the easy path of greediness over quality, say Konami or EA for example, but there's still plenty of people doing the things right over the industry.

I think it gives the opposite impression due there's more trashy adds and general bad reputation for things like Microsoft aquissitions.

definitely yes

Stop playing only AAA games

that's it, welcome to my ted talk

Yup, the REALLY BIG companies pushing tons of bad game practices around is just annoying as hell. But then we got hi fi rush, hades, alan wake 2, 9 years of shadow, blaphemous 2, baldurs gate 3, zelda tears of the kingdom, scorn... If you can, i recommend trying to look for games' podcasts, they normally keep up with realeases outside the big corpo stuff

the ones that

i vouch on that, still an excellent game made to have fun.