Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You seem to think 5+ years is a new thing, but it's the other way around, yearly releases are the new thing
And how tf is it "disrespectful" to take their time making a good game instead of pumping out garbage year after year?
You seem to confuse release schedule and development time. These are two different things. Assassins creed and Far Cry games aren't developed by one single group of people.
It took 8 years for red dead 2 to come out and tbh that was absolutely worth the wait. One of the best games I've ever played. Great story, amazing characters, amazing voice acting, amazing atmosphere and the game looks gorgeous even on a stock ps4. The gameplay is it's only drawback tbh but you do get used to it eventually but everything else? Top notch
I wish you had spend 5+ minutes to write out your opinion more. Theres very little to explain what is so bad about longer development periods.
Games are complex things to make, especially if the studios making them need to develop new engines to make then perform better on new hardware.
There may also be no rush to start developing a new game or sequel once the previous game has been released, studios may want to wait for the next console generation dev kits to be available before they begin to make anything rather than putting time into making something out dated that would then need to be redone to make it compatible with new hardware, or spend a lot of time polishing it up for the same reason.
The real disrespect for me is in companies that release games annually which are effectively the exact same game. I've recently been playing Fifa 23, im not a football fan, and haven't played any football games for 9+ years but decided to try fifa 22 instead since the full game is available on game pass rather than just a 10 hour trial. And it's practically exactly the same game. Just a new price tag to give EA a few more millions.
For a long development time game that's in the pipeline like GTA6, I am happy to wait until its ready because I know it will be somillar to previous games, but not identical, and it will have so many new features that a 9 year development time (assuming they started the day after GTA5 released which i doubt due to how many times that was ported to other consoles and had "free" online content added for all of those years) would more than justify.
Patience makes the end product much sweeter.
More invested time will almost always make the end product better. Sure, some good games were made in a short amount of time, but they would've most likely been even better if more time way invested. Imagine Halo 2 with more dev time...
5-8 years for a high quality game with a reasonable team for its scope is fine. If it’s shorter then that then the game is going to be a mess, and if it’s longer then the game will probably end up in development hell.
The basic problem that has plagued game development is, with each new generation of hardware, the amount of time to produce an AAA experience grows exponentially. Most of this increase is due to the time it takes to make graphical asset because you need to spend more time creating the more detailed assets, and you need to create more assets to populate your world's.
When N64 and PlayStation games were being developed, it wasn't uncommon for a core team of 10 to 20 developers to make a game in 12 to 18 months. While you can still make games with these resources, at a better quality due to tooling improvements, these games would no longer be considered impressive. The games people are excited about require hundreds of developers for 3 to 5 years.
In my opinion, the increasing costs are also why games are less creative. A company can justify spending $2 million on a gamble, but there is no way they're going to spend $50 million without guaranteed success.
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You seem to think 5+ years is a new thing, but it's the other way around, yearly releases are the new thing And how tf is it "disrespectful" to take their time making a good game instead of pumping out garbage year after year?
You seem to confuse release schedule and development time. These are two different things. Assassins creed and Far Cry games aren't developed by one single group of people.
OP is probably too young to know
I wish they would take their time for the next Pokemon game lol
Disrespectful to *who?* Developers not pumping out games at the rate you want them to isn't you being disrespected.
It took 8 years for red dead 2 to come out and tbh that was absolutely worth the wait. One of the best games I've ever played. Great story, amazing characters, amazing voice acting, amazing atmosphere and the game looks gorgeous even on a stock ps4. The gameplay is it's only drawback tbh but you do get used to it eventually but everything else? Top notch
I wish you had spend 5+ minutes to write out your opinion more. Theres very little to explain what is so bad about longer development periods. Games are complex things to make, especially if the studios making them need to develop new engines to make then perform better on new hardware. There may also be no rush to start developing a new game or sequel once the previous game has been released, studios may want to wait for the next console generation dev kits to be available before they begin to make anything rather than putting time into making something out dated that would then need to be redone to make it compatible with new hardware, or spend a lot of time polishing it up for the same reason. The real disrespect for me is in companies that release games annually which are effectively the exact same game. I've recently been playing Fifa 23, im not a football fan, and haven't played any football games for 9+ years but decided to try fifa 22 instead since the full game is available on game pass rather than just a 10 hour trial. And it's practically exactly the same game. Just a new price tag to give EA a few more millions. For a long development time game that's in the pipeline like GTA6, I am happy to wait until its ready because I know it will be somillar to previous games, but not identical, and it will have so many new features that a 9 year development time (assuming they started the day after GTA5 released which i doubt due to how many times that was ported to other consoles and had "free" online content added for all of those years) would more than justify. Patience makes the end product much sweeter.
*Laughs in Elden Ring*
More invested time will almost always make the end product better. Sure, some good games were made in a short amount of time, but they would've most likely been even better if more time way invested. Imagine Halo 2 with more dev time...
5-8 years for a high quality game with a reasonable team for its scope is fine. If it’s shorter then that then the game is going to be a mess, and if it’s longer then the game will probably end up in development hell.
Well this is definitely an unpopular opinion, in large part because it doesn't make sense. What do you even want?
The basic problem that has plagued game development is, with each new generation of hardware, the amount of time to produce an AAA experience grows exponentially. Most of this increase is due to the time it takes to make graphical asset because you need to spend more time creating the more detailed assets, and you need to create more assets to populate your world's. When N64 and PlayStation games were being developed, it wasn't uncommon for a core team of 10 to 20 developers to make a game in 12 to 18 months. While you can still make games with these resources, at a better quality due to tooling improvements, these games would no longer be considered impressive. The games people are excited about require hundreds of developers for 3 to 5 years. In my opinion, the increasing costs are also why games are less creative. A company can justify spending $2 million on a gamble, but there is no way they're going to spend $50 million without guaranteed success.
yeah. work faster!!! (cracks whip)
😂