I dont really think this is an actual problem. Yes, theres a lot of games now, far more than ever before and more releasing in a year than some consoles had in their lifetime. But this is actually a good thing because it means this industry is more accessible than ever and we have very little limit on what experiences we can have.
The actual problem is the diversity and quality of those games due to muddy motivations. Like any entertainment industry under capitalism, artists are not just performing their art because it is their passion, its also to make a living. At the start, the core motivation is passion, a desire to create and innovate and expand on what that medium can be. When that medium reaches a point where a newbie with great talent can become an overnight sensation, then the motivations for creating art in that field become tainted because individuals start to believe that they dont need passion for the art in order to make massive amounts of money. The market will start being flooded with greedy, talentless people who are looking to cash in on the craze.
Ive been gaming since Sega Genesis, and have followed the industry closely most of my life. To this day, I believe everything in modern gaming can be connected back to the insane popularity of Call of Duty 4. Before that game, nearly every game that came out was trying to do something unique. They might share a genre, but they always did something to stand out from the crowd. Very few games were ripping off a competitor, and the ones that did normally did it so poorly that they immediately got ignored. But after the success of CoD4, that changed massively. Everyone was releasing a first person shooter with pvp multiplayer. Games that didnt need multiplayer had it tacked on per publisher demand. Japan went full on stupid and stopped making games that had that particular vibe that only Japanese games had, and even went as far as hiring western studios to redo franchises that absolutely did not need to be redone, with Capcom coming to mind as particularly bad about this. The market was flooded with low quality, cheaply made games trying to get a part of that bag that CoD4 made.
But we actually got lucky during all of this. Xbox and Steam were both platforms that attempted to lift up independent developers. Unlike the film industry, a space was created for low budget game development, and tools to make games were permitted to be accessible for very cheap. What this did was allow those artists who actually have passion in their art be able to take a pathway to creating high quality games. The ripples of that are felt to this very day, with Silksong being a perfect example of why accessibility in a medium is important.
There are a lot of games, and a lot of them suck for sure. A lot of them are rip offs, overpriced re-releases, clones, and even scams. But with that we’ve also gained so many great games, in so many genres, with new genres being molded like every month. The AAA space is arguably in a state of painful saturation, where budgets are bloated, dev times are too long, quality is poor, and prices are absurd. This will end up in whiplash against the AAA scene in time, probably sooner than later. But unlike when a similar phase happened in the Atari era, almost killing the games industry, that just wont happen this time, because the industry is not reliant on giant corpos to carry it.
What i would recommend as a gamer is to give up on the old notion that you can play all the games that come out. Especially as you get older, you wont have the time and you shouldny try to make the time for all of that. Treat games like people treat music. You cant listen to all of the music, and you shouldn’t try to. You find the type of music you like, and search that space to find more things to enjoy. Do the same with games. Dont rush through them, play them at a pace that is fun for you and lets you soak them in, and play the games that specifically appeal to you. Even if its a single game you play on repeat, if it brings you joy then it shouldnt matter.
A more controversial recommendation is stop being averse to spoilers. If your friend plays a game that you dont know if you will ever bother to play, let that friend tell you about the game. Studies have actually shown that players enjoy a game more when they go in knowing spoilers. This might not apply to all games, but from personal experience I can say letting a friend ramble about a game they love that I only have a mild interest in has not only caused me to actually play those games, but games are so rich in detail and varying experiences that I will end up having a very different experience than them that I now get to share with them. Being less averse to spoilers both helps you be able to communicate with more people about gaming, as well as gain new insight on games you might be on the fence about. This can help reduce the amount of games you feel an urge to play but cant make time for by acting as a social filter, or “word of mouth”.
Competition is what degrades quality. People who’s needs are met are more creative and more likely to take risks and more likely to try to make something unique. That’s the problem with the influx of games. You see it in everything. People who are already insulated with a secure amount of wealth are able to become creative musicians/artists and others will just try to copy what makes money, but ultimately most will fail due to the sheer amount of people competing. If every developer and creator’s needs were met before they tried creating anything then the landscape would look very different, but that’s not the world we live in.
