• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Games take too long to make these days....

64bitmodels

Reverse groomer.
Back in the 80s, 90s, and 2000s you could easily get away with making yearly sequels because of how much easier and faster it was to create a video game. Call of Duty was at it's peak in the late 2000s- Early 2010s, and almost every game pumped out at that time came complete and fully designed. Nowadays, COD comes out unfinished and barely playable with tons of bugs and glitches.

The first 3 uncharted games came out in the span of 4 years- 1 in 2007, 2 in 2009, 3 in 2011
Uncharted 4 took 4 years of development, and came out in 2016. although to be fair, they did have to work on TLOU in that time span.

Final Fantasy 7 Remake is a gorgeous looking game. It's also a remake of the first part of the original. And it took 5 years to make that one section as opposed to the 1 year of the entirety of the original.

Horizon forbidden west, also. First game came out in 2017, the second came out in 2022. 5 whole ass years of development time.

Gran Turismo especially gets me- GT6 came out in 2013, 3 years after GT5 came out. GT7, came out in 2022!!! Sport existed yeah, but if we add that to the equation it still took 5 fucking years.

It honestly feels like games take forever to make these days. Life is way too short to be waiting nearly an entire decade for a video game (cough cough Cyberpunk cough cough GTAVI cough cough)
I think it's cuz of visuals and budget. The cutscenes, graphics, etc found in video games must take a LOT of time to make- they might make the bulk of the development time as opposed to the gameplay and music. There's stuff like UE5's quixel which enables you to create jawdropping video game environments in a couple of days, yet we don't really see devs taking advantage of that stuff. Or if they do, it's clearly not speeding up development that much.

I'm a patient person, even if this post might say otherwise. But i honestly think that games take too much time to make these days. It's reasonable to wait 2-3 years for a sequel to a beloved franchise.... Not 5 or more years. It's understandable if it's a new IP like Starfield, but not that many new IPs are being made by developers these days, and the games i listed are all sequels.
Also, yes i know backlogs exist, but they're gonna run out one day, and when you've played everything then how the fuck are you gonna cope with waiting 6 years for the next fucking Halo, or Zelda? Oh yeah, Zelda especially gets me. BOTW2 doesn't look to be that much crazier than BOTW1 but it took them 6 years to make. What the hell?!?
 

BennyBlanco

aka IMurRIVAL69
Yeah. It’s getting crazy. Look at the the turnaround in Zelda. Ocarina of Time —-> Majoras Mask was less than 2 years. Breath of the Wild was over 5 years ago and we still don’t have a release date for the sequel that’s on the same engine.
 

Portugeezer

Member
You'll play Elder Scrolls 6 with your grandkid and you'll enjoy it.

Yeah. It’s getting crazy. Look at the the turnaround in Zelda. Ocarina of Time —-> Majoras Mask was less than 2 years. Breath of the Wild was over 5 years ago and we still don’t have a release date for the sequel that’s on the same engine.
Zelda feels like a strategic hold to be honest. If it launches with Switch 2 it would make sense.
 

JayK47

Member
The editor's note in the latest Game Informer magazine agrees. He discusses Rockstar as an example. Compares how many games they made on the PS2 compared to now, which is maybe one per generation. Many studios take well over 5 years to make a single game and it will only get worse. How long before it takes 10 years to make a damn game? It really is crazy.
 

Batiman

Member
Yep, it’s why I don’t wait on games anymore. I even wish they took some shortcuts in the graphics department if it means we get games quicker. As long as it looks good overall with a solid frame rate then I’m good.

I know most won’t agree with that statement. I’m not saying I want ugly games, I’m saying i don’t need to see the tiniest details of facial hair or grass if it means another year of waiting. Somewhere in the middle.

This all comes down to the ridiculous expectations we all set for games these days. Gamers rip apart anything that’s not perfection with screenshots, memes etc.

There’s also an option to add different pricing to easier/quicker developed games. 40$,50$,60$,70$ whatever. It blows my mind I payed the same amount of money for Kirby as red dead 2. And I’m enjoying Kirby a lot. But there’s obvious differences in what both games took to make regardless of what you enjoy more.
 
Last edited:
Zelda feels like a strategic hold to be honest. If it launches with Switch 2 it would make sense.
I agree. The only reason that makes sense is that the game was finished some time ago and they are just holding it for Nintendo's new hardware. No way it took the devs more than a few years to have it ready. Zelda is a system seller. Can literally carry the Switch 2's first year by itself.
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
A big industry with mtx keeps the revenue coming in even with no new game releases. Successful games can milk it dry.

