Don Carlo
Member
Last edited:
-
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.
AAA Games Should Rely On Famous IPs To Avoid Risks, Claims Tencent VP
- Thread starter Don Carlo
- Start date
Puscifer
Member
I'd argue since Uncharted 2, I hate saying it but God Damn naughty dog DNA is in everything major these days.
MiguelItUp
Member
Lol "avoid risks", the AAA industry has been doing plenty of that for awhile now. It's why we don't see many unique and exciting AAA games like we used to.
Angry_Megalodon
Member
Another asshole in a blue suit and white shirt.
DaGwaphics
Member
I wonder where he figures these famous IPs came from. 
Though I can't blame him for noticing that many of the best selling games over the last 5 or 10 years are familiar names. But, things like Cyberpunk do pop in there as well.
Though I can't blame him for noticing that many of the best selling games over the last 5 or 10 years are familiar names. But, things like Cyberpunk do pop in there as well.
Xion_Stellar
People should stop referencing data that makes me feel uncomfortable because games get ported to platforms I don't like
Yeah I was about to say fame has never guaranteed financial success before and it won't now
FinalBossWithTheMostPower
Member
It has little to do with the IP.
Ancient wisdom suggests it's not what you do but how you do it.
Who really thought Robocop was gonna be a sleeper hit. It's not that huge of an IP, and anything remotely related as of late has been trash.
Then we got Rogue City.
Blaming market performance on the visibility of the IP is a cop-out, IMO.
Avengers was ass.
Suicide Squad = teh sucketh.
Spiderman 2 was whack.
Stop making games that only the shareholders want. They don't even play them...
Ancient wisdom suggests it's not what you do but how you do it.
Who really thought Robocop was gonna be a sleeper hit. It's not that huge of an IP, and anything remotely related as of late has been trash.
Then we got Rogue City.
Blaming market performance on the visibility of the IP is a cop-out, IMO.
Avengers was ass.
Suicide Squad = teh sucketh.
Spiderman 2 was whack.
Stop making games that only the shareholders want. They don't even play them...
Men_in_Boxes
Snake Oil Salesman
It's about mitigating risk. No one can eliminate it totally.
Represent.
Represent(ative) of bad opinions
We are fucked
FinalBossWithTheMostPower
Member
Ozzy Onya A2Z
Member
At this point I feel like we're heading towards an independent think tank without bullshit accounting, marketing, VPs and executives etc. People who know what makes games kick ass awesome fun, risks worth standing for and they go in during the prototype phases to alter the course of AAA titles specifically.
That reminds me where in the hell is AAAA Perfect Dark....
That reminds me where in the hell is AAAA Perfect Dark....
Don Carlo
Member
When you talk about pure innovation, yes, but there have been some unique blends here and there.
Don Carlo
Member
with the major example being Starfield, of course. Truly one of the games of all time.
Grildon Tundy
Gold Member
Wow, what a novel and foolproof idea. No wonder he makes the big bucks.
Rat Rage
Member
"video game executive". Truly the people who know how the gaming industry works and what gamers want. This is why oldskool gaming was the golden age of video games, where executives didn't have too much say in the overall development process, because they were happy to even find people who knew how to develop a game.
ProtoByte
Member
People will balk at this, but he's not wrong if you account for the fact that the game itself has to be good, and the licensing fees not too onerous (ie Marvel).
I get people like the idea of new IP, but new AAA IP has to become established IP at some point, and the standard is higher than ever. People have been exposed to so many, and it has to last publishers at least a generation and a half (each longer than they've ever been) to be worthwhile. That takes a lot of money, but more importantly, time. Which is why Cory Barlog's new IP is now, what? 6+ years in the making? And it's probably not coming out before 2026.
I'm not saying that publishers should never put the money and time on the table to do it, but it's not like licenses are inherently bad.
Honestly, I'd much prefer a competent developer spends 5-6 years making a killer Werewolf: The Apocalypse game over whatever generic low rent Elder Scrolls or Mass Effect IP is cooking these days. Insomniac's ass and reputation are entirely saved by Spider-Man. No one was really checking for them after rehashing Ratchet and Clank for 20 years, and even fewer were buying their games outside of that.
As much as people rag on AAA, it's not like the indie scene isn't full of modern copycats and "spiritual successors" to what used the AAAs of the past.
I get people like the idea of new IP, but new AAA IP has to become established IP at some point, and the standard is higher than ever. People have been exposed to so many, and it has to last publishers at least a generation and a half (each longer than they've ever been) to be worthwhile. That takes a lot of money, but more importantly, time. Which is why Cory Barlog's new IP is now, what? 6+ years in the making? And it's probably not coming out before 2026.
I'm not saying that publishers should never put the money and time on the table to do it, but it's not like licenses are inherently bad.
Honestly, I'd much prefer a competent developer spends 5-6 years making a killer Werewolf: The Apocalypse game over whatever generic low rent Elder Scrolls or Mass Effect IP is cooking these days. Insomniac's ass and reputation are entirely saved by Spider-Man. No one was really checking for them after rehashing Ratchet and Clank for 20 years, and even fewer were buying their games outside of that.
Innovation in a mature industry is increasingly difficult and overrated.
As much as people rag on AAA, it's not like the indie scene isn't full of modern copycats and "spiritual successors" to what used the AAAs of the past.
Last edited:
Wildebeest
Member
I don't know if the risk is really any lower, but it is a good excuse for an exec to have in their back pocket when their games fail, and they don't want to be fired.
