The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
What is an AAA game, and is the Wii getting any from 3rd parties?
UncleSporky
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
What constitutes a triple-A game?
Welcome to the exciting world of semantics!
Well, maybe a little bit more than that. Semantics with a point, hopefully.
Is a game an AAA title regardless of its popularity, hinging only on the parties involved in making it and its production values? Or are games only AAA if the public sees them as being so? Is it about the quality of graphics, meat to the game, and money spent on it, or is it simply when people decide it should be categorized as one?
I wanted to avoid list warz junk in this thread, but I think some specific examples are in order. GTA games are AAA, Halo is AAA, Mario Galaxy is AAA. This is just my opinion but I think it's reasonable and accepted - some games are pretty much indisputably top-tier. But what about more offbeat games like Katamari Damacy? Personally I would say it's AAA for being such an all-around quality experience, and yet it wasn't created by one of the big boys or on a huge budget. I don't think it even pushed the envelope in any respect. But based on popularity and fun/cohesiveness, I would call it triple-A. Is that fair, or incorrect?
Could it swing the other way? Suppose you have a game from a big studio with millions invested that looks and sounds spectacular, but it bombs hard. Is it possible to consider it AAA? I'm having a hard time coming up with examples of this, maybe Kane & Lynch, or even something like Beyond Good and Evil.
And is it possible for a game to be AAA more than once? I'm referring to ports. RE4 was AAA on the Cube, but is it still so on the Wii?
The reason I ask is that there seems to be a general sentiment about the Wii that it's not getting any AAA effort from third parties. I suppose this could be correct, I'm not going to get defensive about it or anything. I just wondered if, by our definition of AAA, this is really true.
The Wii is getting a lot more offbeat sort of games, interesting twists on "normal" genres. This was something else I mentioned to Scarab in our earlier discussion - that 360 and PS3 are seeing "classic genre" 3rd party AAAs such as FPSs, and the Wii is getting third party AAA games of a different kind. Two games which I personally would categorize this way are Trauma Center and Zak & Wiki.
One thing in particular that occurred to me: seeing that the Wii is getting quite a few games from non-standard genres, I wonder if we are getting triple-A games here, it's just that they're less recognizable because their category has been more or less untapped. Why wouldn't you call games like Trauma Center or Big Brain Academy triple-A? Is it because it doesn't belong to one of the specific genres that AAAs can come from, or because it doesn't have astounding 3D graphics, or what? Is it based on popularity among the forums?
That's the jist of my argument (if you want to call it that). I think there's more star effort for Wii than most people think, we just aren't used to calling it that, and it seems worse for comparison. If I'm totally off base here, please let me know!
But also please avoid list warz and stuff like "what do you mean, every game on the Wii is shit." I don't mind if you feel that way, I'd just like a more thought out post with less flamebaiting.
The_Scarab wrote: »UncleSporky wrote:Just making sure this is typical space-saving exaggeration, yes?The_Scarab wrote:Wii has been out over a year and the only good games are Nintendo ones.
Well yes and no. This requires more analysis on what is a 'triple A' title. At the moment on the Wii, the best games are definitely Nintendo ones, the most high profile too. That's not to say there aren't good games from other people, but hyperbole just cuts out a whole other discussion that leads nowhere.
The Wii will outsell all other consoles this year, but it will plateau around summer, and third parties will not release any triple-A content for the system due to weak third-party sales.
Welcome to the exciting world of semantics!
Well, maybe a little bit more than that. Semantics with a point, hopefully.
Is a game an AAA title regardless of its popularity, hinging only on the parties involved in making it and its production values? Or are games only AAA if the public sees them as being so? Is it about the quality of graphics, meat to the game, and money spent on it, or is it simply when people decide it should be categorized as one?
I wanted to avoid list warz junk in this thread, but I think some specific examples are in order. GTA games are AAA, Halo is AAA, Mario Galaxy is AAA. This is just my opinion but I think it's reasonable and accepted - some games are pretty much indisputably top-tier. But what about more offbeat games like Katamari Damacy? Personally I would say it's AAA for being such an all-around quality experience, and yet it wasn't created by one of the big boys or on a huge budget. I don't think it even pushed the envelope in any respect. But based on popularity and fun/cohesiveness, I would call it triple-A. Is that fair, or incorrect?
