Support NeoGAF

[Felessan]

We’ve all heard how PS3 was extremely difficult to code for, and how time to triangle has greatly improved over the gens since.

Why is there no developers spitting out PS3 quality games at an astronomical rate?

PS3 graphics were no slouch and would be perfect for the AA space. From Resistance, Warhawk, Motorstorm, Uncharted, inFamous.

ND made 5 games on PS3, 3 Uncharted games, and Last of Us + the DLC expansion.

In a time where development takes forever it seems like that would be a goldmine.

Or the real reason games are taking forever is due to bloated companies, filled with people who don’t know how to code.

Marketing cost is not reduced, as well as many other costs of the game
Sales drop with IQ much faster than cost reduction benefit - in indie/A space (where "ps3 quality games" now belongs) you really have to stand out to be successful

You sell either flashy or interesting or viral games. Generic ps3 level game now have no of these points, so hundreds or even thousands of them just lie in the forgotten corner of steam/psn.

 

[64gigabyteram]

Less talent in the industry, plus games with "no graphix" would have some trouble selling among the masses I guess.

Many indies are opting for low-poly PSX like graphics tho. Which is cool, I like that aesthetic.

The indies with the PSX graphics are also taking way too long too IMHO. A bit more excusable since they're less experienced and have less money, but still.

 

[bitbydeath]

The indies with the PSX graphics are also taking way too long too IMHO. A bit more excusable since they're less experienced and have less money, but still.

And to this I wonder why, when indies being less experienced should have always been the case.

 

[BlackTron]

 

[64gigabyteram]

You get the Switch (and upcoming Switch 2) for Nintendo games. They're the only folks making the games they do in the AAA space.

 

[Wildebeest]

The point of making games like Uncharted was never to realise a certain vision for story telling or sustainable game development. It was always to squeeze competition out of the market by making games that other developers could not compete with in terms of production values and marketing spend.

 

[BlackTron]

You get the Switch (and upcoming Switch 2) for Nintendo games. They're the only folks making the games they do in the AAA space.

Hey, one market leader out of three is more than nobody

They're just an example of OP's thesis in action.

 

[bitbydeath]

The point of making games like Uncharted was never to realise a certain vision for story telling or sustainable game development. It was always to squeeze competition out of the market by making games that other developers could not compete with in terms of production values and marketing spend.

But they were each made by the one team and released just two years apart from one another.

2007, 2009 and 2011.

Last of Us then released 2 years later again in 2013.

 

[64gigabyteram]

Hey, one market leader out of three is more than nobody

They're just an example of OP's thesis in action.

I think it would be better if every company (yes, i mean every popular company) came up with PS3-level games to release every 2-3 years between their major projects.

I know people are sick of this word at this point, but genuinely, it's unsustainable to keep banking everything on these major 4+ year long projects that take hundreds of millions to make. I sincerely wish the likes of Ubisoft, Rockstar and Remedy would listen & take tips from Capcom in how industrious their output can be

 

[chakadave]

I'm still playing these I have a Switch.

 

[Wildebeest]

But they were each made by the one team and released just two years apart from one another.

2007, 2009 and 2011.

Last of Us then released 2 years later again in 2013.

A big problem with that sprint type development on one series is dev burnout. If you look at the original Tomb Raider on PS1, then the devs left from the original game were all burned out by the end of Tomb Raider 2, but the series had to keep going on and on because it was the only thing Core had. It didn't stop them making games, but it wasn't sustainable or good for growth.

 

[digital_ghost]

Nintendo switch is close to ps3/Xbox 360 and there are ton of games for switch .

Also the ys games come out regularly with ps3 graphics .

 

[bender]

The games you mentioned like Resistance, Uncharted, inFamous etc. are good…

 

[Walter Matthau]

Game development tools improve over time, but it doesn't eliminate other costs and expectations increase from generation to generation.

A relatively untalented team of a few people could make a game with the visual "quality" of Warhawk, but it'll be missing everything else that made it compelling.

 

[FeralEcho]

Because even though the technology has been made to be easier to work with,the developers of the modern age spend 40% of their working time pushing their agendas on social media and 40% bitching on twitter about what awful humans gamers are because they don't like said agendas so it doesn't leave much time for actual proper development.

