AAA game development headed for extinction - along with the console

Another year of the game industry has been marked by lower profits and studio closings. Today’s post examines the problems facing AAA development and what could be done.
When we look at development studios, there are three categories that we can group them into: Indies, middle tier and AAA studios. Over the last decade, the move to digital has aided Indies and middle tier developers, while AAA has been feeling the burn.
With reports of losses and lower quality titles going around the larger development houses, we need to ask: What is going on with AAA development?
The Preconception of AAA Studios :

When we talk about the differences between the different studios, there are preconceptions based on the quality of the work that comes through.
A consumer, who buys an indie game, doesn’t expect graphic fidelity on par with looking out their window. And at the same time, someone buying an AAA title expects a bug free experience, wrapped up in amazing design and graphics.
In all consumer industries, the quality of the product should be reflected in the price. That is one of the main reasons why people are willing to spend more at 5 star restaurants as they expect a premium product for that price.
However, gamers have been seeing a drop of quality and uniqueness among the AAA studios. The number of First Person Shooters and online games has increased, with more titles being developed with multiplayer options and DLC.
Even established brands are being affected, with Resident Evil 6 designed more as an action co-op game then a horror title. Then there was a report about Dead Space 3 was going to go the same route with adding co-op to a horror designed game.
Now it’s safe to assume that the developers and publishers are reading fan reactions and seeing the criticisms levied at them. But what has happened is that the culture of the industry has changed and AAA studios are not adjusting.
The Cost of Development:
There is a basic rule of any major business: The company has to keep making a profit to stay alive. If you have a day where you’re not making money, then you are doing even worse then you may realize.
The reason has to do with operating cost. Every day that your business is running there are daily costs that have to be factored in. Electricity, rent, hourly wages and more are just some of the costs that come up every day.
When you have profit lost or no productivity one day, you are even worse off than before due to operating costs. This is why companies based around selling are so aggressive about daily sales, as they need to cover the operating costs to make a profit.
While a video game studio is considered a consumer product industry, their profit structure is different from other industries while having the same cost. Every day that a game studio is working on a title, is a day where they are losing money due to operating costs. But at the same time, they are not making money every day to cover that.
Instead, the studio expects a massive pay out once the game is released to cover all the expenses and of course, make a profit. Because of the profit structure, it forces larger development studios into the publisher-developer relationship.
A normal studio does not have the hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars of savings to cover the cost of development in preparation for that payday.
Publishers have a major say in the development of AAA titles, as if the developer doesn’t keep the publisher happy, then they won’t have the funding needed to finish the game. This also means that publishers are more adverse to risky or niche titles that may not sell enough to cover the cost of making the game.
There are two scenarios that no publisher wants to see with their titles:
1. The game bombs with horrible reviews.
2. The game gets positive reviews and fans liked it, but the game doesn’t sell enough to cover the costs.
While a fan would consider the 2nd scenario a win, to a publisher they are both failures.
This is part of the reason for the homogenizing of AAA game design. When one publisher sees the success of a game like Call of Duty, Gears of War or World of Warcraft, they want the same results with their series. And that means spending millions of dollars on developing a game with similar design that may or may not make that money back.
But there is one area that has become a huge boon to Indies and gamers and a nightmare to AAA studios: Sales.
The Pricing Paradox:
With the growth of digital distribution from sites like Steam, Amazon and many more, has allowed both designers and the online retailers to introduce sales. Before, retail chains like Best Buy and GameStop had the final say on what a game would cost.
The rate that games have become discounted, has caused many gamers to no longer buy games at release, or what would be considered full retail ($60.)
In other industries, products retain their value due to the quality of the brand and the product itself. For example, I will never be able to buy a brand new Lamborghini for $1000 no matter how long I wait.