Could it swing the other way? Suppose you have a game from a big studio with millions invested that looks and sounds spectacular, but it bombs hard. Is it possible to consider it AAA? I'm having a hard time coming up with examples of this, maybe Kane & Lynch, or even something like Beyond Good and Evil.
And is it possible for a game to be AAA more than once? I'm referring to ports. RE4 was AAA on the Cube, but is it still so on the Wii?
The reason I ask is that there seems to be a general sentiment about the Wii that it's not getting any AAA effort from third parties. I suppose this could be correct, I'm not going to get defensive about it or anything. I just wondered if, by our definition of AAA, this is really true.
The Wii is getting a lot more offbeat sort of games, interesting twists on "normal" genres. This was something else I mentioned to Scarab in our earlier discussion - that 360 and PS3 are seeing "classic genre" 3rd party AAAs such as FPSs, and the Wii is getting third party AAA games of a different kind. Two games which I personally would categorize this way are Trauma Center and Zak & Wiki.
One thing in particular that occurred to me: seeing that the Wii is getting quite a few games from non-standard genres, I wonder if we are getting triple-A games here, it's just that they're less recognizable because their category has been more or less untapped. Why wouldn't you call games like Trauma Center or Big Brain Academy triple-A? Is it because it doesn't belong to one of the specific genres that AAAs can come from, or because it doesn't have astounding 3D graphics, or what? Is it based on popularity among the forums?
That's the jist of my argument (if you want to call it that). I think there's more star effort for Wii than most people think, we just aren't used to calling it that, and it seems worse for comparison. If I'm totally off base here, please let me know!
But also please avoid list warz and stuff like "what do you mean, every game on the Wii is shit." I don't mind if you feel that way, I'd just like a more thought out post with less flamebaiting.
Switch Friend Code: SW - 5443 - 2358 - 9118 || 3DS Friend Code: 0989 - 1731 - 9504 || NNID: unclesporky
UncleSporky on
0
Posts
Halo 3 and Portal both fall into this description as to Assassin's Creed and Call of Duty 4 while great titles like Crackdown, skate, and Persona 3 don't and would probably be called double A or A grade titles.
Generally the whole description of "AAA" is given to a game long before it's released anyways so it's generally based on how much critical hype a game gets along with it's marketing.
AAA games aren't necessarily GOOD games, they're just the big budget, highly featured, main product a company is pushing.
System seller.
Hype levels.
Sales.
Heritage.
Etc etc.
from webster's:
Trauma center isn't a blockbuster (or AAA game) because it's not the kind of game that the company poured all it's resources into. A game like trauma center is more accurately described as a sleeper hit. Movies like napoleon dynamite? They're not blockbusters, they're sleeper hits.
The biggest thing to note though is that most AAA titles are decided as such long before they're ever released, and generally the actual success of a game (unless it COMPELTELY tanks) doesn't affect that standing.
The opposite can be true for suprise hits but generally not until they get whored.
Yeah, this. One word to describe and parallel AAA perfectly. Well done TSR.
Probably because most third parties have seem fit to just regurgitate anything they can.
Heck, the only good games on the Xboxes are MS first party.
Halo 1, 2, 3
Phantom Dust
Forza
Fable
Crimson Skies
etc
Sega actually is putting out it's blockbusters on the wii. NiGHTS would be considered a blockbuster from sega. Square is putting blockbusters on the DS, but not the wii. the next Dragon Quest? A blockbuster definitely. However it seems the trend is to put your blockbuster on another system and give something similar, but not quite a blockbuster on the wii. Case in point, Resident Evil. PS3 and 360 owners get the blockbuster version - RE5. Wii owners get RE:UC.
Note that blockbuster doesn't necessarily imply quality, nor does non-blockbuster. Case in point, sleeper hits and blockbuster failures. Assassins creed (which I actually enjoyed, but I recognize it's flaws) was a blockbuster that failed. Trauma center was not a blockbuster but it rocks.
An even better example - Sonic the Hedgehog. Sonic the Hedgehog (2006) was undoubtedly sega's blockbuster for the year. And damn did it suck. On the other hand, Sonic and the Secret Rings was not, an it ended up being a sleeper hit.
But it's pretty obvious that the blockbuster stuff is tending to come out on other systems. will the trend stop? I dunno. But, and I say this without the intent of pissing off other wii owners (like myself), it's pretty clear that nintendo's console hasn't been the blockbuster machine.
well that's pretty ignorant. Remember that title from Bioware - Kotor? I hear it did pretty well. How about that one game about the dude in black... ninja something or other. Or that fighting game with the titties. Lets not forget my favorite companies outtings - JSRF, Panzer Dragoon Orta, and so forth.
However, it doesn't mean excellent games from third parties won't coming to the Wii.
AAA is by and large a grade, but I agree with others that the general meaning for it is a blockbuster, popular, title. In that sense Z&W wouldn't make the grade.
PSN: SirGrinchX
Oculus Rift: Sir_Grinch
If AAA just comes down to "pleases the hardcore," then citing a lack of them is really just another way of saying the Wii is too kiddy, isn't it? Or is that not what you guys mean? It just seems like it's impossible to have an AAA game of certain genres, like puzzle, and the majority of them are shooters and RPGs. And thus if the Wii isn't getting those genres due to lack of graphical power then it would be impossible for it to have triple-As.
I think Halo is the only must-own Microsoft title you've mentioned. I actually don't own it but I realize that is weird of me as an xbox owner.
Again, just like in movies, there's more to it than just blockbusters, sleeper hits, and failures. In fact the vast majority of movies (like games) are merely moderately successful and fall into neither of the three categories we've mentioned.
For every Lethal Weapon that's a AAA blockbuster, there's a dozen lesser-known buddy cop movies with lower production values that manage to be financially successful.
As far as I know, not one third party has tried to make this kind of game for Wii.
So then it's more about the effort than the result. I wonder if No More Heroes would count in this regard, though I don't know if anyone besides Suda ever hoped it would be massive. I would also say RE:UC shows a ton of effort, but again, their own predictions were only for moderate success.
It may have sucked in many people's eyes, but it sure didn't flop. Sales were quite high.
From the Sales Figures Thread, this popped up:
In response to that, I wrote:
Daikatana was most certainly an AAA title, even though it was pure shit. It was the flagship title from Ion Storm for quite a while. It's not about whether the game is good or not, it's about the time, resources, and effort the developer is willing to sink into the production of a game -- and right now it's clear that developers (in the general sense) are unwilling to put their big budget, big name, best staff, most effort games onto the Wii.
Alejandro has it pretty well nailed where he talks about the self-fulfilling prophecy though. As long as you put half-assed games on the Wii, they'll continue to sell poorly. But as long as games are selling poorly on the Wii publishers will be unwilling to put their biggest projects on the system.
It seems that the only people who haven't figured this out are the developers and publishers themselves.
I think 4 Wii vs. 10 PS3/360/PC is pretty decent, although of course that's just a poll and not representative of sales and dev thoughts. Which is exactly what you were talking about!
Most of what we are seeing are little side experiments like RE:UC and the DQ:Swords stuff. Not to say these games are not (or will not be) great games, but they are hardly huge profile. Other than the experiments, it is mostly ports or partygames.
No More Heroes is a big title for that developer (forget their name), but only because the developer is pretty small. So it probably only makes it a AA title, even though it is a big risk for their size.
What is that game coming out that is supposed to use light and shadows heavily? The anime one with the flashlight? That might be at least AA, who is making that one again?
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
MMOG Comic, Quests, and News. www.thebrasse.com
But this thread is about third party, so only ONE of those top 20 would even count, Zak and Wiki and it sold pretty poorly, didn't it?
I know I would never buy it. We finished it in about 6 hours or so on a rental. Brought it back the same day. It was fun though.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
MMOG Comic, Quests, and News. www.thebrasse.com
I don't think I'm alone in this. It's kind of hard to say that your 'main' games won't sell on the Wii when you don't even fucking try it. As far as I know GHIII is the only big-time release to compete acrss all three platforms, and just look at how that experience went: "Eh, we'll toss out a couple of glitchy Wii copies to appease the handful of fanboys who'll buy it over the 360/PS3 version and...holy mother fuck it sold out overnight! Jesus, make more, MAKE MORE!"
Same here.
