4 ms·

> all these super politically progressive AAA gaming companies somehow are worse Corporate interest is primarily financial, anything beyond that is unfortunate

> all these super politically progressive AAA gaming companies somehow are worse Corporate interest is primarily financial, anything beyond that is unfortunately all too often only (financially motivated) virtue signalling.

TulliusCicero 7mo ago
I think it's that the biggies are focused on big budget AAA titles that they can sell for $70 or monetize as a FOMO live service, their distinguishing factor compared to indie games is high production values, and they don't feel like they have enough of an advantage in this space, or that they can get enough revenue to justify the huge expenditure of a AAA game. Basically the same reason many other genres (e.g. roguelites) are dominated by little indie studios.
- bee_rider 7mo ago
  Plus the studios that have become AAA did it because they implemented interesting ideas, limited by their size constraints. The they get scale and lose the size constraints that caused the to go after interesting ideas. The real successor to an old AAA series is the new series made by people who played it as kids.
torginus 7mo ago
I'm sure there's a huge incentive in these studios to sell games to women, but women (mostly) aren't buying them. That is despite overwhelming evidence that women play games they do like, and play them a lot. So by greedy capitalist standards, these companies are falling short of what they want to do.
sapphicsnail 7mo ago
The parent pointed out that there are financially successful games targeted at women that AAA studios won't make. Corporations are made up of people who have their own biases. I know so many people who would kill for a more modern Sims game.
- ndriscoll 7mo ago
  They have one. It's just that "modern" for "AAA" games means it's a microtransaction mall and advertising delivery vehicle. Though admittedly as far as I know it doesn't have gambling mechanics yet, so could be further modernized.

TulliusCicero 7mo ago

I think it's that the biggies are focused on big budget AAA titles that they can sell for $70 or monetize as a FOMO live service, their distinguishing factor compared to indie games is high production values, and they don't feel like they have enough of an advantage in this space, or that they can get enough revenue to justify the huge expenditure of a AAA game. Basically the same reason many other genres (e.g. roguelites) are dominated by little indie studios.

bee_rider 7mo ago
Plus the studios that have become AAA did it because they implemented interesting ideas, limited by their size constraints. The they get scale and lose the size constraints that caused the to go after interesting ideas. The real successor to an old AAA series is the new series made by people who played it as kids.

torginus 7mo ago

I'm sure there's a huge incentive in these studios to sell games to women, but women (mostly) aren't buying them. That is despite overwhelming evidence that women play games they do like, and play them a lot. So by greedy capitalist standards, these companies are falling short of what they want to do.

sapphicsnail 7mo ago

The parent pointed out that there are financially successful games targeted at women that AAA studios won't make. Corporations are made up of people who have their own biases. I know so many people who would kill for a more modern Sims game.

ndriscoll 7mo ago
They have one. It's just that "modern" for "AAA" games means it's a microtransaction mall and advertising delivery vehicle. Though admittedly as far as I know it doesn't have gambling mechanics yet, so could be further modernized.