Skyrim is one of a few games whose scope and production values justify setting its price at full retail.
Likewise, car companies know that they can’t make every car like a Lexus or Mercedes as it would just over saturate the market with high end cars.
That’s why cars are made and priced at different levels, obviously the more money you spend means a higher quality. But at the same time, lower priced cars still have a standard of quality to them that lets them retain their price.
But in the video game industry, specifically AAA studios, there is no differing value. A $60 price tag can be attached to anything from Halo, to Dead Space or Playstation All Stars Battle Royale. But as we’re seeing, the $60 price doesn’t come with the same standard of quality, as evident by the review scores games are getting.
There is just more value these days in Indie and mid tier developers then there are in AAA studios. The smaller studios can get away with more out there and unique games, as their costs are smaller compared to the larger studios. The smaller cost means that they can price their games lower and more affordable and still make money.
One of the reasons why we’ve seen a decline in single player AAA titles is the issue of value. A typical single player game is usually designed around 8 to 10 hours of gameplay (not counting side quests and extra content.) But even with that low number of playtime, they are still being priced at $60 new.
Instead of lowering the price and to create more value, designers have been adding more multiplayer and DLC gameplay to extend the play-time. What ends up happening is that instead of getting an amazing single-player game or an amazing multiplayer game, we get an average single player with a possible above average multiplayer.
Last year my two most played games were The Binding of Isaac and Dungeons of Dredmor. Between the two I’ve spent over 100 hours combined playing them. Buying them both cost me a total of $10 at launch. Now if I could get all that value out of two $5 games, why should I spend $60 on an AAA title?
The answer sadly, is that I and most gamers shouldn’t. There are very few games being released at $60 that are actually worth that amount in terms of player value. Only a few studios like Bethesda, Bio-Ware and Rockstar for example makes games that match the price tag.
These games are either huge in scope and production values (Skyrim, Red Dead Redemption), or a massive story carried across multiple games (Mass Effect). But that doesn’t stop every publisher from pricing their game at full retail and saturating the market.
Now you may ask yourself:" Then why don’t publishers just lower the retail price?” The problem is that they financially don’t have the option.
As game engines become more powerful, so does the cost of using them. Art, music, voice acting, graphics are all additional costs to making a title. What ends up happening is that publishers have no choice but to release games at $60, if they want to have any chance of recouping the development cost.
Besides the cost of game development and maintaining a studio, there are also advertisement costs. AAA titles are commonly seen on TV, websites and magazines. And the cost can be huge.
But a middle tier and Indie developers have a lower development cost allowing them to price their titles cheaper and still turn a profit. This lower cost gives the developers wiggle room when it comes to sales that the big developers don’t have.

Even though Darksiders 2 received decent reviews and sales. It still hasn’t made enough money to cover THQ’s expenses.
Helping matters further is that most indie and mid tier developers don’t spend much on advertisements and rely on word of mouth and positive reviews to drive sales.
Both don’t cost the designers any money and can be in some cases just as powerful (if not more so) as advertisements.
The Impact of Sales:
Because the price of a game has less relation to the quality of the title, we don’t see the variety of pricing when it comes to video games. Because of that, the concept of sales is the same for every video game as a way to get a title to the price point of the spender. The lower the price of a video game, the more people will be interested in buying it.
Raise your hand if you ever bought a $2 game for no other reason then it was cheap. We all have an impulse buy threshold when it comes to games, for me its $10 or less.
The closer a game gets to our perceived value raises the chance that we’re going to buy it. That doesn’t matter if a game was originally priced at $15 or $60, but what it is priced at now.
Because of the lower development cost, it allows smaller developers the ability to make money with their games on sale. If a game was released for $15, dropping that down to $5 will still help them thanks to the increase in sales and lower cost of development.
But if a $60 game that cost several millions to make is dropped to $5, the developers have a very hard time recouping the cost. Recently THQ announced problems with Darksiders 2. Even though the game was reviewed positively and sold around 1 million copies, THQ needs it to sell at least another million for them to break even.
Dead Space is also feeling the burn, as EA reported a few months ago that in order for the series to be considered viable, the next game will have to sell at least 5 million copies for them to justify continuing the series.
Something Has To Give:
AAA development is in dire straits, if publishers are asking such huge numbers to continue smaller series. Publishers are looking at advertisements, DLC and other monetization as a way of improving profits. It’s hard to tell from the outside at what point greed is taking over necessity.
As more studios are closed and publishers are reporting losses, something has to change. AAA studios are still operating the same way as they did in the last decade. But with the rise of cheaper, more accessible titles and the move to digital, the marketplace has changed.
It has become very difficult to justify spending $60 on any game these days, but that is still the standard retail price publishers are asking. And with the rise of monetization, gamers are getting less for the same amount of money.
With the next wave of consoles fast approaching, it can only mean further raising the cost of AAA development. This is not good for the publishers who have to invest the money and the gamers who are still feeling the effects of the economy.
We need to ask how much longer large studios can sustain the costs and development under a publisher-developer relationship. Further complicating matters is the rise of Kickstarter this year, allowing developers to fund a game of their choosing without a publisher’s intervention.
My prediction is that either publishers will have to find a way to cut costs and hopefully lower the price barrier of games, or they will have to switch focus to smaller budget titles. The last decade could be summed up with the description “the rise of the digital market”, if publishers aren’t careful this decade could become “the crash of AAA development."
- Josh Bycer

