Mass Effect, WoW, Skyrim, Dragon Age: Origins, Witcher 3, Baldur’s Gate 3, Bioshock…

Totally. As I said, I don’t disparage well made games and enjoyed literally every title you listed except Persona (never played).

But like lets be real. AAA game industries have generally become bloated, increasingly prioritizing profit over product quality. Lots of exploitation of developers and gamers alike.

I’m not saying AAA can’t produce good games.

Mostly agree, but WoW wouldn’t qualify for the no monetization part.

Neither would Mass Effect or DA:O, those had purchaseable cosmetics and preorder bonuses. So did Dead Space, incidentally. In fact there were some cross-brand cosmetics between Dead Space and Mass Effect, IIRC. Definitely Jedi Survivor. Persona games often have small cosmetic DLC, too.

Often with this stuff, “AAA” becomes “games I didn’t like” more than anything else.

I am very confused about what you’re saying there. So AAA produces great games but also is bloated, exploitative and low quality for the sake of profit.

So which is it? I mean, it can be both, but then I’m not sure where the “AAA needs to die” thing comes from. Presumably AAA should make more good games and less bad games, which seems like a completely different thing to say.

Cyberpunk

Releasing a broken beta version for full retail price is not “AAA done right”.

2012, 2005, 2011, 2009, 2015, 2023, 2011.

Control and Alan Wake 2 also, Remedy flying the AAA banner while holding their artistic head high still.

I haven’t played them but I from what I hear the Batman Arkham games and Insomniac Spider-Man games also count as worthwhile and well-made AAA games.

1. You’re changing what I’m saying. I didn’t even use the phrase “low quality.” I said prioritizing money over quality. Like launching broken games and patching after the fact.

2. It’s not mutually exclusive. You can spend too much on anything regardless if it’s good or not. Just like Hollywood movie budgets are massive compared to decades ago… but are the movies “better”?

Needs to change is a more accurate statement. But everyone listing their favorite AAA game as an argument against what I’m saying has misunderstood.

It has been finished and done for at least two years now, with a solid expansion to boot, so the “garbage at launch” argument doesn’t hold much steam for me anymore.

Huh, I… Acquired Jedi Survivor so all connectivity shoving monetization must not have worked. I haven’t played the 2nd one, but at least in the first one I didn’t remember there being DLC packs and whatnot.

Also to be completely honest I haven’t played Persona, so if there is DLC in it I am mistaken.

Luckily “garbage at launch” isn’t a phrase used to indicate something is bad “right now” so no steam need be held.

The game played like a beta on underpowered consoles, but the PS5 versions were complete and were able to be finished with no DLC needed. They did the work, turned it around, and the game runs and plays fantastic now 5 years after launch. On top of that they did it in less than 3 years.

Not understanding how it doesn’t qualify under my original statement.

That’s my biggest gripe. Games being released in an unfinished state. I’d rather them be honest, call it an early release and charge accordingly.

My second biggest gripe rides off the back of the first… how the people who make and play games are exploited.

• Devs getting worked to death and thrown under the bus for executive decisions.

• Gamers’ loyalty being taken advantage of including the declining value of Pre-orders.

At Launch the game was heroically broken on ps4, literally unplayable.

PS5 was buggy but doable.

PC was hit and miss, i had a reasonable time with it though.

Agree about the turnaround, like a faster no mans sky, which i would hope with the difference in budget.

Not understanding how it doesn’t qualify under my original statement.

I wasn’t addressing your original post, but i can give my opinion i suppose.

Your original criteria of “AAA done right” were:

“solid ending, no monetization beyond a full expansion for less than retail, and good story”.

So the comment:

Releasing a broken beta version for full retail price is not “AAA done right”

Doesn’t so much point out how cyberpunk doesn’t fit your proposed criteria, but rather that “baseline release quality” should also be in the list.

Which i agree with, I’d go as far as to say “should be a playable, functional game at launch” is a baseline requirement for any type of studios that wishes to be considered “Doing things right”.

I’m not sure persona actually fits as AAA, it’s more like AA.

Jedi was alright, others on that list, meh…

2 to 5 Mio budget sounds alright for a small project for him and his daughter to get the creative juices flowing.

Just from PC-perspective:

Just too bad AW2 is locked in Epic Store, but that’s not related to the quality of the game.

Arkham Knight had quite a disasterous launch with the performance issues tho, but can’t recall any gameplay bugs - even though I do have my gripes with that game. The performance issues are (now) fairly non-issue as gpu/cpu/storage performance has risen noticeably since launch.

Arkham Origins I couldn’t even play 15 minutes without it crashing, no idea what’s happening there.

I realize now you are not the person who originally commented on my top level comment, so my reference to my original point was moot. Have a great day!

Fuck AAA.