Back then, the gaming market was smaller and no mtx. So studios had to pump out the games asap to stay alive.

New World Computing released 9 Might & Magic games in 16 years, + a bunch of Heroes of M&M games + whatever else they made. I totally get it many of the franchise sequels can be similar and just updated with new textures and storyline, but hey they still figured out how to revamp that stuff every year or two.
 
Last edited:

Naked Lunch

Member
Im not sure exact what has happened but somehow these dev cycles need to be re-thought. Unless things are un-salvageable now. As others have said - diving back into retro games is the way to go now a days. Rediscover the classics in between these years and years long droughts.

Ive always said 1998 is the best game release year of all time but even release schedules of stuff from just 10 years ago is lightyears ahead of today.
I was organizing my old game mags - looking for Wii's Skyward Sword reviews and was just blown away by what came out in 2011 alone.

Just look at this fucking list below from 2011 alone and only stuff I handpicked out.
I mean we took this stuff for granted back then - acted like this was just...normal.
We had no clue how good we had it even then. How the hell did we even have time to play all this stuff?

2011 Key Game Releases:
Battlefield 3, Ultimate MvC3, Zelda Skyward Sword, Arkham City, Halo Anniversary, MGS HD Collection, Uncharted 3, Kirby Return to Dreamland, Ratchet & Clank 4, Forza Motosport 4, Dark Souls 1, Ico&SoTC HD, Gears 3, Deus EX HR, FFTactics PSP, Alice Madness Returns, Infamous 2, LA Noire, Deathsmiles II, Virtua Tennis 4, Portal 2, Limbo, Top Spin 4, Hard Corps Uprising, Tactics Ogre PSP, Dead Space 2.

Edit: Also forgot about Skyrim and Witcher 2 (!!!) [thanks to Laptop1991 Laptop1991 and Smiggs Smiggs ]

Just a ridiculous amount of amazing stuff to pick from.
 
Last edited:

Laptop1991

Member
I agree, and when they do actually come out, a lot arn't that impressive or even work properly, i still blame online stores and mtx for a lot of the current state of the industry, too much about making money, not enough about quality and entertainment. i'm getting bored of replaying great games from the past now!.
 

Fbh

Gold Member
Yeah, but that's what we'll get as people continue wanting more and more graphics and content.
It has also made these super early announcements extra annoying. A game getting announced early used to mean "see you in 2-3 years". Now it's "See you in 5-7 years....maybe).

Duality of gamers:

Want quicker releases, will complain about puddles.

Pretty much.
For example FROM has kept a pretty good pace with their releases, since 2015 they launched Bloodborne (+DLC), Dark Souls 3 (+DLC), Sekiro and Elden Ring.
But of course you get people whining about Elden Ring reusing assets and not looking as nice as Demon Souls Remaster
 

64bitmodels

Reverse groomer.
i have been an advocate for lowering graphics quality if it means games come out sooner. A lot of good games in the PS2- Xbox era still look good today, same for 360.
At the end of the day, graphics will inevitably become nothing more than visual noise as you focus less on them and more on the gameplay in the game. We don't need them to look good everywhere, but maybe for the parts it counts. Like having PS3 level geometry in a scene with tons of hard, demanding gameplay would make sense since you're too busy focusing on the gameplay to care- but cutscenes need to look good. I have no idea about game development personally, but if that were the case i think it'd be a great compromise
 

Represent.

Member
Theres not enough talent/manpower. Studios are too small. Games got more ambitious and studio sizes didnt match that same growth.

As I said, Hollywood and other industries have stolen the talent away from the gaming industry.
 
Last edited:

Smiggs

Member
2011 Key Game Releases:
Battlefield 3, Ultimate MvC3, Zelda Skyward Sword, Arkham City, Halo Anniversary, MGS HD Collection, Uncharted 3, Kirby Return to Dreamland, Ratchet & Clank 4, Forza Motosport 4, Dark Souls 1, Ico&SoTC HD, Gears 3, Deus EX HR, FFTactics PSP, Alice Madness Returns, Infamous 2, LA Noire, Deathsmiles II, Virtua Tennis 4, Portal 2, Limbo, Top Spin 4, Hard Corps Uprising, Tactics Ogre PSP, Dead Space 2.

