this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2025
147 points (96.8% liked)

Games

42266 readers
3077 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Rules

1. Submissions have to be related to games

Video games, tabletop, or otherwise. Posts not related to games will be deleted.

This community is focused on games, of all kinds. Any news item or discussion should be related to gaming in some way.

2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

No bigotry, hardline stance. Try not to get too heated when entering into a discussion or debate.

We are here to talk and discuss about one of our passions, not fight or be exposed to hate. Posts or responses that are hateful will be deleted to keep the atmosphere good. If repeatedly violated, not only will the comment be deleted but a ban will be handed out as well. We judge each case individually.

3. No excessive self-promotion

Try to keep it to 10% self-promotion / 90% other stuff in your post history.

This is to prevent people from posting for the sole purpose of promoting their own website or social media account.

4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

This community is mostly for discussion and news. Remember to search for the thing you're submitting before posting to see if it's already been posted.

We want to keep the quality of posts high. Therefore, memes, funny videos, low-effort posts and reposts are not allowed. We prohibit giveaways because we cannot be sure that the person holding the giveaway will actually do what they promise.

5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

Make sure to mark your stuff or it may be removed.

No one wants to be spoiled. Therefore, always mark spoilers. Similarly mark NSFW, in case anyone is browsing in a public space or at work.

6. No linking to piracy

Don't share it here, there are other places to find it. Discussion of piracy is fine.

We don't want us moderators or the admins of lemmy.world to get in trouble for linking to piracy. Therefore, any link to piracy will be removed. Discussion of it is of course allowed.

Authorized Regular Threads

Related communities

PM a mod to add your own

Video games

Generic

Help and suggestions

By platform

By type

By games

Language specific

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

"And at least part of that plan involves AI", reads the subtitle. To be clear, not an endorsement from me. Some of this reads very strangely to me, but this is boots on the ground reporting from Gamescom of developer sentiment.

...having spent the past four days dashing between appointments with CEOs and developers, there is one sentiment that has remained consistent among almost everyone I spoke to. We need to make games quicker.

Amen. Twenty years ago, 3 years was a long dev cycle, and most games were churned out in 12-18 months. It also relied heavily on crunch, but maybe we could get back to 3 year dev cycles that don't, and that can be considered somewhat "normal".

Of course, it's one thing to say you want to make games more quickly, and quite another to actually do it. More to the point, how do you do it?

Well, I, for one, would start with the bloat that made its way into mainstay series. The icon barf of Assassin's Creed. Turning series open world that have no business doing so. Making a huge game as the first outing in a series instead of seeing if there's even an appetite for the premise in the first place.

One option is to make games that look worse. Given how super-detailed graphics seem to be far less important to a younger generation raised on Roblox and Minecraft, this would seem like a fair enough strategy. ... Yet there seemed to be little appetite for this strategy among the people I spoke to at Gamescom. Perhaps it's an unwillingness to fly in the face of conventional wisdom in an industry where frame rates are often fetishised. Perhaps it's more about simple pride in the craft.

So are we refusing to do what's actually necessary to keep people's jobs sustainable, or...?

So what's the alternative? One option is to use AI to speed up the development process. And it's an option that more and more studios are taking up. ... AI is the games industry's dirty little open secret – the majority of people I spoke to said they were using AI in some form or another.

And this is where I know a lot of people would like to stop reading, but I'd encourage you to continue anyway.

Utilising AI to generate snippets of code was a popular choice.

To date, this is the only use I've ever heard, as a programmer, as something that might be useful for my job. Not that I've done it. I can still come up with snippets quickly enough just from old fashioned documentation most of the time. But sometimes it's written so generic that it takes hours of your day or more to actually learn it. And that's not the most common thing in the world that I run into that.

I do wish the author broke down how much, and which pieces, of this came from developers compared to executives/managers/owners. I'm glad to hear that everyone agrees that shorter dev cycles are a goal worth pursuing. I'm not convinced AI gets us there, and I wonder how many programmers really feel it's speeding them along in their day-to-day such that it can reduce a development schedule by literal years.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 53 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Could you instead make them better? They're already mostly shit and you wanna pump 'em out faster so quality drops even more? πŸ€¦β€β™‚οΈ

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 14 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Do you think they get better if they take longer to make? These development times are a fairly recent phenomenon.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 32 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

It's not a gurantee, but cutting the time down when QA is already paper thin ain't gonna make shit better and likely won't even retain the quality it currently has.

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Who says the time getting cut is in QA? Maybe the games just scope down.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 21 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

The use of generative AI tools implies scope isn't going to change at all.

