this post was submitted on 10 May 2024
128 points (100.0% liked)

Games

18418 readers
1058 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works 56 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I love long complicated games, like breath of the wild, but I think the world also needs more concise games, those 20-40 hour masterpieces that keep you wrapped up without having to memorize 3600 pages of back story to remember where you left off.

What the studios (especially Nintendo) don't understand is you can't charge the same ~$60 for both games. People don't hate shorter simpler games, they just hate paying the same price for less content.

Right now, Nintendo is selling the Switch version of Link's Awakening for only $10 less than TOTK ($60 vs $70). That's right, a remake of a 20+ year old game with a pretty limited story is selling for almost the same as the largest most complex and expansive game Nintendo has ever produced.

I don't know why they're so fixated on matching prices between games that took orders of magnitude different amounts of effort to produce.

[–] rbits@lemm.ee 25 points 11 months ago

the world also needs more concise games

Yeah!

those 20-40 hour masterpieces

...wait, concise?

[–] Titou@sh.itjust.works 41 points 11 months ago (1 children)

"And games will be less fun of course"

[–] I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world 16 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Has Nintendo slipped in quality? Their practices aren't the great, but when it comes down to it, they have some of the most consistently high quality games.

[–] JDPoZ@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago

They also have some of the longest tenured pros of game design and programming in the industry in its entirety… something sadly far more rare outside of Nintendo… but especially Japan.

Shigeru Miyamoto, for example, has been designing at Nintendo for literally 4+ decades at this point.

Turns out you can master a craft after doing it for a majority of your adult life.

But - in the US at least - the executives at publicly traded game companies would rather shut down literal smash hit dev studios like the guys who made Hi Fi Rush than cultivate a few master class devs of their own over a few decades…

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 8 points 11 months ago (8 children)

I thought BotW was pretty mediocre. They basically took the "bigger and better" strategy to one of their iconic games and made it "bigger and worse."

It's an unpopular opinion apparently, but that's my take. Hopefully it's notb the start of a trend of Nintendo following other AAA studio trends.

[–] CoggyMcFee@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

BotW was my favorite gaming experience of all time. Hours and hours of joy for me.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Eh, it was the worst of the Zelda series for me. To each their own I guess.

[–] CoggyMcFee@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You already explained you don’t like it. But your anecdote and my anecdote cancel out the anecdotes.

[–] jose1324@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Ok? Convinced yourself yet lol

[–] CoggyMcFee@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Convinced myself of what?

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.ca 20 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Anyway...Have y'all tried Animal Well?

[–] Corr@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It's on my list. Finishing inscryption first. Is it good?

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.ca 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I'm only an hour in, but I'm getting masterpiece vibes

[–] Corr@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago

That's awesome to hear. I'll have to check it out

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 18 points 11 months ago

It has never been easier to make A Game. The only thing getting harder is meeting shallow expectations imposed by empty suits. What a small team can accomplish in a few months keeps expanding, and unless you chase some zillion-dollar trends, what they can do is plenty.

Shareholder puppets like Microsoft should figure this out - they demand instant turnaround. They own enough studios to have several of them try cranking out six games in two years. If you want it to happen faster, use fewer people. I dunno, build a friggin' pipeline for indie devs to slap together a killer idea that gets fixed-up, art'd, and polished by different teams. Then you can sell more things to more people for more chances to trip into a brand new trend. You don't have to perform ritual sacrifice when a decade-long project makes a shitload of money! You can still get angry when the actual profits are less than the number you made up in your head! Just-- put money behind cool things that cost $20, instead of constructing situations where people have to spend $140 each or you lose. It's like a fuckin' Mad TV skit. Spend less, sell more.

[–] ringwraithfish@startrek.website 17 points 11 months ago (1 children)

There are too many breakout indie hits developed by one person or a small team that prove this isn't true across the industry.

AAA development may be that way because there are higher expectations, just like blockbuster movies invest heavily in special effects and A-list celebs. But at the end of the day gamers just want to be entertained.

[–] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 16 points 11 months ago

What he's saying is that major studios are locked playing chicken with each other, and that the industry is going to remember the 1983 crash fondly in comparison with what's going to happen.

[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 14 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] Fitzsimmons@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

"I want shorter games with worse graphics made by people who are paid more to work less and I'm not kidding 😎"

Indie games are kind of this, but it's hard to make the "paid more" work consistently at scale. Largely because there's a shitload of people making really good indie games and I can only play so many of them.

[–] steeznson@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I think in this context the original poster was lamenting the loss of AA gaming.

[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 2 points 11 months ago

Fitzsimmons actually got it even better than my kind of brainless appeal to nostalgia. That's what I want

[–] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It doesn't have to though. Tools are so easy to use now and the gaming industry will never have a shortage of people trying to get jobs in it, there is no reason that so many games need to be spending 5+ years in devepopment.

[–] blargerer@kbin.social 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Have you ever worked on a game?

[–] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yes, I have. A small team can launch a small/medium size game in less than two years using current tools. Game jams, albeit almost never ending up with complete games, last for usually one week and the end result is basically a vertical slice of a game nearly always built by a single person.

Again, there is no reason a game spending 5+ years in development should be considered average or normal.

Even in the past, AAA studios could complete successive games in a shorter amount of time. Metroid Prime 2, Star Wars Battlefront 2 (the good one from 2005), and Legend of Zelda Majoras Mask were all developed by reusing code and assets from the games that came before them, and game development tools were not as easy to work with then as they are now. Metroid Prime 1 was developed in 3 years, Ocarina of Time was developed in 3 years, and Battlefront 1 was developed in 2 years. All of these were developed with AAA funding and took less than 5 years on tools with less accessibility than modern tools.

[–] autonomoususer@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Because they ban us from changing the source code: that's what they won't tell you.

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

What does one have to do with the other?

[–] Grass@sh.itjust.works 3 points 11 months ago

how about no?

[–] Tylerdurdon@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Just as long as they don't hop onto the procedurally generated bandwagon. While I appreciate the attempts at making unique gameplay while focusing less on level generation, those types of games end up making me feel like a hamster on a wheel.