Triple A - Good, Bad, Or Excuse to Upgrade?

[The Brown Hornet]

I'm many threads on this forum the peculiar state of Triple A titles are often debated. Members of this forum seem to be of the opinion that Triple A =Bad, Indie =Good. Of course it's not all Black & White but I must exaggerate to make this point.

In recent threads debating the status of Next Gen tech several gamers have replied with "Triple A titles are copy and paste" "Triple A devs are lazy" "Indie games is where the innovation is" "Triple A titles overpriced, overrated" "I don't even play Triple A games" " Triple A are bad console ports" etc ...

Many of the same gamers who made these remarks and argued against my "new tech is all the same" points of view, fully embrace Nvidia's next gen technologies. They say it's a Golden Age of technology and it's pushing gaming forward.

So my question is how can you be so supportive of next gen tech while being anti Triple A gaming at the same time?!

Isn't it fact that Nvidia's next gen technology is solely focused on enhancing the Triple A experience; the majority of features introduced, DLSS 4, frame smoothing, 4x frame generation, Override, etc... are not even supported by less than Triple A titles! I have yet to see one Indie game featured in any Nvidia campaign ad or promotion. By the way, Indie games rarely have need for advanced technologies, that's part of what makes then Indie!!

So there it is, you dislike the modern state of Triple A and it's shiny bells and whistles yet you run out to buy upgraded technology for shiny bells and whistles. Alright, keep on shining!

[peremptor]

Depends on the game but the reality of the issue is that most AAA games want to extract as much money as possible from you and the live service games are even worse plus also wanting as much of your leisure time as possible (Destiny 2 for instance).

The problem for them is that unless you are addicted to the latest and greatest slop they are competing against all the games available on the PC platform currently and from the past that are bargains or even free by now and are amazing games and for a lot of us they already in our backlog.

Why incentive bad overpriced games when we got so many alternatives to spend our quality game playing time on?

AAA gaming outside of a few golden gooses like CS, LOL and Fortnite are just fighting for the dwindling scraps that are left.

[Nx Machina]

Is it a game you want to play? Yes or no?

If your computer cannot handle it you and only you have a choice to upgrade or not.

[Zarineth]

I play both AAA and indie games and have fun with both. It's all about managing expectations and making informed choices.
If someone fails in any of the above, they will have a bad time with both AAA and indie games.

[BJWyler]

The Brown Hornet a écrit :

I'm many threads on this forum the peculiar state of Triple A titles are often debated. Members of this forum seem to be of the opinion that Triple A =Bad, Indie =Good. Of course it's not all Black & White but I must exaggerate to make this point.

In recent threads debating the status of Next Gen tech several gamers have replied with "Triple A titles are copy and paste" "Triple A devs are lazy" "Indie games is where the innovation is" "Triple A titles overpriced, overrated" "I don't even play Triple A games" " Triple A are bad console ports" etc ...

Many of the same gamers who made these remarks and argued against my "new tech is all the same" points of view, fully embrace Nvidia's next gen technologies. They say it's a Golden Age of technology and it's pushing gaming forward.

So my question is how can you be so supportive of next gen tech while being anti Triple A gaming at the same time?!

Isn't it fact that Nvidia's next gen technology is solely focused on enhancing the Triple A experience; the majority of features introduced, DLSS 4, frame smoothing, 4x frame generation, Override, etc... are not even supported by less than Triple A titles! I have yet to see one Indie game featured in any Nvidia campaign ad or promotion. By the way, Indie games rarely have need for advanced technologies, that's part of what makes then Indie!!

So there it is, you dislike the modern state of Triple A and it's shiny bells and whistles yet you run out to by upgraded technology for shiny bells and whistles. Alright, keep on shining!

You're running on the False Equivalency fallacy there. Disliking the state of AAA games had nothing to do with the advancement of technology or being an early adopter. You can still love bleeding edge tech, and still be critical of the current corporate mindset when it comes to the business model of AAA games, because the problem with the business model isn't the bleeding edge technology.

