this post was submitted on 07 Mar 2024
133 points (98.5% liked)

Games

16800 readers
569 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works
133
EA CEO talks AI, says the usual stuff before the bong rip hits and he starts blabbing about a future where 3 billion people are creating EA's games with it (www.pcgamer.com)
submitted 8 months ago by nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works to c/games@sh.itjust.works
19 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ITeeTechMonkey@lemmy.world 63 points 8 months ago (7 children)

The development cycle is very iterative, and incredibly time consuming, which is why games are now taking six and seven years to build, as they've gotten bigger and deeper," said Wilson, "So the first thing for us is how do we make that more efficient?"

I dunno maybe take a page from indie developers and make fun games that are innovative?

I'll take quality over quantity every time.

[–] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I think the bigger takeaway from indie devs is to cut back on the graphical fidelity and stick with something stylized visually.

Even if you want some graphical "wow" factor, you can get a hell of a lot from good lighting and other shaders over a less detailed environment.

Ultimately I feel that's what is making "mainstream" games take so damn long to develop: high quality "realistic" graphics take an absurd amount of work. The longer timelines mean bigger budgets, bigger budgets mean more incentive to "play it safe" and try to maximize appeal to the lowest common denominator in an attempt to break even.

When a game takes so many years and millions of dollars to make, there's a lot less room to let them be a passion driven "art" based project. Why take a risk at something innovative that may fail at mind bending cost?

[–] fckreddit@lemmy.ml 2 points 8 months ago

I completely agree with this. Graphical fidelity can be cutback for faster dev times and faster iterations.

load more comments (5 replies)