85
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2025
85 points (100.0% liked)
PC Gaming
11933 readers
809 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Totally. As I said, I don't disparage well made games and enjoyed literally every title you listed except Persona (never played).
But like lets be real. AAA game industries have generally become bloated, increasingly prioritizing profit over product quality. Lots of exploitation of developers and gamers alike.
I'm not saying AAA can't produce good games.
I am very confused about what you're saying there. So AAA produces great games but also is bloated, exploitative and low quality for the sake of profit.
So which is it? I mean, it can be both, but then I'm not sure where the "AAA needs to die" thing comes from. Presumably AAA should make more good games and less bad games, which seems like a completely different thing to say.
So hold on they prioritize profit over quality, but the result isn't "low quality"?
I mean, charitably I could separate design quality from technical quality and accept you were only talking about the latter, but it's a big concession.
"Needs to die" and "needs to change" are very different things, and we're all estabilishing that there is a lot of worthwhile stuff coming out of that side of the industry right now. If you think you're being misunderstood I'd happily hear what the correct interpretation is supposed to be, but I'm going to politely say maybe it's because you presented your point in an imprecise, hyperbolic way for effect, not because we're twisting what you said.