My take is, as soon as traditional AAA studios die out - console will go along with them. Because consumer would simply ask "What would justify for me to pay for an expensive hardware that’s dedicated only for gaming when there are no AAA quality titles to play?

It’s not going extinct any more than hollywood will stop churning out blockbusters. You will get more “searchlight” or “indie style” AAA games though made with a slightly reduced budget – but you will always get blockbusters.

It’s simple scaremongering. AAA doesn’t mean all or nothing, its a big scale of money to spend going from penuts to millions. It’s perfectly acceptable to cut a few corners and still call it AAA. Smarter tools coming out every year only assist this.

Also a lot of his arguments aren’t grounded in any sort of reality. Looks like self marketing. Currently studios piss money down the drain due to bad management and overspending as well. Lots of ways to fix and continue, and they will continue.

The author is a website journo and QA. He doesn’t have any insider knowledge if that’s what you’re thinking. I appreciate what’s said, but it’s not realistic.

This is the best educational article I’ve read about cost of videogames in a long, long time.
Basically it’s a perfect “why pirating is bad for dummies”, + “why driving prices to the bottom is bad for dummies”, + “why you should not judge a videogame only by its graphics”, etc, etc… for dummies.

It should be stickied on any game blog, forum, etc, and forwarded as much as possible.

Sidenote : Bawss, why are you trying so hard to extinguish consoles in all your threads ? The article here doesn’t say that at all.
It just explains why gamers should care about the points above, or it will lead to more AAA studio closures. Never it says that situation is doomed.

That was a bit of shocking news to me. I was under the impression that Darksiders 2 was a super duper success already even financially speaking. (I mean Its everywhere in the Youtube Game Walkthrough channels). Apparently not

Here are the latest Darksiders 2 sales figures for those interested

Still disappointing

EDIT: Upon closer examination it appears that the above site(vgchartz) only tracks retail sales and NOT digital sales. So the figures have to be considered in context

Well said. Games, like everything, change and evolve. Like you said some big studios will have to change their methods, and they will. Some may fail, but others will rise. Platforms will come and go, and some even go in cycles. Consoles have already “died” at least once.

And even indies are far from immune to bad decisions and poor management, we have seen that recently.

In the end, getting overly worked up about “states” of the industry or things that may or may not happen is counter productive (unless you are in a product role, or a blogger). Me, I make games because it is what I love to do. I will just keep making games.

Hey Hippo! how’s going mate! :smile:
While I agree with you on some extent on tools becoming “smarter” - but we all know that’s not how AAA is defined. You are talking about “production value” which is a fluid term because of perception - some incredible talent + good tool chain can make a budget title look “AAA-ish”. But there is a clear seperation of AAA title to the average game or indie game title - the most obvious being the budget - which typically is in the tens of millions ($50+ million).

Also in reply to your analogy - first, Hollywood cannot be compare to Game industry. Hollywood still enjoys huge profit even after it churns out one garbage after another (many even with horrible reviews - eg. “Avatar: the Last Air Bender” still made handsome profit) - I can’t even recall the last time a big budget blockbuster flopped in the boxoffice. By comparison, a lot of AAA big budget games are flopping left and right - its the main reason why big studios are shutting down or laying off workers by the thousands.

Secondly, a typical summer blockbuster (even a CG-heavy/CG film) only takes less than a year to produce. The turn-around time (investment of capital) is fairly quick - for investors it is good news. Compare that to an AAA game these days - typically it takes MINIMUM 4 YEARS to make.
This inherently makes AAA titles incredibly risky investment. 4 years is a long time in tech industry - if you think about the amount of money, manpower, technoloogies, hardwares, infrastructures pour into a project - in the span of 4 years all these could become nothing - because hardware, technologies, demographics, market trends, even laws could change in the span of that time. Projects would even stalled or stopped and later cancelled because key personnels leave the project. Its incredibly risky investment for anyone to invest in to say the least. Nothing is guaranteed. For such a long project, it makes it incredibly hard to do risk analysis and react to these fundamental changes - it is a reason now it is common to see big budget titles delayed (by a few months to few years!) or even cancelled because of these factors.