Just a ridiculous amount of amazing stuff to pick from.
Witcher 2 also came out in 2011. And then Witcher 3 came out 4 years later, and that game is massive.
 

Begleiter

Neo Member
Gust put out one to two games a year, often better than major releases from other developers. It's simply a question of what publishers prioritise.
 

Laptop1991

Member
Im not sure exact what has happened but somehow these dev cycles need to be re-thought. Unless things are un-salvageable now. As others have said - diving back into retro games is the way to go now a days. Rediscover the classics in between these years and years long droughts.

Ive always said 1998 is the best game release year of all time but even release schedules of stuff from just 10 years ago is lightyears ahead of today.
I was organizing my old game mags - looking for Wii's Skyward Sword reviews and was just blown away by what came out in 2011 alone.

Just look at this fucking list below from 2011 alone and only stuff I handpicked out.
I mean we took this stuff for granted back then - acted like this was just...normal.
We had no clue how good we had it even then. How the hell did we even have time to play all this stuff?

2011 Key Game Releases:
Battlefield 3, Ultimate MvC3, Zelda Skyward Sword, Arkham City, Halo Anniversary, MGS HD Collection, Uncharted 3, Kirby Return to Dreamland, Ratchet & Clank 4, Forza Motosport 4, Dark Souls 1, Ico&SoTC HD, Gears 3, Deus EX HR, FFTactics PSP, Alice Madness Returns, Infamous 2, LA Noire, Deathsmiles II, Virtua Tennis 4, Portal 2, Limbo, Top Spin 4, Hard Corps Uprising, Tactics Ogre PSP, Dead Space 2.

Just a ridiculous amount of amazing stuff to pick from.

Agreed and you didn't even mention Skyrim! lol.
 

levyjl1988

Member
I enjoyed the Xbox 360 era. Games were made and developed pretty quickly and it was genuine pure bliss gaming.
Games were feature complete.
Sure there were issues with store-exclusive preorder bonuses, online passes and DLC inserts for all new purchases.
But it felt complete at launch.
Halo 3 and Halo Reach were fun playing online.

Modern gaming during the Xbox One/ PS4/ Wii U era introduced:
Broken games at launch, with the, fix it later mentality.
Heavily focused on microtransactions.
Lootboxes with OverWatch and its exploitative practices.
etc.

We will never have games again that will evoke that Xbox 360 era ever again.
 

64bitmodels

Reverse groomer.
I enjoyed the Xbox 360 era. Games were made and developed pretty quickly and it was genuine pure bliss gaming.
Games were feature complete.
Sure there were issues with store-exclusive preorder bonuses, online passes and DLC inserts for all new purchases.
But it felt complete at launch.
Halo 3 and Halo Reach were fun playing online.

Modern gaming during the Xbox One/ PS4/ Wii U era introduced:
Broken games at launch, with the, fix it later mentality.
Heavily focused on microtransactions.
Lootboxes with OverWatch and its exploitative practices.
etc.

We will never have games again that will evoke that Xbox 360 era ever again.
people need to shut up about the PS2 and Xbox, give some more love to 7th gen. Games started becoming more mature and deep around that time, tackling subjects previous generations never bothered with. DLC sucks yes, but you didn't even see that until around 2011. 2005-2011 were the peak years of 7th gen
 

JayK47

Member
I enjoyed the Xbox 360 era. Games were made and developed pretty quickly and it was genuine pure bliss gaming.
Games were feature complete.
Sure there were issues with store-exclusive preorder bonuses, online passes and DLC inserts for all new purchases.
But it felt complete at launch.
Halo 3 and Halo Reach were fun playing online.

Modern gaming during the Xbox One/ PS4/ Wii U era introduced:
Broken games at launch, with the, fix it later mentality.
Heavily focused on microtransactions.
Lootboxes with OverWatch and its exploitative practices.
etc.

We will never have games again that will evoke that Xbox 360 era ever again.
That was a great gen for sure. So many great titles for the Xbox 360. The system sucked, but the games were amazing. I wish all the games were backwards compatible with the Xbox One.
 

S0ULZB0URNE

Member
Meta/review score not mattering is what a certain group of fanboys started spinning last gen when there gaming format of choice lineup didn't fare well in comparison to the competitions.

AAA has always been about critical acclaim,then budget and that's where Cyberpunk comes in with the big budget but not AAA critically.

Some AAA games didn't have big budgets.
 