[–] zaphod@sopuli.xyz 13 points 3 weeks ago

Probably, which means the developers (or managers) didn't really identify the problem.

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

That's the fear the author raises, yes. I always say people are fluid, and we expand to fit our containers, whether that's our schedules, filling our homes with junk, or anything else. Hopefully what the industry is coming to realize is that their container is smaller than they think it is, but yes, scope creep is a real threat. I'm rooting for the industry to scope down.

[–] callouscomic@lemmy.zip 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I read this as shortening development time ("quicker"), not necessarily reducing the sheer amount of slop they pile in and call "content."

This is absolutely c-suites pushing for constant development to be a smoother, faster repetition; lots of DLC, or SaaS.

[–] ms_lane@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

Who says the time getting cut is in QA?

History and Common Sense.

[–] turmacar@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

A problem with AAA games is the development time is longer, the time spent working on the final game is not.

Time and time again when a game as been "in development" for 5/7/10+ years, the game that shipped was only really being worked on for the last year or two, once they finally got the design and gameplay nailed down and worked on the final game. Anthem is one of the more egregious examples in that some of the developers working on the game learned at the E3 presentation a year before launch that the game involved flying.

There's an iceberg of effort and only a fraction of it gets released.

[–] dukemirage@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

Games generally, in every budget class, take longer to develop but they are not generally worse.

[–] raptir@mander.xyz 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Doom 2 came out less than a year after Doom.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 4 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Does that mean you would prefer sequels to just be glorified map additions to the game you already own? If Doom 1 and 2 were done today, Doom 2 would have been a DLC.

[–] psx_crab@lemmy.zip 8 points 3 weeks ago

Nah dude, today we have Death of the Outsider, and Blood Dragon, both doesn't need the base game to run and is standalone, even though they use the same asset and engine from their base game. Not to mention ODST and Reach, both come out within 3 years of Halo 3. All phenomenal, even though they're using same engine, same asset, with some additional content and new map. The scope is also significantly smaller than the base game. They're all standalone even though they're DLC.

Also Tear of the Kingdom use the same map and asset, and it's considered sequel instead of DLC. same thing goes for Majora's Mask which they did within a year after Ocarina of Time. It's totally fine to do that as long as the game is good.

[–] zaphod@sopuli.xyz 8 points 3 weeks ago

And GTA Vice City was originally planned as an expansion to GTA III, then turned into an independent game and released just a year after GTA III.

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

Maybe that's the problem.

[–] Hazzard@lemmy.zip 28 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

I'm down for uh... one tiny part of this. I certainly think we could do to make games smaller, I'm sick of massive open worlds and colossal play times, which seem like an astounding amount of developer time to make swathes of stuff that ends up so soulless that I don't want to play it.

More focus on fundamentals, shorter, more meaningful campaigns with well executed gameplay and ideas would be wonderful, because we're rapidly finding the limits of every studio on earth trying to make the "forever" game. Players only have so much time.

The best recent example I have is Mario Kart World. It's a marvellous game, wall and rail grinding are amazing, the tracks are some of the best in the franchise, it's fantastic. But you can tell a massive amount of effort and years went into the open world, which uh... actively makes the game worse? Free roam is fun for an hour or so, but I have no idea why I'd want to do it with friends, and the game shoves its 200+ "intermission" tracks down your throat constantly. Time trials are the best mode in the game, because it's the only real way to consistently play the excellent tracks enough to actually unpack and learn the shortcuts and tricks that are afforded by the game's deep new mechanics. I feel bad that the team wasted so much time on something the community begs for better ways to avoid.

[–] Katana314@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I definitely want to see more publisher-driven "game experiments". Imagine a studio putting out a 3-hour vertical slice of a PS2-era-style experimental game idea for $5. Now imagine, a publisher puts out about 20 of these such games a year (and mostly loses money on them - since $5 isn't a lot and those 3-hour segments need polish) but then, occasionally one of them hits it big - and then the publisher grants them a greenlight to make a trilogy of 14-hour games after figuring out that people enjoy it.

[–] dukemirage@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

20?? The devs gonna burn out just as fast.

[–] Katana314@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago

To clarify, the idea would be to have smaller studios each independently making games. So for half a year, one studio may only have the responsibility of a single 3-hour demo.

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

That's the dream. Even $5 is probably low-balling what they could get away with.

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 22 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I would like to see more games where the draw is novel and interesting gameplay concepts and proportionally more effort is put into that than standing out visually etc. Hopefully this brings things more in that sort of direction.

