Lets talk about AAA games.....

It wasn't untill this gen that I learned about this concept of AAA games, before games were just games, and since consoles/PC was the norm the playing feild seemed even

now, like film I guess theres a whole range of games.."indie" to "AAA"..anyway

I notice alot of people have a certain....disdain for "maintream" "AAA" titles, "stagnation" "dumbing down" to name a few reasons (and personally if I hear one more person say they only play indie games now I'll...well I wont do anything but yeah)

and yes, its understandable....gamings somthing of a big thing, and much like movies weve got our own versions of the summer block-buster

so I guess what Im asking is

what do you define as "AAA" what does it mean? and is that concept going to change in future generations?

second question

overall do you still enjoy "AAA" games?

It's a rather vague term, mainly dealing in terms of manpower and budget. Going with a loose definition, I'd say a AAA game is anything that has two out of the following three factors:

1. A budget in excess of $10 million U.S. (or the equivalent)
2. A development team of 30-40 people, or more.
3. The backing of one of the "big" publishers (Nintendo, Zenimax, Activision, EA, etc.)

AAA game is a pretty vague term that has little meaning besides "a project with huge finnacial backing". For me I think if you pour $10 million+ dollars on the development of a game its considered AAA.

I think if we consider inflation, going by a pure dollar amount will force us to change what AAA means

Personally I enjoy some AAA games. Although Im finding a lot of indie or smaller games to be more enjoyable. The problem with AAA games is they have to appeal to larger audiences to make money and sometimes I just want a niche game like Tribes: Ascend or Legend of Grimmrock.

More spent on marketing, than development.

To me, there are only two types of games. Games I like and games I don't like. It doesn't matter if it was made by the big billionaire companies or some guy working out of his basement with a budget of $6. If I like it, I play it, and if I don't I don't play it. Simple. And I don't really see why it should be any more complicated.

Hal10k:
It's a rather vague term, mainly dealing in terms of manpower and budget. Going with a loose definition, I'd say a AAA game is anything that has two out of the following three factors:

1. A budget in excess of $10 million U.S.
2. A development team of thirty-forty people or more.
3. The backing of one of the "big" publishers (Nintendo, Zenimax, Activision, EA, etc.)

This pretty much sums it up. Well put.

As to enjoying them, I doubt it, save for a few exceptions. Most of the games coming out that I've enjoyed the past few years have been B or C-List games. Once you're putting Megabucks into game development, like we all already understand, you just don't take risks, and you worry about things like graphics and how close it emulates known-popular mechanics, over fun. Risks are for the smaller games.

Vault101:
It wasn't untill this gen that I learned about this concept of AAA games, before games were just games, and since consoles/PC was the norm the playing feild seemed even

now, like film I guess theres a whole range of games.."indie" to "AAA"..anyway

I notice alot of people have a certain....disdain for "maintream" "AAA" titles, "stagnation" "dumbing down" to name a few reasons (and personally if I hear one more person say they only play indie games now I'll...well I wont do anything but yeah)

and yes, its understandable....gamings somthing of a big thing, and much like movies weve got our own versions of the summer block-buster

so I guess what Im asking is

what do you define as "AAA" what does it mean? and is that concept going to change in future generations?

second question

overall do you still enjoy "AAA" games?

1. Never even heard the term AAA game, I have heard of New release games. AAA game is rather subjective perception don't you think?

2. 50% of the time new release games are great

Yeah, basically what others have said. An AAA game has a big budget and a big publisher behind it.

I still enjoy a lot of AAA games. (Not all of them obviously, not everything will be to my taste and some of them will downright suck.) People say they "don't take risks" or "don't try anything new", but when it comes down to it neither do most indie games.

kingthrall:

1. Never even heard the term AAA game, I have heard of New release games. AAA game is rather subjective perception don't you think?

2. 50% of the time new release games are great

hmmm not really

AAA is pretty much the game equivalent of a summer blockbuster

go back in time a few motnhs when Journey was a "new release" but that was only on PSN and I doubt had as many people working on it or the budget as you would somthing like Assasisn creed 2

2. that figure....hmmm...doesnt actually seem that far off, of coarse some periods are better than otehrs (liek 2011 with Deus ex, infamous 2 and Batman AC to name some)

Zhukov:

I still enjoy a lot of AAA games. (Not all of them obviously, not everything will be to my taste and some of them will downright suck.) People say they "don't take risks" or "don't try anything new", but when it comes down to it neither do most indie games.

oh really? I keep hearing about how awsome indie games are...all the time

Vault101:

Zhukov:

I still enjoy a lot of AAA games. (Not all of them obviously, not everything will be to my taste and some of them will downright suck.) People say they "don't take risks" or "don't try anything new", but when it comes down to it neither do most indie games.

oh really? I keep hearing about how awsome indie games are...all the time

Oh, don't get me wrong, some of them most certainly are awesome. For example, I love me some Journey and Bastion.

However, the indie scene isn't quite the bustling hive of creativity that people describe it as. Many indie games are the usual unremarkable crap, many are retro and there are huge numbers of clones (a new Minecraft imitation comes out every couple of months).

Vault101:

kingthrall:

1. Never even heard the term AAA game, I have heard of New release games. AAA game is rather subjective perception don't you think?

