Saints Row was *among* the GTA's of the world in it's heyday. That shit falls on the suits.

SR never had the brand awareness or "prestige" that GTA has. GTA presents itself as a satirical crime series, SR after 2 was cartoony fun. Around GTA 4/5 , SR 3/4 I started preferring the saints row series. I fucked up and ignored agents of mayhem.

I'm sure this joker's salary isn't hindering games.

The crazy mofos were releasing a new game every two years when all they had to do was one game between GTA releases.

And locked themselves into the Sims-like cycle of DLC.

I always felt 4 was just *too* cartoony to last. I enjoyed the super powers, but it did way too much damage to the series' world (literally and figuratively) and left very little room to realistically expand. I get that they lost what they were planning with the whole Ultor thing when the rights split happens, but the path they took feels, and I didn't intend the pun when I first wrote this, pretty scorched earth.

To be clear, he seems to be talking about the reboot. I don't know if he feels the same way about 3 and 4 from the article. I may argue that going from the reception of the end result he may not be wrong. Whether that would have been true of the team that was making the two games people actually like or why they went from that to Agents of Mayhem is not something I have an informed opinion about. He's definitely right that the industry isn't throwing money at the wall to see what sticks anymore. That kinda sucks for innovation on high end games. You really need a big, established publisher to take a big gamble on a well planned project to even have a shot now. It makes a lot more sense to start small and build through iteration (or just make a million meme games and hope for a REPO or a Lethal Company). We'll see where that takes the industry, I guess.

That title really doesn't seem to reflect what the guy said. The issue he seemed to mean was the soulless lack of direction most AAA studios have.

> He’s definitely right that the industry isn’t throwing money at the wall to see what sticks anymore. Depends on what you mean by "the industry". The indie scene is doing exactly that. Every flavor of game in every type of combination is being done right now, all at the same time.

I'm not finding a good source. What do you mean about the rights?

Nobody is "throwing money" at them, though. That's exactly the state of the industry I'm referring to. Indies are effectively brute forcing creativity with a firehose of smaller games, either self-funded or supported by a few indie publishers, but nobody is funding larger efforts along those lines with higher budgets. Unless your name is Kojima, I suppose.

Soon. AAA studios are bleeding money out of every orifice because nobody gives a shit about their bland and boring games. BG3 was where the potentials started to show, but it's going to take another few years of studios tripping over themselves before the ones with actual cash are going to start investing elsewhere.

I guess we're doing this again. BG3 is the triplest of triple-A. It's a four studio game with a budget in the hundreds of millions, a major IP license and half a decade of development. If we're going to use the term we're going to have to agree on what it means. Also, everybody is bleeding money right now. It's not a creative issue. The financial situation has changed. If anything, the AAA guys are still raking it in. Fortnite and Call of Duty are making tons of money. It's the middle of the pack that is suffering most.

Yup sr 3/4 were fun whereas GTA was not by 4/5. I hate driving in those games.

Yeah cheap loans are done worldwide which always hits the midweights the hardest.

Saints row 2 was better than gta4

5 is definitely better but fuuuuuucck the driving physics in 4

Yeah, the powers are cool, but completely obsolete 60% of the game. Why would I get a Car and trick it out if walking is always faster? Why get a tank if I can punch things to death easier? If the hacked powers extended to more things and weren't quite so ridiculously powerful, there would be a lot more to enjoy.

> BG3 is the triplest of triple-A. It’s a four studio game with a budget in the hundreds of millions, a major IP license and half a decade of development. The budget was $25 million for BG3, not hundreds of millions. It is not a "four-studio game". It's ties to D&D are far far easier to license than most IP, since it's literally called the Open Game License. Concord cost $400 million. The latest CoD game cost $600 million. Starfield was $200 million. The latest Assassin's Creed was $300 million. > If anything, the AAA guys are still raking it in. Ubisoft is in trouble. EA is in trouble. Games divisions for Sony, Microsoft, and WB are in trouble. These are all AAA studios, not the "middle of the pack".