 

[onQ123]

We’ve all heard how PS3 was extremely difficult to code for, and how time to triangle has greatly improved over the gens since.

Why is there no developers spitting out PS3 quality games at an astronomical rate?

PS3 graphics were no slouch and would be perfect for the AA space. From Resistance, Warhawk, Motorstorm, Uncharted, inFamous.

ND made 5 games on PS3, 3 Uncharted games, and Last of Us + the DLC expansion.

In a time where development takes forever it seems like that would be a goldmine.

Or the real reason games are taking forever is due to bloated companies, filled with people who don’t know how to code.

I'm pretty sure there is lots of PS3 level games out now that no one is buying

 

[ProtoByte]

Its organizational bloat and work culture change. The industry was staffed by late gen x/early millenials usually in their 20s and 30s and without families. Now, it's staffed by very aging millenials and late gen x who need a "work life balance" to tend to family and such. They're not as hungry.

sincerely wish the likes of Ubisoft, Rockstar and Remedy would listen & take tips from Capcom in how industrious their output can be

Ehhh, I wouldn't say that. Capcom is running on fumes of remasters and remakes where the foundational work is already done for them, and the odd Monster Hunter title every 5-7 years. They're not all that different from 2010s Ubisoft, only they're using old ass games to lay the groundwork instead of new ones like Child of Light or Rayman Legends.

There's nothing wrong with less frequent releases that are expected to be bigger hits. The problem is that the devs don't act like they're making games that are expected to be big hits. They're on cruise control.

 

[SHA]

Wrong, they're the same except afew studios doing the heavy lifting and change the experience.

 

[jshackles]

Any examples?

One that immediately comes to mind (though I hate to admit it) is the Atelier series

Atelier (video game series) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

These games rarely miss a year, and almost never go more than two years between releases. They have been pumped out pretty consistently since the very first game released in '97. Graphically even the newest game that releases in March isn't exactly a showcase game for the latest generation consoles. In fact, I'd say it looks very much like a PS3 game.

 

[poppabk]

Err Nintendo.

 

[TGO]

Despite what people of the finish product, Alan Wake 2 took 4 years with a $70 budget.
That's PS3 level time & cost there and I wouldn't say Alan Wake 2 is weak in the graphics department or production value and it's not a short game either
In fact I can't point at anything what would be considered low budget in that game.
So maybe some Devs are just telling pokies and like you said...are full of inexperienced hacks that don't know what they're doing other than pushing the message and getting in the way development.

 

[Griffon]

PS3 level games are still too expensive and complicated to make for your average bedroom coder.

Maybe once ai-made assets become truly ubiquitous, things will get going. But for now it's at an awkward place.

 

[Guardian Monkey]

Sir, you are describing the indie scene. Welcome, please enjoy it.

I know right.

 

[bitbydeath]

I'm pretty sure there is lots of PS3 level games out now that no one is buying

I re-bought TLOU - Doing my part.

 

[JimboJones]

Atlus still rocking that PS360 look.

 

[YeulEmeralda]

You know the one thing that still costs just as much money in 1998 as it does today?

Artists.

You can find code monkeys easily they are a dime a dozen. But why do so few indie games look like Suikoden? Exactly.

 

[genesisblock]

We’ve all heard how PS3 was extremely difficult to code for, and how time to triangle has greatly improved over the gens since.

Why is there no developers spitting out PS3 quality games at an astronomical rate?

PS3 graphics were no slouch and would be perfect for the AA space. From Resistance, Warhawk, Motorstorm, Uncharted, inFamous.

ND made 5 games on PS3, 3 Uncharted games, and Last of Us + the DLC expansion.

In a time where development takes forever it seems like that would be a goldmine.

Or the real reason games are taking forever is due to bloated companies, filled with people who don’t know how to code.

Pretty much what you said. The developer veterans are either pushed out or burned out. That Ubisoft director confirming half the team has no experience developing any game for AC: Shadows should tell you the state of the industry. If you were to bring the developers back with a Time Machine and immediately set them to work on the PS5, I haven’t no doubt we will se a far greater quality and quantity of output today.