2. 50% of the time new release games are great

hmmm not really

AAA is pretty much the game equivalent of a summer blockbuster

go back in time a few motnhs when Journey was a "new release" but that was only on PSN and I doubt had as many people working on it or the budget as you would somthing like Assasisn creed 2

2. that figure....hmmm...doesnt actually seem that far off, of coarse some periods are better than otehrs (liek 2011 with Deus ex, infamous 2 and Batman AC to name some)

Zhukov:

I still enjoy a lot of AAA games. (Not all of them obviously, not everything will be to my taste and some of them will downright suck.) People say they "don't take risks" or "don't try anything new", but when it comes down to it neither do most indie games.

oh really? I keep hearing about how awsome indie games are...all the time

I prefer a mix of indy or big release games but most of all I prefer classic older games (not arcade) cause there is much more balance between graphics, mechanics and balance. Newer games tend to either go way towards the Rock/Paper/Sissors balance like starcraft 2 with no sense of grey area to defeat enemies with tactics on flanks with a weaker force.

Or alternatively they go the other way with games like the Witcher 2, where there is little room for forgiveness from a poor strike or mis-cklick. Yet I prefer the latter for a challenge but when playing on Hard difficulty for example it become more of a chore than a challenge.

Indy games are a bit of a mix of the old and new stuff, but the problem is that balance and lack of content always tends to drag it down.

If you think AAA games are stagnant and indie games aren't then you're an idiot really. There are lots of indie games that pretty much copy other brilliant indie games, it's just that they don't surface as much as AAA games.

Anyway, to your question. I primarily play AAA games due to them having a larger budget and experienced dev team which usually lead to better and bigger games. Look at RE6, it has a dev team of 600 people and has been in the works for 3 years atleast. It also has a seemingly limitless budget due to Capcoms size and wealth.

Racecarlock:
To me, there are only two types of games. Games I like and games I don't like. It doesn't matter if it was made by the big billionaire companies or some guy working out of his basement with a budget of $6. If I like it, I play it, and if I don't I don't play it. Simple. And I don't really see why it should be any more complicated.

So seconding this!
Well said. *golfclap*
Either I enjoy it or I don't, publisher, genre, graphics doesn't matter, I can still like it or hate it, or well, maybe something in between. But either I play it or I don't.

AAA games are games with high development costs and a lot of marketing. I would say that quality or expected quality also fits in here.

As for the enjoyment factor of these. Well, I don't have time for games these days so I enjoy almost anything not related to school so I'm not the person to ask

I usaully think of AAA as a game that has a lot of money spent on it, either on the game itself or wasted on retarded markerting.

I do still enjoy AAA games. Because they are so expensive to make, publishers usally force developers to make them "Appeal to a larger audience" or make them all samey pretty much. I can see why people wouldn't like them as many of them start to feel boring after a while such as Call of Duty or Battlefield for example, but there are still good ones out there. I enjoy plenty of games that while perhaps not AAA are still far from indie and I find to be very fun.

It's silly to buy only indie since there are plenty of good games out there such as...

Metro: 2033
Assasins creed
Prototype
Dead space
Halo
Others but im tired and can't think of any right now...

The proper definition of "AAA" has pretty much been hammered out in this thread - games with high development costs, large amounts of manpower, and the backing of a well-established studio. However, to a lot of people, "AAA" means "Call of Duty", and thus you get a lot of people attacking AAA games as a whole when in reality they're really only attacking one franchise. I guarantee you that even the most ardent opponent of "AAA" titles still enjoys some games with a "AAA" budget, Skyrim being an excellent recent example.

I think, on the whole, the AAA market is solid. Sure, there is a notable lack of original content - most AAA titles are sequels. However, the overwhelming majority of them that I've played have all been well-designed and well-written. The new Fallout games, Skyrim, the Assassin's Creed series, the Uncharted series, the new Batman games, Valve's recent releases...so yeah, on the whole, I really enjoy AAA games. Often times, a whole bunch of money and a whole bunch of people can make for something which is really good. Naturally, there are plenty of exceptions, but I don't play games by Bioware, so I've been more or less been spared from such crippling disappointment.

Thoric485:
More spent on marketing, than development.

Basically this. Perhaps not always literally, but figuratively at the least. A AAA title is one being financed and marketed by a major publisher with lots of cash being dumped at it in all fields. Development, marketing, distribution...it's tailored to fulfill a role, or several. One example of such as role is to claim market shares. IE, CoD VS BF. AAA titles aimed at market dominance in their genre, competing for the same audience, etc.

AAA is not as vague a term as some seem to believe.

Mainstream, I hope so, and No! I don't find AAA titles interesting at all and it seems they focus more on what is more popular and sells out best (making it shiny) than coming up with something unique and great quality. Indie games haven't captured my interest either.

I've been going backwards a lot lately playing many classics that I missed out on the PS2 and computer. I'm even considering on trying out a Dreamcast.

Well to me triple A is simply a top price game, when you go $60 or more you better bring your top game because that is a huge chunk of money.

And yes I still enjoy them but more often then not I get them at a lower price or make sure I can resell because the content is getting mighty thing these days.

The concepts should change in the future because the extremes of super cheap and super high priced games just don't to anyone any favors.
A whole bunch more triple A titles would get praised if they just came out with the proper price, and as Steam proved time and again a lower price can yeild a far better income over time.

1. To me it`s more like what to expect from this developer and publisher or like already mentioned here the dollars spend on the production.

2. I enjoy them as much as "smaller" titles it really depends on the game itself. The last "AAA"titles were Uncharted3 and MW3 and those were good entertaining rentals. I didn`t felt the need to buy these two titles afterwards (MW3 was the usual and UC3 didn`t had the same replay value as UC2).

Surprisingly Binary Domain was a really fun game i will purchase. While most AAA titles feature a heavy advertising campaign and the feel of getting something other, than what you`ve already seen in trailers etc, is missing. I love this kind of surprise and the feel of getting more than expected.

The overall hype for some games seems to be pretty damaging and i know i`m guilty of being not able to not watch any trailer or read any kind of preview. It`s sometimes hard to stay away from any info to me.

In the end i still enjoy "AAA" but i don`t expect much "AAA" value after completing them.

 

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked