• Ephera@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      That seems to only be the headline that makes such a bold claim. The article text says that they’ve got people on board with AAA experience and that they feel like they could tackle a project with AAA budget. Now, it’s up to potential investors to determine the actual budget…

      • Gamers_Mate@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        That being said I think there should be an independent organization in charge of defining what is and is not triple A. Like if you buy the game and it still has micro-transactions and loot-boxes it should be disqualified from being considered AAA. I don’t think having a large budget by itself should be enough.

        • Ephera@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Well, for good vs. bad, we have review scores. For micro-transactions and loot-boxes, you may find indicators on storefronts or from youth protection agencies, but I agree that a more standardized effort would be better here.

          You have it backwards, though. Indies basically never have micro-transactions and loot-boxes, whereas AAA has lots of them.

    • onlinepersona@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      That shouldn’t be possible, but that’s what marketing does: it uses whatever words purport to convey quality and beat that word dead then keep going.

      IMO, an AAA studio should be a studio that released and keeps releasing games that are highly rated. Budget, name, location, or whatever else shouldn’t matter one bit. Make good games, that’s what matters. Who gives a shit if it cost 10 billion to make a shit game. Doesn’t make you AAA.

      CC BY-NC-SA 4.0