4 ms·
Wikipedia edit history [1] suggests the definition has been a matter of some debate, but the current definition has more or less been static since a few months
by 2000UltraDeluxe 4y ago
Wikipedia edit history [1] suggests the definition has been a matter of some debate, but the current definition has more or less been static since a few months after the article was created; i.e. high costs, high-profile and high-expectations.
By that definition, a AA game could definitely look better than an AAA game, although it would be unexpected. On the other hand, BioWare's recent titles and the entire Cyberpunk 2077 debacle seems to have shaken things up quite a bit and many people now seem to have have _lower_ expectations on AAA titles, because the major players aren't trusted to release good titles worth their money.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=AAA_(video_game_industry)&action=history&offset=&limit=500 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=AAA_(video_game_i...
- thaumasiotes 4y ago> By that definition, a AA game could definitely look better than an AAA game, Of course...? > although it would be unexpected. No it wouldn't; that would be completely normal. I didn't say AAA meant attractive graphics. I said it meant current-generation graphics. Compare a screenshot of Escape from Monkey Island to one of Curse of Monkey Island. No one is going to argue that Escape looks better. But if you released a beautiful 2D-animated game in 2000, that wouldn't be "current" technology.