How Content is Killing AAA Games – The Point

With The Order: 1886 sparking arguments about game length, Danny investigates how the infatuation with content is negatively impacting AAA games.

Watch more of The Point!

Visit all of our channels:
Features & Reviews -…

Related Articles


  1. It's simple –AAA developers & publishers should stop focusing on how "pretty" their games look.

    That's it. That's all they have to do. Stop with the photorealistic nonsense and just focus on gameplay & content. Gamers will appreciate them for it.

  2. I like single player games but I also don't want one that u can finish in a day ,and when you spend cash on a game and have to be hooked up to the Internet that game goes way beyond the cash you spent just on the game .when I buy a game I make sure I can play it offline otherwise I won't buy it .like fallout 4 you can make your own game withing the game without being hooked up .

  3. the order 1886 can be a piece of pelican SHIT……………………. but graves cant have a fucking cigar?

  4. I remember being absolutely disappointed at the game "Thief." It just had this whole "I'm not what I could be" feel to it. And then I realized it was missing the little things. Yeah, it had the big picture, but it was missing the creativity to give it personality.

  5. People like indie titles because they bring new game mechanics (or bring back old mechanics they haven't seen in a long while) to the table rather than the same game we played 10 times over but with a different location, same general set pieces, and Shinier graphics.

    The order: 1886 is a cover-based shooter where you mow down hordes of faceless goons and use QTE-s for boss fights. Just because you thinly veil it behind an alternate setting, doesn't mean it's much different than any other shooter people have played 100 times over. So yes you do need a substantial amount of content or replayability to make it at all interesting.

    That's why people still play generic crap like CoD. Even though it's the same thing rehashed over and over, they manage to pack a lot of that hash into each game. The story mode length and game-play match The Order pretty closely, but CoD has a lot more content that people buy the game for. No one would continue playing CoD if it had the same type of story mode and the developers took out all the extra repayable stuffing.

    The story line of 1886 is rushed, has very little replayability and brings nothing new to the table in terms of game-play to warren a full priced game. It wasn't just the length that killed it but seeing how a lot of people still play games like CoD, not many people are going to call it out on the generic game-play and story.

    I guess the best thing I can say about the order is that it had a neet backstory and it's a shame they didn't do more with it.

  6. Only games with ZERO content are the multiplayer games. Same game modes on boring maps so you and your friends can run around shooting, jumping, and laughing with each other. Why create content? Make same game, different graphics, same no content and the children will spend their parents money for each $60 update.

  7. I think the problem is actually not the content but rather, as touched on in this video, the massive costs associated with super graphics games don't need to be good; if they weren't such huge financial risks companies would try making different things and get back to advancing the medium.

  8. I do not know what sence does this make. It does not matter that my game offers one MP map and one SP mission as long as they are fun and innovative, did I get this opinion corectly?

    So it is the innovation mantra all over again. What is the meaning of that? What kind of metric is that?

  9. Old school games = capitalism (more skill = more reward)
    New school games = socialism (everyone is mediocre)
    There is only one Cypher in Quake.
    There is a million of no scope 360 shooters in COD.

  10. You nailed it. It's been a growing problem for a long time and it's only getting worse. But with Unity/UE4 dev-to-dev content markets, indies are poised to shatter that model. Asset reuse will become more prevalent and more resources will go into story and mechanics.

  11. Despite everything that is wrong with, say, Bethesda titles, the only thing that keep them afloat is pure content. No revolutionary graphics, no revolutionary gameplay mechanics, just hundreds of hours of exploring sometimes a bit repetative levels (which is a pure lack of even more content). You are wrong all the way.

  12. More crap journalism to promote crappy unicorn indie games. You guys never learn. The only thing that kills a game, is making something that the audience don't play. There are lots of awesome AAA games out there that are doing just fine. However those who play socially-engineered-greater-good-of-humanity-diverse-machintash-approved-propaganda crap with the audience are doomed to failure. Now go ahead and bang your head against the wall over and over and tell me dying light is a bad game and we should play Sunset instead. We will regardless of what others think, rock the co-op multiplayer slaying zombies.

  13. I've never bothered to think before about why indie games seem to have so much more value than the big box titles these days. Great job breaking this concept down!

  14. nice video but it unfairly puts the burden for this reliance on develoepers. I think consumers share maybe 1/3 of the weight of this problem with their expectation that games have more content.

  15. 0:54 you got it here. Older games wanted you to loose while making you willing to play it.. now they're designed to don't let you sell it back to gamestop too soon.

  16. hahahaha Great ending. But I almost never say this, but great job with this video GameSpot! IGN probably would just argue over this on some podcast.

Back to top button