The market is extremely competitive, and ever more so with each new developer. Everything is more accesssible yes, but that is worse for everyone besides major IPs who will always make money and those who can take risks because they are in a position to do so. This is the problem with all creative fields. It’s great for people who are already secure and terrible for everyone else.
Seeing how publisher buying company and fucked their employees, now i’m super glad Hoopo sell only the IP to Gearbox, and not the whole company. Unknown Worlds might as well become a f2p company now, and my interest had plunged below zero.
Search for the story of Anthem and David Gaider opinions about how they handle their writers, they fucked that up on their own.
And reading this article is basically: The DA team blames the ME team for diverting them to Andromeda. Then they blame Anthem. Then they blame EA. Then they blame the pandemic. Then they blame EA. Then they blame the ME team again.
The only moment that they actually put some blame on the DA team is with the tone of dialogue and they quickly blame EA for saying “you guys doesn’t have time to make changes”. The ME team made changes, it’s because of favouritism from EA or the ME team just has better management and know how to negotiate?
A good portion of that comes from how the teams are treated by EA and how many resources they’re granted though. I’m not about to assign a percentage to the blame, but of course the DA folks will be resentful of the ME folks if EA listens to one of them and gives them the time and money they ask for at the expense of the other. “Knowing how to negotiate” can often just come down to how much one game sold versus another, which isn’t really something the developers are responsible for.
But even that is a mess of causality for blame. EA wants to save money and mandates a nightmare of an engine for development; managers get incentives from EA to build a type of game that their studio doesn’t usually make; etc.
I could argue in favour of EA’s decision regarding the engine. Their previous engine was also a mess, but they mishandled the change. They didn’t give the studios the necessary time or support to implement it properly. But at the time of Veilguard they already had plenty of experience, the game performs really well and they release the game practically bug free.
The part of EA forcing them to build a type of game that they didn’t usually make I’m particularly not inclining to believe it’s was a problem. Bioware developed and maintain Star Wars Old Republic, an MMO, MMOs have many similarities to live services(it’s a type of live service), they already had experience with that. They also released Anthem, and looks like the idea of a multiplayer for Anthem came from Bioware.
The idea of a multiplayer Dragon age to finish the story is completely stupid but Bioware had the expertise to work on it. It’s a different case for Fallout 76 as Bethesda has never developed a multiplayer game before, TESO is a completely different studio with its own team, SWTOR is from a team within Bioware.
Just like other aspects of commerce, we’ll see what the market does. I hate to say it that way, but that’s simply how it works. Look at what’s happening to McDonalds right now. They’ve been raising prices for years, now tariffs have made things even worse, and people have responded accordingly and go to McDonalds less. Ball is in their court.
Another good example is the recent news about Beyoncé no longer filling major concert venues. I know there’s a lot of factors going on in these situations, but the truth at the core of it is that prices finally went up to a point where a not insignificant portion of her audience noped out of the transaction. Simple commerce.
Rebirth is already out, but it’s still exclusive to the PS5. The PC port was announced for early 2025 I think. so OP is either making a jab at Rebirth not being available on PC because PC players hate exclusives, or they’re just saying they’re waiting for the 3rd part of the remake trilogy (probably to be expected some time in 2027), which is what a number of players are doing.
Personally, I started on the first part of the remake trilogy, then stopped when I realized how annoyed I would be about waiting for the sequels. So now I’m waiting for all of it to be out on Steam before I start again.
They are employing almost 30 concept artists, their art style is extremely unique. Just look at the Elves in DOS2.
They use the tools available to them. If quick iteration of the “foundations” of ideas is improved by the use of GenAI, why not use it? It’s already integrated into the products they’re paying for (like Photoshop).
It’s like saying “they shouldn’t be using Google Images or artbooks when developing concept art”, it’s just silly.
The concepting stage is a really crucial and foundational stage in terms of design, but it can also influence writing, gameplay, etc. as an artist explores the thing they’re concepting.
I don’t like genAI, and think that using it at such an important stage will invariably mean it ends up influencing the game. I want to play games or experience media made with intention by people, not bland products shat out by a chatbot.
You: “The exercise at the gym stage is really crucial to building muscles. I don’t like cars and think that using it at such an important stage will inevitably mean it ends up influencing the training”.
