While we know an 80s style game industry crash won't happen, do you think game budgets could go back to the PS2 days without graphics taking a huge hit?
And if graphics did take a hit, would you be fine with it?
It could happen if devs did smaller projects, and adjusted budgets to allocate less money towards marketing and voice acting.
Nintendo already lives that lifestyle of gameplay first graphics second
I would be perfectly okay with it
>>321665115
Aren't some VAs costly because they provide voices and Motion Capturing too? Or am I mistaken?
>>321666131
Yeah. Some are famous, and motion capture can be very expensive.
>>321664824
I wouldn't mind it. It would mean companies could take more risks since the losses might not be that huge.
I assume we're just talking about AAA games, right?
Because I think we've already seen what happens when AAA games become too damn expensive for most developers: "indie" and mobile games explode all over the place.
As for AAA games, it's hard to say. There's definitely been speculation out there suggesting that games either need to become more expensive for consumers or devs need to cut back on budgets growth if they want AAA titles to stay profitable.
I'm not an economist, and I know next to nothing about the specific costs that go into making the average AAA game these days. But unless the number of people buying video games matches the pace of growing budget demands, then something will have to give eventually.
>Would you be okay with graphics taking a hit?
Absolutely. Especially if it means seeing more ambitious games playing with unique concepts. One of the worst things about the industry right now is how little room there is for error when it comes to AAA games.
>>321664824
Honestly most AAA shit don't even have amazing graphics as is.
CoD is constantly full of hilariously low res textures.
>>321667474
>There's definitely been speculation out there suggesting that games either need to become more expensive for consumers or devs need to cut back on budgets growth if they want AAA titles to stay profitable.
I cant see things going over well if games became more expensive.
>>321664824
it's already happening
remember all these movements by like ea and ubisoft, absolutely massive publishers, trying to push "indie games" they published as the big events?
cheap is just named indie now, even if it's not independently developed
japanese publishers also push out a lot of cheap stuff as they always have, but you won't be touching most of them
>>321668254
>remember all these movements by like ea and ubisoft, absolutely massive publishers, trying to push "indie games" they published as the big events?
>cheap is just named indie now, even if it's not independently developed
now that I think about it, it does make sense.
>>321664824
Mainstream graphics are gonna plateau pretty soon (if they haven't already). There will always be games trying to push the boundaries but generally speaking better graphics have reached the point of diminishing returns, normies don't care about 1080p vs 4k or 15 percent better draw distance.
It's widely agreed that current AAA budgets are unsustainable, but I don't think graphics will take a hit.. On the contrary I think as the market settles into a particular level of expected polish for a title then the techniques for achieving that level of polish will become more refined and cheaper. We're already seeing it with tools like Fox Engine which allow high res models and environments to be cranked out cheaply. Combine licensed middleware with crowdfunding and alternative production paradigms (like paying voice actors royalties rather than up front sums) and in less than a decade indie devs are going to be able to put out games on par with Ground Zeroes, for example.
I think budgets might drop before the current gen is done. I can't see graphics jumping higher without other being a problem return wise
I'm not so sure, look how buggy games are released these days. No one gives a shit about polish at all. Just look at all the awful dudebro games that everyone buys in droves and then get plastered all over reddit, tumblr, and 4chan. Even Eastern publishers have joined in on the racket. Ever since CoD4 it's been clear, everyone's goal is to make the most popular game, rather than trying to make the best game possible.
Of course, there's definitely going to be a point where the marketing expense won't be covered by the profits. What we really need is for people to be more critical about what games they purchase. It honestly feels like a lost cause, but do I think one day at least the AAA market will crash and the devs making solid, fresh, and interesting games will be the ones left standing.
>>321670740
meant to reply to >>321669501
There's been fuck all for meaningful development with the past two generations. We could go back to PS2-level visuals and nothing would be bad at all.
All we've done is make huge ass open worlds with nothing in them and cinematic shooters where in between the usual "hide to restore health, then pop out and shoot some people for a while" you have "press forward and occasionally jump/crouch" while the architecture explodes.
>>321664824
That's exactly what I wish would happen. 90% of money and manpower in game dev today go towards shit that doesn't affect the gameplay like graphical assets and character animations.
But I don't think AAA is going back there. I think AAA is going to keep ballooning until it implodes in upon itself and we just have to wait for the indies to catch up to small PS2 sizes teams.
>>321671068
>All we've done is make huge ass open worlds
I'm actually getting kinda tired of open worlds. Everyone's been doing it for so long that it isn't special anymore.
>>321671235
A triple A model implosion would look like a horrible train wreck considering how many companies live off that model
>>321664824
No. Review sites refuse to g give anything that isn't aaa or indie a chance, unless they pay them. Bound by flame comes to mind, and it got but blasted. Or velvet assassin from last gen. The good days are gone my friend.
>>321673076
It seems like its bound to happen because Season Pass prices keep getting higher every year. I'm honestly surprised at how many people are willing to pay $50 or £40 extra in advance for a season pass on top of a $60 or £50 game before they even play the game.
>>321664824
Yes, I would be fine with it. I would be fine with PS2 graphics. At least then modern consoles could manage 1080p/60fps
The most recent game I played was MGSVIt was on a 360
I'm too much of a poorfag to complain.