Guilty_AI
Member
Thing is there are all kinds
. There's certainly the copy-paste stuff, but there's also refinement of old-school formulas, interesting takes on estabilished genres as well as completely unique types of games.
Last edited:
NeverYouMind
Member
Eh... established IPs give the products visibility and reduce marketing costs. However, the quality content and production values have to be there for them to be a success.
Last edited:
Arsic
Loves his juicy stink trail scent
Lots. You just have selective memory.
SoloCamo
Member
I'm down for some examples to fresh my memory if you'd be so kind.
Arsic
Loves his juicy stink trail scent
Capcom- Exoprimal
Ubisoft - Skull and Bones. 2D prince of Persia.
Sony- Helldivers 2.
Microsoft/Tango- Hi Fi Rush. Msoft shows a lot of indie ventures.
EA-Immortals of Aveum
I think that’s a few just off the top of the dome.
Men_in_Boxes
Snake Oil Salesman
Exoprimal, 2D Prince of Persia, Helldivers 2, and Hi Fi Rush definitely not AAA.
Skull and Bones and Aveum are a little grey area imo.
Arsic
Loves his juicy stink trail scent
The question was how many AAA studios have tried anything new.
Those are major new.
Capcom makes AAA. Made a unique new IP work exoprimal.
2D prince is a departure from the 3D action they had been.
Helldivers 2 was a top down game. Now a full on third person crazy visuals and live service title.
Hi Fi, fine. Tango isn’t a AAA developer since evil within never got them there.
Skull and bones were pitched to be AAAA for one, and AAA for another. New titles and IPs trying something unique. Those aren’t up for debate.
xrnzaaas
Member
It's definitely a risky business with the profit margins not being that big even for successful AAA releases. I don't expect the AAA market to change, but maybe we'll start getting more AA releases. And heck, if one of them turns out to be a proper hit why not turn the sequel into a triple A game?
Killjoy-NL
Member
If so, we wouldn't have games like TLOU or Horizon.
They just need to release good games and make it trilogies at best.
If a new IP fails, they fucked up and need to come up with something better. Simple as that.
They just need to release good games and make it trilogies at best.
If a new IP fails, they fucked up and need to come up with something better. Simple as that.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
To avoid risks in selling microtransactions, use popular ip. - Tencent
Hypereides
Member
If this what the CEOs at the big pubs collectively think, then this sets a really ominous precedent for AAA games. They'll accelerate their own demise this way.
Now that they've either laid off or lost their visionaries and creative mavericks then they got nothing else left than to clutch their legacy IPs as a safety net.
Now that they've either laid off or lost their visionaries and creative mavericks then they got nothing else left than to clutch their legacy IPs as a safety net.
crackajack
Member
A known IP is hardly bad for a game, unless all the budget goes into acquiring a license and nothing is left for the game development itself.
I'd say we get new IPs too seldomly, but those are often allowed some slack too. Since the novelty and exactly unknown fresh characters can outweigh some not so great other incredients. So the risk also comes with benefits.
IPs are not bulletproof at all and a ton of newer or sometimes actually brand new stuff is sold the most. Helldivers could have been an official Starship troopers game and the somewhat limited success could have stopped a successor but something that is a good idea sometimes just needs a second nudge to become what it should be. Then fully risk averse would be detrimental to your profits.
Avoiding risk at all costs is probably not really helping in preventing stagnating revenue streams. So the argument feels very shortsighted especially for shareholder driven endless growth delusions that require to expand everything in every direction all the time.
I'd say we get new IPs too seldomly, but those are often allowed some slack too. Since the novelty and exactly unknown fresh characters can outweigh some not so great other incredients. So the risk also comes with benefits.
IPs are not bulletproof at all and a ton of newer or sometimes actually brand new stuff is sold the most. Helldivers could have been an official Starship troopers game and the somewhat limited success could have stopped a successor but something that is a good idea sometimes just needs a second nudge to become what it should be. Then fully risk averse would be detrimental to your profits.
Avoiding risk at all costs is probably not really helping in preventing stagnating revenue streams. So the argument feels very shortsighted especially for shareholder driven endless growth delusions that require to expand everything in every direction all the time.
killatopak
Member
To avoid risks, make a good game.
It's basically already the case in movies so I don't see why games will be any different. You're going to have a few Tarantinos and Nolans (e.g. Kojima) with enough leverage to do novel things but for the most part AAA games will be either long-established game IPs or non-native successful IP like Hogwarts, MCU etc.
Oddvintagechap
Member
Idk how you managed to use Spiderman as an example.
djjinx2
Member
So many industry people are saying the current AAA model is unsustainable, maybe MS aren't so stupid in the end with their shift to multi plat and they can carve a niche out with a change of direction (sorry if slightly off topic but seems relevant to this)
One thing is for sure it's a very risky business, cancelled games are an instant write off of million's of £/$
One thing is for sure it's a very risky business, cancelled games are an instant write off of million's of £/$
Laptop1991
Member
While i get the point and do agree to an extent, it's no good ruining famous IP's with bad entries, that has happened before with Command and Conquer etc, make games people want to pay money for, too many mediocre games and gaas games made to milk customers but don't sell well as they just arn't very good in the end
ProtoByte
Member
Easy to say, but again, the standard for a hit new IP is higher than ever.
Killjoy-NL
Member
Sure, but I never said it is easy.