I mean, if you just want to invent and imagine things and then get angry at them, go ahead.
I’m just trying to tell you that Larian isn’t replacing anything or anyone with AI, they’re using it to help with the foundational stage of some processes, which is how it’s supposed to be used. Throw shit at the wall and see what sticks, then work off of that.
Like… It’s hilarious to complain about their use of AI like that in the context of the fact that they currently employ 27 concept artists and are hiring more.
I think maybe you’re having a different argument than me? I didn’t say they were replacing anyone or anything with AI.
What I have expressed an issue with is exactly what you described:
they’re using it to help with the foundational stage of some processes, which is how it’s supposed to be used. Throw shit at the wall and see what sticks, then work off of that.
And you dismissively and incorrectly compared that to driving to the gym.
I think maybe try a different LLM to come up with your arguments, maybe Claude? Because the one you’ve got thinking for you right now doesn’t seem to be working lad.
I think what they’ve said is that they’ll be using it in the ideation stage, which is part of the process of creating concept art. They’ve also said they often use it to “develop concept art”, which could well just be a slip of the tongue by management rather than a clear statement by somebody involved in the process.
But they’re using GenAI in the ideation stage of concepting, which is something I have a problem with, and you don’t (which is fine, by the way). I feel like we’ve come back to the beginning of this argument, lol
I feel like replacing low-quality, quick-and-dirty doodles (often by non-artist members of the team) with medium-quality AI is fine and doesn’t pose a threat to the job security of concept artists (as exemplified by Larian currently hiring more concept artists).
If you’re just against any use of GenAI, then I get it - it is controversial due to the way it’s trained, and I’d prefer if they weren’t using it, but at least in terms of “AI replacing humans” it’s a non-issue in this case.
Thats depressing, i really liked larian’s whole thing and their attitude toward games development. Seeing them kick artists while they’re down means I’ll be skipping this :/
Soooooo they’ve crippled their game making divisions with layoffs that obliterated employee morale so that they had more money to throw at AI, and now they’re demanding that this same section of the company offset even more of their AI costs because it’s one of the few parts of the company that actually makes money?
Reminds me of how Hasbro is milking WotC for all they’re worth while destroying faith in the brand.
makes me wonder if the acquisitions were just a win/win strategy - acquire all these studios, milk them with unreasonable demands, cut the workforces constantly, then close up the studio but keep all the ip.
Why does anyone read Bloomberg? That shit is the equivalent of the suit wearing shitty little twerp on a college campus c. 2017 being a conservative edge lord. Change my mind.
So? It's your own fault, just as it was mine, for compulsively buying games you're not going to play ever. There's still going to be games being released after you die, so, why worry too much about the volume of games?
But I don't see how it is a problem. Because the article or whomever wrote it, is basically asking the industry "hey, take a break, stop producing things." Which, you mind as well ask every other industry and it'll more ridiculous per request.
"Hey Authors, please stop writing things, I need to catch up on my library!"
"Hey movie directors, please stop making films, I need to watch my library!"
"Hey TV Networks, I need to catch up on this series!"
That still isn’t what the article was about. It was about how there are so many games coming out that even critically acclaimed games can’t break even, even though critical acclaim generally helps move copies.
You've just stated what the article was about - there are so many games coming out. Whether it is about them making even, breaking even or not is just a mention. The core thing is that there are too many games.
Go argue with a freaking wall, for christ sake. Why do you even post? Get a life.
Hello fellow kids, remember the BioShock game series? Now you can buy more, now with added Circus of Value™ boosts! $4.99 to unlock a new exclusive ability!
Just let a series be, not everything needs endless sequels. Come up with something new.
Idk, I suppose you can argue that the binary morality system of the first BioShock was integral to the franchise identity, considering the time it came out and all, but I don’t hate that Infinite has one definitive ending to the story it wanted to tell. In fact, given the game’s emphasis on tropes and meta commentary, I’d imagine that setting a story in a universe with infinite possibilities and then removing the “choice” from the player to influence the ending was done deliberately. However, it’s been a decade since I played it, so I could certainly be misremembering some details.
bloomberg.com
Ważne