Stephen Totilo - Nintendo, Microsoft, Square welcome us to the era of fewer big video games

[Aadiboy]

People have been saying for years that Nintendo is different, that they aren't making games that have 5+ years development times. Then TOTK took 6 years to come out, and MP4 is taking 5+ years to come out. CEO said the same exact thing that everyone else has realized: Games will take longer to develop and cost more across the board, and that includes Nintendo.

 

[Vagabond]

If MVCI's mod is teaching me anything, its that artstyle is so important but often completely underutilized. Capcom and Nintendo seem to be the kings of making games with a lower than blockbuster budget that punches above their weight and I'd attribute a large amount of that success to artstyle being appealing - the games may not require hundreds of artists or animators but they look great. The other part is just nailing down game design and not overinvesting on things that have little or no value to the player.

Kinda baffling that it seems like Nintendo, Microsoft and Squenix are taking the wrong lessons from the industry trends of the last few years. Like, you can't control the reaction to your games and if you put more eggs in, say, the CoD basket and one of your CoDs don't live up to expectations then you put a large part of your business at risk.

Coulda sworn I remember reading during the FTC trial that this was one of the reasons ABK said they needed to sell. Now its Microsoft's entire strategy?

 

[Shoe]

Fine with me because the backlog is huge, but this does seem unsustainable on the studios's side

 

[Handsome James]

My point is MS is especially bad with the number of games produced.
In the last 4 years I can count Gears 5, Halo Infinite, Sea of Thieves and Forza off the top of my head (there's more but those are the big ones)

Nintendo for example make these many games in a single year.
I'm of course not saying game development is easy or shouldn't take any time, but there are obviously issues in production and/or management within MS 1st party studios.

Click to shrink...

?? I assume you are not counting Bethesda games?

Criticize the quality all you want, but MS has released a lot of first party games since 2020. Not even counting Gears 5 and Sea of Thieves as they release 5-6 years ago, they released ~ 25 titles across Xbox Series/One, and PC.

That's not even counting the remasters or the Series XS enhancements they had at launch. If you include those they're averaging close to 10 releases a year. Some of enhancements (Gears 5- which also got additional Story DLC with Hivebusters, Ori 2, and Forza Horizon stand out to me) were some of the best looking games you could play on the next gen consoles at the time and , IMO as good as most "remasters" that get repackaged and rereleased at $60 on other consoles.

2022 was a down year for sure- the real effects of COVID hit them hardest, but 2021 was amazing for me with FH5, Psychonauts 2, Halo Infinite. And they had a steady stream of releases in 2023.

Maybe they're not everyone's cup of tea, but I can confirm there are a lot of them based on my current backlog and looking at GamePass.

 

[fiendcode]

Edit: you seemed to have answered my question. So it was closer to five years in development, which seems to be the standard for big triple A games nowadays.

Click to shrink...

Around 5, but they could've had it out in 4 if they needed and maybe less without a global pandemic in the middle.

 

[BabyDontHurtMe]

Around 5, but they could've had it out in 4 if they needed and maybe less without a global pandemic in the middle.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, though it usually takes about a year of polishing for big beefy triple-A games like TotK. Being 'content complete' doesn't mean it's close to completion. It just means the whole thing of playable. Nonetheless, it's perfectly fine and normal for Nintendo's big games to take longer to make. That's why they do the remakes/smaller budget stuff like WarioWare (a game they can pump out in a couple years). Nintendo has the capability to incubate smaller teams to produce less ambitious titles at a faster rate. Their mainline titles would take a longer time (4-5 years) in addition to their proclivity to hold onto certain releases for strategic reasons (Advanced Wars 1+2 was clearly finished for a long time before release, in addition to the Metroid Prime Remaster). Kirby games also come out at a frequent pace as well, and of course there's Pokemon who remain committed to an annual release schedule. The select games that do take awhile to come out are the mainline Zelda/Mario and other major Nintendo IPs that are pillars to their business such as Splatoon and Animal Crossing.

Again, this isn't a bad thing. Nintendo just isn't immune to the ongoing shifts happening in game development. The more complex games are, the longer they take to finish.

 

[LastNac]

This ain't the way.

 

[llama-5-0]

It's kinda ironic. You would think all of the modern tools and technologies would make game making easier, not more difficult.

It's interesting that he mentions the rising costs of labor; are game devs getting decent wages now?

I cannot imagine trying to keep my game company afloat in this industry while also not completely losing all integrity. You have to be truly special to rise to the top it seems.

 

[cw_sasuke]

That's only an issue if all you release are AAA or big video games.

 

[Minions]

I find it hard to believe all your eggs in one basket is the right approach going forward. I forsee a single failure (like Forspoken) potentially closing studios if they simultaneously release less AA titles and less AAA as well. It feels like each company keeps wanting to outdo the other visually, when games already looked good enough. At some point somethings going to give.