Lastly, it is a very unrewarding experience - typically people get burn out by long projects - they invest a huge amount of their life in a single project - only to see it flop in the market. Its a reason why this industry is called the meat grinder - especially among the large studios. Just imagine if you spent 5 years working on a single project on perpetual crunch time, only to see it sell poorly in the market (or even get cancelled). While the industry currently can sustain itself with the fresh blood from the schools that churning out graduates - but as viability of indie gaming taking off - I think less and less people will want to join the ranks of big studios - and it may even create shortage - in which it drives up the salary - in turn drives up the development cost of big budget title, which becomes an endless vicious cycles.

I can’t possibly be extinguishing console industry by myself ! :smile:
I am simply just voicing my own opinions on top of his piece, trying to make people aware of the current trend in the industry.

Think about it, most of the AAA titles are now on consoles these days. When you buy an expensive/dedicated gaming hardware - without the AAA titles to drive up the sales, consoles would die. It is as simple as that. Nintendo/Xbox/PS3 cannot survive on 99c games - because there won’t be a clearly differentiation of product tier if they do, and consumer will have no reason to buy these expensive consoles if they can get the same experience from mobile phone.

Keep in mind making a AAA game might get cheaper . Many of Gameloft games on the android store/IOS store are at a point where they can be considered AAA .

The future might be one of cheap low budget AAA like the Unreal IOS games, Infinity Blade 12 for example

So true …

Dude, you haven’t worked in the game industry if you think studios will EVER be unable to recruit new talent , theirs way too many game degree grads for far too little jobs .

The worst that could happen would be for these studios to have to offer higher pay . As is the game industry pays peanuts compared to any other software field .

Plus as studios close down it will actually be easier for the ones to remain to recruit highly skilled talent!

Although I would say that there is some truth in this doom and gloom scenario, I would like to add one important caveat and that caveat is the Diablo 3 model. It appears that Diablo 3 sold 10 million copies.Seeing that it is priced more than 50 bucks that works out to around 500 million.

The Diablo 3 model which has put a significant dent in game piracy might offer a ray of hope

The same thing happens in Hollywood. They throw money at a shit idea and expect it to be a success. If less money was available studios would still turn out great games, only it would cost less and ultimately be easier for them to recoup the costs and make a profit.

Consoles will never die.

Real fact is that there are a dozen hundred AAA games under development now and with release confirmed to 2015.

I wish there was less AAA publishers and studios, but the fact is they will always use fresh grads to work on their projects and layoff most veterans that are in the industry for 5+ years. It will never stop, there always will be out there gamers paying with blood to have the chance to work on a game dev studio.
When a studio is shot down, that is always after the product is ready to ship unless there is no publisher involved, publisher does so because they know they can have same product quality paying less, using noob grads.
When studio manages to make that not happen, they need to meet extreme sales numbers to make publisher happy and the market is simply over saturated to everyone achieve that.
If youve ever worked on big studio and later get a job doing something else you will never want to come back, rarely.

Really? I thought we are in the entertainment industry. We fit there much better than consumer product.

First, Mr. Bawss, you are the boss - that was one epic article!

However, it seems to me that the various consoles have been somewhat preparing for the fall of AAA; the XBox 360 has an indie gaming section. If the ability for Indie games to make it onto the PS Vita proves profitable, there’s another indie-friendly avenue right there. Nintendo’s Wii-U is probably the only console I’m seeing that dosen’t have a contingency plan, but after the relative crash of the Wii’s market, that could be understandable.

I agree with the article; the AAA industry is not keeping up in A) pricing, B) quality, or C) philosophy. As a result it is facing a true crisis; where I was once a loyal console buyer, even I don’t go that route anymore; games play just as well from the resale bin. If AAA wants to keep up, the business people need a slap in the face; their current model is just not working for them anymore.

If this goes on much longer, they’ll have irrevocable proof, in the form of another Video Game Crash to rival that of 1983. And, for the economy’s sake, that totally does not need to happen.