S0ULZB0URNE

Member
Imagine thinking the metascore is an indicative of a game's quality in the year of our lord 2022.
Maybe it doesn't for you but in 2022 a AAA rated game has been super helpful with researching a game before purchase and in these modern times has never led me the wrong way.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Meta/review score not mattering is what a certain group of fanboys started spinning last gen when there gaming format of choice lineup didn't fare well in comparison to the competitions.

AAA has always been about critical acclaim,then budget and that's where Cyberpunk comes in with the big budget but not AAA critically.

Some AAA games didn't have big budgets.

AAA directly refers to a games budget and production values. Not its perceived critical reception.

No idea what all else you're babbling about here friend, lol.
 

Valedix

Member
We're still in the middle of a pandemic so you can expect a handful if not the majority of developers still work from home, along with that comes potential communication issues. Cyberpunk is a great example of why games take longer time as developers don't want to rush a broken game.
 

64bitmodels

Reverse groomer.
AAA has always been about critical acclaim
disco elysium is rated 97 on metacritic, does that make it an AAA game despite being clearly developed by an indie studio with the budget of an indie game
how about Celeste, it has a 94 on metacritic (fully deserved BTW, that game is a masterpiece) yet it has the budget, visuals, and studio of an indie. That clearly must mean it's an AAA game
 

TintoConCasera

Gold Member
Maybe it doesn't for you but in 2022 a AAA rated game has been super helpful with researching a game before purchase and in these modern times has never led me the wrong way.
So you say you agree with the reviews that said Deathloop is a 10/10? And what about those Cyberpunk reviews that said 10/10 when the game was broken/incomplete?
 

64bitmodels

Reverse groomer.
I genuinely don't see how you can oppose more games coming out in less time, if you have a good vision, a good work ethic and focus on the parts of the game that matter most your game will always be a masterpiece, regardless of if it was made in 2 years or 5.
(also, on the topic of metacritic scores, GTAIV has a higher score than GTAV. Metacritic is fucking based)
 
Funny how there's one thread here talking about how it's too bad game devs don't write games "to the metal" in assembly (as if you really even can anymore) and another one complaining that games take too long to make.
 

S0ULZB0URNE

Member
disco elysium is rated 97 on metacritic, does that make it an AAA game despite being clearly developed by an indie studio with the budget of an indie game
how about Celeste, it has a 94 on metacritic (fully deserved BTW, that game is a masterpiece) yet it has the budget, visuals, and studio of an indie. That clearly must mean it's an AAA game
ABSOLUTELY and I did say not every AAA game has a AAA budget and every AAA budget doesn't always end up being a AAA game.
 

TintoConCasera

Gold Member
I didn't buy it.
The 10/10 was suspect and not the AVERAGE score which I go by.
Glad to read that.
I still have a hard time trusting reviewers and game journos. I'd rather go to GAF or elsewhere and check users reviews, they are more trust worthy for me.

But hey, it's your system and it's working for you, so keep at it.

Just... Bro, don't discard a game just for being lower than XX MC score. You might be missing on some cool stuff just because some journos didn't like it.
 

S0ULZB0URNE

Member
AAA directly refers to a games budget and production values. Not its perceived critical reception.

No idea what all else you're babbling about here friend, lol.
Years ago... AAA talk started by referring to critically acclaimed games.

And you know exactly what I am babbling about.
 

S0ULZB0URNE

Member
Glad to read that.
I still have a hard time trusting reviewers and game journos. I'd rather go to GAF or elsewhere and check users reviews, they are more trust worthy for me.

But hey, it's your system and it's working for you, so keep at it.

Just... Bro, don't discard a game just for being lower than XX MC score. You might be missing on some cool stuff just because some journos didn't like it.
It's my system and it does work for me :)
But not every critically acclaimed game is every ones type of game.
For example, I LOATHE the GTA games BUT what they do(that I loath) they excel in.

If a game score doesn't meet my criteria... I will still consider buying it IF I can play it for myself.
For example, Destiny got shitted on at launch but I played the Alpha and the beta and enjoyed it.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Years ago... AAA talk started by referring to critically acclaimed games.

And you know exactly what I am babbling about.

AAA has always been about production and budget and never about critical acclaim.

Games are called AAA long before they even start getting any critical reviews.

You're confusing two very different things here.


In the video-game industry, AAA (pronounced and sometimes written Triple-A) is an informal classification used to categorise games produced and distributed by a mid-sized or major publisher, which typically have higher development and marketing budgets than other tiers of games.[1]


 
Last edited:
Top Bottom