Huge games can be exciting. Just take a look at the upcoming Starfield. If it lives up to Bethesda’s promises, it will truly be one of the most ambitious games to release in recent years. However, the game has been in active development for around eight years. That’s a lot of development time. While that time does seem warranted, it does raise an interesting question.
Are games taking too long to make? Development time on AAA titles isn’t getting any shorter. To be fair, older games didn’t really have to worry about things such as 4K textures and incredibly intricate 3D models. The restrictions set by the hardware of the time ensured that games could be made on a relatively tight schedule. However, this is no longer the case for big-budget games.
Unless it’s a Nintendo title, there are usually expectations for AAA games to have high graphical fidelity and a grandiose sense of scale. It can take a lot of time and a lot of people to realize this all. As you may expect, the bigger development teams get, the more challenging they are to manage efficiently. In addition, the more complex a piece of software gets, the easier it becomes to break. This all adds up to increasingly long development times.
Waiting for the Next Generation
While the PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X|S are going to turn three years old this year, there’s a good chance that they feel quite recent to you. Part of this has to do with the fact that these consoles were quite difficult to obtain at first. However, there’s probably a bit more to it than that.
Unfortunately, there aren’t many games that truly take advantage of current-gen hardware. While I am someone who wants as many people to enjoy games as possible, the fact that it’s taken so long to see a substantial amount of games that properly utilize current hardware for more than performance and resolution boosts is a little unfortunate. Consoles have been getting fewer and fewer compelling launch titles, and this is probably something that isn’t going to suddenly change when the next generation comes around.
It’s incredibly likely that any major game that starts development right now won’t be seen by the public until the successors of the PS5 and Series X|S are on the market (the head of Xbox Games Studios says that games take a minimum of 4-6 years to develop). The length of modern game development makes targeting compatibility with older hardware a much safer bet than guessing what next-generation consoles will be capable of. Sure, development kits are a thing, but a major game will likely be far into development before the studio that is making it is able to get its hands on one.
Jack of All Trades, Master of None
Games have become so expensive and time-consuming to make that it’s a lot more difficult for AAA games to target a niche. Unless you are Hideo Kojima or a renowned studio such as FromSoftware, chances are that your big-budget game needs to appeal to as large of an audience as possible. This isn’t inherently a bad thing, but it can water down games with mechanics and content that don’t feel particularly meaningful.
As tired of an example as it is, just look at an average modern Ubisoft game (I’ve talked about how they bloat their games before). Most aspects of their titles can blatantly feel like the product of several focus tests. This doesn’t necessarily result in a bad game. However, Ubisoft games tend to come off as incredibly safe and/or bland despite the large open worlds they create. These games still require a lot of development time to make, yet the game mechanics feel as though they lack an identity.
A reason why I believe Capcom has done so well in recent years is that many of their games narrow their focus on doing a few things very well instead of attempting to do everything with mixed results. Sure, Street Fighter 6 may be one of the most ambitious fighting games in recent years, but its primary focus, above all else, is to excel as a fighting game.
How Companies Address Development Time and Cost Concerns
Do you ever wonder why companies keep releasing forgettable live service games despite how often these types of games fail? Think about it for a moment. I dislike mediocre live service games as much as the next person, but I also believe there is a reason why these keep getting made (remember the recent PlayStation showcase?). At the end of the day, it likely comes down to simple matters of money.
Put yourself in the position of someone funding the development of a big-budget video game. If you want to meet your shareholders’ expectations and be successful yourself, you will likely want to invest in a project that isn’t too risky. You hear that Fortnite is making a bajillion dollars and you think that you may be able to replicate its success. A big new single-player title may be a profitable endeavor as well, but the time and money investment could prove to be a bit of a gamble.
With live service games, you can release a barebones product at launch with the promise of more substantial content in the future. It’s still a gamble if the game will take off, but there’s a good chance it will be a bit more fast and cheap to make. If the game does take off, you’re probably going to be pretty rich. If it doesn’t, you can easily pull the plug on any further development of the game.
Symptoms of the Problem
I believe that live service games and games that suffer from a lack of identity are symptoms of greater problems within the industry. One of those big problems is just how long games now take to make. Modern development time can take ages. After all, time is money, and AAA games aren’t getting any cheaper to make.
As much as I hate to say it, I can understand the decision to make a big project such as Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League a live service game. Warner Bros. Games likely committed to the idea before the term “games as a service” became as truly controversial as it is now. Even then, I don’t think the game will fundamentally change that much despite the long delay. It will be a live service game using an already established and strong IP, which gives it a better shot at life than most.
Don’t get me wrong, while modern gaming has plenty of issues, I think that gaming is in a better place than some will insist it is. 2023 is already an amazing year for games, and there’s still plenty to look forward to. However, it may be time for some big publishers to reconsider their approach. Huge games can be incredible, but we also need a development process that is sustainable.