I don’t see many traditional AAA games in the Kinect or in the Nintendo Wii, yet both sell like hot cakes.

Also, I think you are a bit outdated on what consoles do. For me, my XBox is:

My DVD player.
My Hulu Netflix streaming client.
My livingroom jukebox
Simply a way to play video games while laying back on the sofa.
A party game for… parties (go go Kinect.)
Cheaper than a PC.

I also happen to have a lot more fun with the Lego platformer games than I do with AAA titles. People that buy consoles dont do so mainly for the big AAA games, they do so for the comfort of the layback couch and the gamepad instead of the mouse/keyboard layforward PC style.

As for everything else, what Hippocoder said.

Pretty good article, although nothing new. This gen has been a struggle for some developers, so many closures in the last 5 years. Also recently some of the famous designers (Cliff B, Bioware Doctors…) are leaving the industry.

No way consoles are going anywhere though. This gen has broadened the market, more people than ever are playing videogames than ever on consoles. The PS3 is the most popular way to watch netflix. The Wii has sold like a bagillion units, 360 still sells like crazy despite being 7 years old.

NPDs for AAA software is still crazy. The amount of successful AAA games out numbers the non-successful ones. There’s alot of ‘single-A games’ (not a huge budget but still $60) that are successful enough warrant sequels. Just cause THQ isn’t successful doesn’t mean it’s doom for the industry. Darksiders 2 was awesome, but if they can’t make a profit at 1 million units there is a problem. Not sure what it is, but seriously.

As long as there is a carrot on a stick, people will try and get the carrot.

Personally though, I wouldn’t care, consoles are annoying. I’m sick of having to buy a bunch of hardware. Sick of not being able to play games online with all friends cause some have the 360 version and some have the PS3 version. I have two versions of Battlefield 3, 360 and PC, with a Premium subscription for each.

I’d honestly like to just have everything on PC with Steam BPM.

How much does it cost to make dead space that they need to sell 5 million units at 60 a pop, 300 million dollars to continue with the IP.

triple A games are still the highest selling form of entertainment. As long as they are still making the big bucks there will alway be someone to fund these games. And if consoles ever did die there would just be AAA games on pc like the good old days.

They don’t get that $60 all for themselves, for one. After googling a bit, this is the ratio I found:

Retailers take about $12.
Console manufacturers get $12
Disc costs 70c.
The remaining $36 goes to the publisher.

It varies how much the publisher gives to the developer, if they sell a million units it’s $20, if they sell 10 million it’s $2. (The more they sell the less % they get) The average is $10.
The marketing is about $9.
Then the final $17 is profit for the publisher.

Based off that, it sounds like the studio needs 50,000,000 to continue development. My guess is not that the game costs 50 million to develop, but that for them to justify an additional sequel the studio must make enough money to cover the development costs PLUS a significant (if not all) the development cost of a sequel, because they don’t dare invest so much money in games anymore.

Mind you, I am not sure if I trust this article, or there may be something else. The first Dead Space sold 1 million copies and was considered a huge success (why we got a sequel) that mean the studio recouped about 10,000,000 million. Is it possible they keep inflating the budget of the sequels? Maybe. Would not be shocked since it’s a trend to keep tossing more money at these games, but it is stupid.

In fact, that may be the reason AAAs are doomed to “die”. Every year they increase the budget (Hollywood does the same) like they think “if I doubled my investment from this movie, I bet tossing 4x in the sequel will result in doubling that investment too!!!” It’s a game of infinitely increasing high-stake poker, and suddenly no one takes seriously the game that cost 17 million to develop, EVEN if that was considered AAA 2 years ago.

I think these people got to stop their horses and star trotting a bit. Just because they invest 4x does not mean the target market also inflates proportionally.

You may ask “but what about the even greter millions the publisher pockets? Why not reinvest it in making another sequel?” Simple: they need to justify profits. If the game does not return the expected profits, it’s just not viable anymore. The publisher needs additional money for all it’s aquisitions, overhead costs, and potentially kick-start other ventures.

Edit: corrected the millions above for Studio profit, accidentally used Publisher profit

Edit 2: Found this additional source, not exactly the same numbers but darn close. Note that it seems to place the 5 milion copy target at 45 million fo the developer, down from 50 milion I noted above.