 

[BeeDog]

Why is the economical state of essentially the entire world always just a side-note in any of these news articles, both from the gaming outlets and the companies themselves? I realize this specific article focuses on the increasing dev costs and games taking too long to release, but on the other hand the game devs/publishers also tend to complain about lower sales across the board. I'd like more analysts to tackle the topic of purchasing behavior in a big economic downturn, and how it correlates to these companies' plans (do they downsize/refocus while the rates are sky-high and money costs money? etc.).

I am probably wrong, but I do almost get the feeling that these companies continue to operate like all of their gamers are able to buy every game as usual (note: they likely cannot since "the growth has plateaued due to ongoing inflation in various countries and regions"), and then get surprised when their massive-budget game isn't a great success, cut down their workforce and ultimately blame the dev teams and their delivery speeds.

 

[NediarPT88]

People have been saying for years that Nintendo is different, that they aren't making games that have 5+ years development times. Then TOTK took 6 years to come out, and MP4 is taking 5+ years to come out. CEO said the same exact thing that everyone else has realized: Games will take longer to develop and cost more across the board, and that includes Nintendo.

Click to shrink...

Nintendo is only different because their hardware is weaker. Game development time is increasing as the hardware gets stronger and games get more detailed.

Switch 2 games will take longer than the ones they are making now, there's no escaping that.

Still Nintendo can do something other pubs can't, which is making smaller games that can at least sell a few million units due to the strenght of their IPs.

 

[Yuntu]

I find it hard to believe all your eggs in one basket is the right approach going forward. I forsee a single failure (like Forspoken) potentially closing studios if they simultaneously release less AA titles and less AAA as well. It feels like each company keeps wanting to outdo the other visually, when games already looked good enough. At some point somethings going to give.

Click to shrink...

Depends. I assume SE for example will focus mostly on their established IP with less risk attached. Well I assume everyone will do that. Big pubs might be even more stale than usual with their big games.

 

[Mukrab]

They really should stop saying bigger when they just mean mpre expensive. To me bigger = more content which is almost never the case with those games. Its just fancoer graphics and fluff like that. There are indoe games woth mpre content than the "biggest" AAA gamew. V rising just came out and it has more content than diablo 4.

 

[Cudpug]

Not to over simplify as I appreciate it isn't like for like, but Little Kitty Big City just sold 100k copies in two days. Animal Well just got 10s and is selling super well. Similar outcome for Another Crab's Treasure.

Maybe...huge AAA budgets and cutting edge graphics aren't 100% necessary for making a successful game. People clearly buy and play smaller games that need to sell far less and review very well.

 

[Tired Repairman]

Why is Nintendo being lumped into this?

Furukawa didn't say anything new regarding to Nintendo themselves, ever since the Wii era they've always been talking about ballooning costs due to growing complexity, that right there was Furukawa warning Nintendo's investors about what's coming with their next hardware.

That has nothing to do with Microsoft and Squenix. The context is completely different.

 

[tmac456]

It's the total opposite for me.
Give me my big cinematic adventures. I barely have time nor the interest to play fighting games, platformers, shooters, racers or multiplayer games anymore.
Give me the GTA story mode. I couldn't care less for the online MP mode.

Click to shrink...

Same for me. I still play Rocket League and Fortnite with some of my friends but otherwise my gaming time is only for big single player releases. But I'm even getting to the point where I'm finding it hard to make time for gaming at all as I get older

 

[Nyandeyanen]

Games are too expensive and take too long to make, so instead of focusing on making more smaller releases we've decided to put all our effort into making one single even bigger game that will take even longer to make and need even more sales before we see any profit. Please look forward to our next game on the Playstation 7.

 

[stoff]

Are "packaged games" still an effective measurement of this?

Click to shrink...

No, you are right. The data backing this take is wildly off-base.
The industry never had a bigger output than right now, it is just that most devs are busy developing DLCs, Season Passes and Post-Release work such as Patches and Ports of successful games.
It simply is more likely to be profitable than betting on "countable" standalone titles.

 

[Glio]

It has been this way for more than a decade now.

 

[Tired Repairman]

Then TOTK took 6 years to come out, and MP4 is taking 5+ years to come out.

Click to shrink...

I would say these two are special cases. TotK is possibly the most complex physics based game ever made, its dev process has been pretty well documented already. It needed those 6 years, otherwise the final result could have been a mess.

MP4 has changed hands at least once, and i'm willing to bet that Retro was given lots of breathing room, wich would fit Nintendo's current stance agaisnt crunsh.

 

[fourfourfun]

People have been complaining about there being too many games coming out for a long time now. Seems like this is a bit self-correcting.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, I feel like you can handle a market with lots of games, but not if they're needing to hit 5m x $70 in order to be feasible.

 

[AyaisMUsikWhore]

great, more time for people to finally play indies



more high quality indie titles than ever before

Click to shrink...

I was about to say this. Are people being dense with the "smaller games" comments? Indies exist for a reason. All that is telling me is people truly don't value indies if that isn't small enough. Wtf are people expecting if that doesn't fit the bill of "small"??

 

[texhnolyze]

I dunno. Seems like shorter dev cycles is a better answer.

Click to shrink...

Shorter dev cycles means AA games. They've tried, and the failed.

There's no such thing as short dev cycles in modern AAA gaming.

