• notgivingmynametoamachine@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 days ago

    Maybe stop spending nigh decades and nigh billions of dollars designing these enormous catch all games that are supposed to appeal to everyone?

    I Don’t want to spend 90 dollars on a game that has 400 different things to do, 200 of which I enjoy.

    I’d rather give Sandfall 50 bucks for a lovingly crafted, focused game that’s actually, you know, good.

    • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 days ago

      If they don’t spend enough money to differentiate themselves then they risk being drowned in a sea of indie games.

      Every year the number and quality of indie games increases. The ferocity of competition makes it extremely hard to get anyone to play your game, let alone survive as a developer. This raises the bar on quality to a ridiculous degree.

      Take any AAA game from the 1990s. Today that’s a single person project which can’t even compete with the most basic of indie games out there. To actually make money and support yourself as an indie developer is ridiculously hard!

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      The company made over 5 billion revenue and spent over 2 billion cost of operating in 2024, I don’t think this has anything to do with affordability.

      • notgivingmynametoamachine@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 days ago

        Not sure I follow sir/ma’am - are you saying R* doesn’t have to price it at 90$ and they’ll still make money?

        I mean that’s true, but publicly traded companies are the devil themselves and are required to make as much money as possible.