I think it's going to be one of those situations where until a large developer decides to do it and shows that they can succeed in doing so, we won't see any of them do it. Ubisoft showed that launch titles can do it, but I haven't heard much about Red Steel 2 yet. If that looks good and plays well and is worth buying, perhaps we'll see some other developers follow suit and make some effort.
Indeed.
Borrowed with much love from PantherLotus over at NeoGAF.
As cool as some of those games may be, it looks like maybe one or two new IPs, rest are all sequels.
Which is depressing.
That is a sweet summary image, though, even though it's got some crap that could be replaced by games like King Story.
* WiiFit
* Super Smash Brothers Brawl
* Monster Hunter 3
Potential AAA release:
* Red Steel 2 (If and only if this time they can fix the issues from last time. With good reviews and good advertising of how this is the best FPS in Wii, Wii owners starving for any FPS - even those turned off by the first one - will surely latch on)
Potential sleeper hits IMO:
* Fatal Frame 4 (Wii owners are very hungry for mature horror games, so this is simple enough)
* Tales of Symphonia (again, Wii owners are very hungry for JRPG games - and one that doesn't have bad character designs like Opoona might help in sales)
* PES 2008 (probably not, but depending on the ads and reviews - it might be able to pull owners of PES for other systems if they can be convinced that the game is very different from regular PES game)
* Okami (hopefully this game will get the same revitalization that RE4 got from the Wii)
* King's Story (I'd like to say this will be AAA, but I don't think the publishers will allow even a decent budget for advertising that's necessary for any AAA game)
Wii owners are probably some of the most forgiving gamers in this current gen so any company that's able to satisfy the lack of traditional games in the Wii will be heavily rewarded.
XBL Gametag: mailarde
Screen Digest LOL3RZZ
Oh, I know, wasn't blaming the Wii. Just disappointing that even on such an innovative system like the Wii, we still get more and more sequels.
SIGH.
Oh well. Still won't stop me from getting House of the Dead.
What I see happening was that the launch titles were basically the few stalwarts brave enough to commit to the system while everyone else waited to see if Ninty's new flagship would live or crash and burn. Now that it's selling out within ten nanoseconds of shipping, everyone's getting on the bandwagon, yelling, "ME TOO ME TOO!" and shoving out whatever they can for the Wii so that they have at least one foot in the door.
I have a feeling that the shovelware phase will soon pass. I don't think we'll see the kind of high-profile AAA titles like Halo 3, simply because the Wii doesn't work that way due to its lack of raw numbers. Instead, companies who want to try something interesting that doesn't require the massive processor power of the 360/PS3 will give it a shot on the Wii instead. Expect more titles like Trauma Center and Guitar Hero: things that take advantage not only of the wii-mote, but the Wii hardware's robustness and small size (it's SO much easier to pack up a Wii in a backpack and take it to a party than a 360 or a PS3, especially when you've already got to carry your Guitar.)
I think Galaxy/Brawl though can show what it can do for graphics and that you can at least get some good stuff out of it.
I can attest to the packing up though. I bought a wireless sensor bar just for this purpose. I pack up the Wii, 4+ multiplayer games, 4 controllers, 4 nunchucks, guitar, power, and a/v all in a small backpack and I still have some room to spare.
Someone's example of Nights would not qualify as a AAA title. It's a port of a game that very few people have played, let alone heard of, and has had very little marketing and a relatively poor outing in reviews.
However, Mass Effect, while a new property, comes from Bioware and has been heavily advertised, promoted through interviews or previews and has garnered massive amounts of attention while scoring quite well in reviews.
Review scores don't matter too much though, as Assassins Creed did fairly bad for the amount of hype and attention devoted to it. It still sold well though.
Going back to Wii, since that seems to be what sparked the OP, Zack & Wiki, Trauma Center, Red Steel and well, I can't think of anything else from the Wii that would qualify, but these are good to great games, but not AAA. My brother doesn't know what Nights or Z&W are. He wouldnt know what TC was if not for the fact I owned it before I sold my Wii. He's the definition of casual gamer and he knows about the sports games he likes and the GTAs and MGS's. All he knows for the Wii are teh VC titles and Nintendo titles because there are no AAA titles. There are good 3rd party games, but no AAA titles.
Hype, brand recognition, etc has little to do with it in the long run.