[–] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 11 points 3 weeks ago

You won’t get that from AAA studios: that’s largely indie territory today.

The issue with creating novel and interesting gameplay is that it’s not a straight-line process. It takes a lot of experimentation and failure. That doesn’t match with the large teams and assembly-line process of AAA game development.

An indie game developer, especially one who just works on the game in their free time but otherwise has a day job, is 100% free to experiment and redo their game design hundreds of times. Often this doesn’t mean throwing the game away but instead making lots of small games for game jams or just to build a portfolio of projects.

Couple that with the fact there aren’t nearly as many AAA studios as there are indie game developers working on hobby projects and you can see why AAAs are at such a disadvantage when it comes to experimenting with novel and innovative game designs. Indie game don’t need to all be successful to make it hard on AAAs: out of thousands of indie games only one needs to be successful.

I appreciate that this is truly a post commenting on the article and not just a link to an unreflected article πŸ™Œ

[–] vane@lemmy.world 17 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

There's the advantage, too, that quickly made games can be adapted to suit current trends, avoiding the pain of, say, launching a live-service shooter years after the genre has been saturated.

Ah yes we need quick money trend slop.

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Were you around to play games 20 to 25 years ago?

[–] vane@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Yeah living my last 25 now.

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

All that to say that adapting to trends creates genres and results in honing in on better versions of the original idea. There will be bad versions along the way, but it's good to get that much iteration. We used to get that much iteration.

[–] vane@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I don't think corporate is able to follow the idea. It's politics. If they follow the idea the idea must come from their boss. It's just buzzwords to me.

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

Fortnite is a still-very-visible version of this exact concept. They were able to iterate quickly. Mostly because they just adapted their dud of a horde mode game into a completely new genre using the same mechanics, but they still did it quickly and found that success. We're also seeing it in the likes of Getting Over It, Lethal Company, Vampire Survivors, and plenty of other games that spawned imitators.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Resplendent606@piefed.social 12 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

The enshittification of videogames.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] simple@piefed.social 11 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

Good. Hopefully that plan involves less massive open world games with 2000 collectables that needs 150 hours to complete

Looking at you, Ubisoft. We're ready for another Rayman game

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 8 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

You're gonna be disappointed as fuck. Open world games are so formulaic and actually easier to shit out than a well-crafted linear experience. Especially when youre using generative tools. Huge maps are NOT hard to create or fill when you don't give a fuck about quality.

[–] CosmoNova@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

It will mean they'll offer less, cost more and have even more bugs and crashes.

[–] cecilkorik@lemmy.ca 11 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

*me looking at most of the graphical-atrocity indie games I play non-stop still being in "Early Access" after 10+ years* Yes, games taking too long to make definitely is the problem. Quantity over quality. Work faster, not smarter. Sounds like a winning strategy AAA-studios, good luck!

[–] Truscape@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Passion project updated by a private indie with no obligation to shareholders is the best kind of game, just ask Project Zomboid :)

[–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 1 points 3 weeks ago

Tried asking but couldn't hear over the warcrimes in Rimworld and artillery in Factorio.

[–] Zedd_Prophecy@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago

These guys no longer understand games.

[–] Goretantath@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Make games QUICKER!? So they are going to give up on quality and just have the consumers test however many A's they have as a slogan games now..

[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

There are, were, and always will be games made in shorter development cycles. It's just that people are finally coming to the conclusion that longer cycles shouldn't be the norm.

[–] SpruceBringsteen@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago

Someone out there is looking at the people mad about chatgpt losing personality and they're gonna cram it into games.

Knowing the latest developments in "world models" that you can use to walk around in VR and interact with the world, I think it only a matter of time until GTA or similar games adopt that tech over manually layouting and skinning their worlds.

[–] CosmoNova@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

That will backfire hard when AAA gaming implodes next year and consumers will demand quality over quantity. But I expected no less from a bunch of execs high on profits who never even booted up a game in their life. The bonus crap they promise you for a pre-order or a deluxe edition at the end of many trailers paint a grim picture. We're not just talking about cosmetic either and I know some games have done this for a while but it's across the board now when AAA sales are actually going down. Nobody has time or money for that slop.

[–] dil@piefed.zip 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

My plan is to buy less games, if anyone enjoys sandbox games, physics, etc. I recommend just spending a month learning blender instead, then it becomes funner than most "creative" games available.

[–] dil@piefed.zip 6 points 3 weeks ago

i want AAA to mean more gameplay options, more horizontal and vertical progression, tired of the graphics focus, lost comsetic progression, elden ring at least brought it back

load more comments
view more: next β€Ί