For me it’s a lack of creativity and innovation when it comes to gameplay. Indies or just smaller studio productions take more risks and that’s a lot more exciting.
Must be multiplayer, ostensibly because people ‘demand’ it, but a narrative easy to believe when you know players are stuck with your servers and you can effectively shut down the game when it no longer makes money for you.
Relatively fewer games to be made, no chances may be taken. Conventional wisdom tells them that people got over turn-based in the 90s, so even the FFVII remake refused to do real turn-based, while Clair Obscur showed that it was still absolutely welcome gameplay.
I admit I was thinking about E33 as well, but my niche is narratively strong games or puzzle games. Too many AAA games are narratively disjointed open world messes and when it comes to puzzles indies are just king. Animal Well, Blue Prince, The Witness etc.
I’m playing Baldur’s Gate 3 for the first time right now. I’m not particularly a fan of turn-based games, but I’m digging there interpretation of the genre. I like how each character has a limited amount of movement per turn and the ability to navigate through the entire environment. I’m surprised more developers don’t use a similar model.
In the final fantasy and Pokemon games I played when I was younger -and more recently Expedition 33-there wasn’t any movement. My team was standing static on the left and the enemy team was on the right. BG3 is the first turn based game I played where I can strategically move around a 3D environment.
Ah I see. Neat, im glad you like it. Xcom 2 is a really great turn based with movement game too. It’s not an RPG, and it’s crazy difficult, but its one of the best.
Zero creativity, zero innovation, zero passion. Too many AAA games feel like all of the design and decision making happened in a boardroom full of executives and market researchers, then the actual designers and developers just churn out whatever the higher-ups have decided the product will be.
to me, aaa = mark of inferior quality, barring some exceptions
For me it’s a lack of creativity and innovation when it comes to gameplay. Indies or just smaller studio productions take more risks and that’s a lot more exciting.
Yeah, AAA productions:
I admit I was thinking about E33 as well, but my niche is narratively strong games or puzzle games. Too many AAA games are narratively disjointed open world messes and when it comes to puzzles indies are just king. Animal Well, Blue Prince, The Witness etc.
I’m playing Baldur’s Gate 3 for the first time right now. I’m not particularly a fan of turn-based games, but I’m digging there interpretation of the genre. I like how each character has a limited amount of movement per turn and the ability to navigate through the entire environment. I’m surprised more developers don’t use a similar model.
That’s just how turn based movement works
In the final fantasy and Pokemon games I played when I was younger -and more recently Expedition 33-there wasn’t any movement. My team was standing static on the left and the enemy team was on the right. BG3 is the first turn based game I played where I can strategically move around a 3D environment.
Ah I see. Neat, im glad you like it. Xcom 2 is a really great turn based with movement game too. It’s not an RPG, and it’s crazy difficult, but its one of the best.
Zero creativity, zero innovation, zero passion. Too many AAA games feel like all of the design and decision making happened in a boardroom full of executives and market researchers, then the actual designers and developers just churn out whatever the higher-ups have decided the product will be.
that is my point exactly. doesnt matter how nice the game looks, if its uncreative crap nothing will save that.
To me, AAA means but it in 6-12 months for $10-20