this post was submitted on 24 Jun 2026
218 points (98.2% liked)

Technology

85719 readers
4273 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BurgerBaron@quokk.au 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Perhaps making one game per decade is a losing strategey.

Edit: I heard a million excuses for that over the years from AAA industry, but my counter is just pointing to Capcom. Why can they keep up both output and quality?

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

Why can they keep up both output and quality?

A lot of games produced under the Capcom brand are merely financed by Capcom and developed by smaller studios. Like how GameFreak makes Pokemon games for Nintendo. Clover Studio produces a bunch of indie games under the Capcom banner. Ninja Theory produced several of the Devil May Cry releases. Inti Creates spun out of the old Megaman team to keep turning out new titles when the franchise lapsed. Pragmata was built by a fully independent development team inside Capcom.

And... idk about "quality". They're as prone to releasing a flop as anyone. They just turn out a lot of iterative and derivative materials. Why are there 18 different Ace Attorney games over 24 years? Because there's just not a lot going on between versions, mostly. Same reason the Megaman franchise could turn over so quickly. One basic engine could support a plethora of titles.

[–] Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

There was a stretch in the late 90s where squaresoft released a final fantasy nearly every year for 5 years. Now it's once every 7+ years. I don't believe it should be that hard to make games these days. There are more people working on the projects, more tools and pre-made engines/libraries available. It's purely a management/budgeting problem.

[–] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 1 points 1 day ago

The problem is that making games (and software in general) has become more high-level, and enshittification has also gotten rid of highly skilled people. So the top studios in the industry are not capable of making resource-efficient, beautiful games anymore. Not because it's physically impossible, but because they're not geared for the processes and decision-making that would allow those games to be made.

When you switch from an artisan mindset to a mass-manufacturing and outsourcing mindset without exercising strict control you eventually become utterly dependent on service and product providers that will see to your costs going up so you'll keep paying more for less.

All the large studios will come to a breaking point eventually because it's unsustainable, and will be acquired for the franchise rights by corporations that make their money in unrelated industries. But the PC platform is also breaking down so this might be a moot issue in 10 years from now.

[–] orgrinrt@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The more the hardware capabilities and our expectations rise, so does the outright complexity of making the games. I’m sure some of us would be fine with less ”bleeding-edge” games if they were otherwise written and designed great, but I think it makes sense, from publisher’s perspective, to hedge the bets and try to also impress with the fidelity of presentation.

If you are looking for a sofa and find one that smells a bit off but is otherwise functional, comfortable and looks nice, you might think you’d be able to live with the smell and buy it.

You almost certainly won’t and will likely regret the choice, but the sale was made and it’s a whole thing to do returns for something so big and hard to transport and move around.

That’s what you want to go for, even if you think it might smell fine. If it looks good enough, it might nor matter if it happened to smell rank ultimately. Numbers must go up!

[–] Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago

I have no idea what your sofa analogy is trying to say.

My friends and I made fun of ff7s terrible graphics when it came out, but the game was so good the bad graphics didn't matter. Ff16 looked amazing, but the game is so boring it doesn't matter.

People don't want bleeding edge from final fantasy, they want a good game.