 

[Henrar]

It's kinda ironic. You would think all of the modern tools and technologies would make game making easier, not more difficult.

Click to shrink...

It made it easier. The industry, however, decided to create even bigger and more advanced technologically games.

 

[Dunfish]

I am all for whatever promotes the health of the industry, the developers and consumers. If that means less blockbuster titles then so be it.

 

[WildArms]

I sure hope with Square that less is more. I'm fine if we get fewer games but I want a return of a badass Square again... I know those days are long behind us (except for maybe XIV) but... still. That or hopefully Cygames can fill that void lol.

 

[Lashley]

It's been like this for a decade now anyway

 

[ekim]

Give me more AA games - I'm all in for it.

 

[Creamium]

Crazy to see all this unfold, the industry's changed so much these last years. I do wonder tho, isn't 'fewer, but better/aim for quality' very risky, with a high chance of putting you in a vicious cycle? If fewer games come out, that means also less money coming in right? And if they bet the farm on the big game, things still could go wrong and the game can bomb/underdeliver even if it's fantastic. Look at Rebirth or plenty of other examples. As Alannah said in her last video, 'quality doesn't matter' and that's very true. So if the big bet doesn't bring in the sales, what then? This five year dev cycle for one game is just completely messed up and unsustainable

 

[Juan]

I wonder what does he mean by:

Games made by the most agile studios will thrive.

Click to shrink...

Does he mean agile in the sense of being able to quickly iterate on an idea/concept and deliver it fast? Or agile in a sense of having a small team deliver on a core concept without doing the over-production area?

 

[Mr_F_Snowman]

Why is Nintendo being lumped into this?

Furukawa didn't say anything new regarding to Nintendo themselves, ever since the Wii era they've always been talking about ballooning costs due to growing complexity, that right there was Furukawa warning Nintendo's investors about what's coming with their next hardware.

That has nothing to do with Microsoft and Squenix. The context is completely different.

Click to shrink...

Already mentioned by myself and a few others but people are not really interested in context - Iwata was saying the exact same stuff about 3DS games -

""Therefore, if developers decide to try and maximize the graphical powers of the system, then the cost would be more expensive than what it is currently"

He also had some more nuggets of gold basically predicting exactly what large swathes of the industry are going through -

""I fear our business is dividing in a way that threatens our continued employment, for many of us who create games for a living," he said. "Yes - developers' hours are always too long, and the stress too high - but until now, there has always been the ability to make a living. Will that still be the case moving forwards?"

"A few games do become mega-hits, but it's not easy. With such competition, even being noticed is extremely difficult - huge investments promise nothing."

Even lack of polish we see on many modern titles is something he suggests -

"As projects become bigger and more complicated, often the option of working over and over again to polish a game, to make it the highest quality it can be, is disappearing,"

If can only imagine the level of doom there would be if Furukawa had come out with these statements today. I mean I get it considering the wider industry layoffs putting everyone on edge but its useful to remember these issues are ones that have been dealt with for literally every generation going.

 

[fiendcode]

Yeah, though it usually takes about a year of polishing for big beefy triple-A games like TotK. Being 'content complete' doesn't mean it's close to completion. It just means the whole thing of playable. Nonetheless, it's perfectly fine and normal for Nintendo's big games to take longer to make. That's why they do the remakes/smaller budget stuff like WarioWare (a game they can pump out in a couple years). Nintendo has the capability to incubate smaller teams to produce less ambitious titles at a faster rate. Their mainline titles would take a longer time (4-5 years) in addition to their proclivity to hold onto certain releases for strategic reasons (Advanced Wars 1+2 was clearly finished for a long time before release, in addition to the Metroid Prime Remaster). Kirby games also come out at a frequent pace as well, and of course there's Pokemon who remain committed to an annual release schedule. The select games that do take awhile to come out are the mainline Zelda/Mario and other major Nintendo IPs that are pillars to their business such as Splatoon and Animal Crossing.

Again, this isn't a bad thing. Nintendo just isn't immune to the ongoing shifts happening in game development. The more complex games are, the longer they take to finish.

Click to shrink...

Right, but the thing is this isn't really a shift for Nintendo. Zelda's been taking 4-5 years for two decades now, Nintendo's cycles quite literally aren't lengthening because they're scaling up R&D to keep pace and keep schedule. Maybe that changes in future but it definitely isn't where we're at now, unlike most other publishers.

As far as "content complete" for TOTK that meant fully playable and releasable according to Aonuma. And trust me, most AAA games do not get a full year of polish, lol. Maybe if you include post launch patches.

 

[Marmoka]

They should go for smaller games or whatever as long as developers are paid well and nobody else losses their job. If you want to do good games you don't need your games to be big.

 

[Falchion]

I would be okay living in a gaming world where new IPs are developed as A or AA games and then the successful ones become AAA for subsequent titles.

 

[inkblot]

I would be okay living in a gaming world where new IPs are developed as A or AA games and then the successful ones become AAA for subsequent titles.

Click to shrink...

Isn't that basically what used to happen?

 

[CheapJi]

I tend to enjoy smaller games more nowadays anyway.