[Piston Smashed™]

If I want to play a game and my PC is starting to struggle with newer games, then it's time to upgrade.

Do, we really need another thread complaining about Nvidia's new graphics cards?

[The Brown Hornet]

Piston Smashed™ a écrit :

If I want to play a game and my PC is starting to struggle with newer games, then it's time to upgrade.

Do, we really need another thread complaining about Nvidia's new graphics cards?

If you are choosing to be simple minded and singularly focused then thats probably all you see in the thread. Especially considering you are one of those posters I'm referring to.

[Piston Smashed™]

The Brown Hornet a écrit :

Piston Smashed™ a écrit :

If I want to play a game and my PC is starting to struggle with newer games, then it's time to upgrade.

Do, we really need another thread complaining about Nvidia's new graphics cards?

If you are choosing to be simple minded and singularly focused then thats probably all you see in the thread. Especially considering you are one of those posters I'm referring to.

Simple minded?
How does Nvidia make their trillions? Selling to content creators, streamers and video editors etc? You haven't a clue about what the company does.

You don't care about AAA or indie games, that is just a line so that you can continue your attack on Nvidia's frame generation etc, probably because the other threads have started to die, so you need to create a new one, after all trying to farm for those points is hard these days.

[The Brown Hornet]

Piston Smashed™ a écrit :

The Brown Hornet a écrit :

If you are choosing to be simple minded and singularly focused then thats probably all you see in the thread. Especially considering you are one of those posters I'm referring to.

Simple minded? :lol:
How does Nvidia make their trillions? Selling to content creators, streamers and video editors etc? You haven't a clue about what the company does.

You don't care about AAA or indie games, that is just a line so that you can continue your attack on Nvidia's frame generation etc, probably because the other threads have started to die, so you need to create a new one, after all trying to farm for those points is hard these days. :spazwinky:

I believe in questioning what is presented to me as the next big thing! I don't just accept what marketing and enthusiasm has to say, gimmicks should be put under a microscope and scrutinized just as we did during the Early Access fiasco. If you are the type to just run with it and accept things as they are then these threads will serve as nothing but an irritatint to you.

But as you can see with previous threads there are plenty who have opinions on the subject.

[BJWyler]

The Brown Hornet a écrit :

Piston Smashed™ a écrit :

If I want to play a game and my PC is starting to struggle with newer games, then it's time to upgrade.

Do, we really need another thread complaining about Nvidia's new graphics cards?

If you are choosing to be simple minded and singularly focused then thats probably all you see in the thread. Especially considering you are one of those posters I'm referring to.

But he's not wrong. You open up this very thread by stating you need to exaggerate in order to make your point. That just means your point isn't very strong to begin with.

At the end of the day, graphics technology was the primary factor in the advancement of PC tech. Not all of it was leaps and bounds. Most of it was incremental. I remember the days (vaguely) of going from CGA to EGA to VGA. Then one day there was this breakthrough of 3D graphics. What a marvel that was! From a personal standpoint, that was the last big innovation in graphics for me, before everything went back to being incremental.

But I do remember the day I first fired up Guild Wars on a desktop PC I built specifically to play the game since my other computers were lacking in the power at every level. I thought I had never seen such a realistic and beautiful rendition of a world. Then, one day I fired up Vanguard: Saga of Heroes, and it was even more beautiful and realistic.

And then more games came, and I had to keep upgrading in order to play them. Just like I had to upgrade from Aquarius to my DOS Commodore 64 with 8" floppy to my IBM with 5.25" and windows 3.0, then something else with both 5.25" and 3.5" floppies and Win 3.11. Then there was the Gateway running Windows 95, followed by an HP with 98.

That's PC tech, and especially PC gaming, bud. You don't have to like it, but quite frankly, I wouldn't enjoy it any other way.

[Piston Smashed™]

The Brown Hornet a écrit :

Piston Smashed™ a écrit :

Simple minded?
How does Nvidia make their trillions? Selling to content creators, streamers and video editors etc? You haven't a clue about what the company does.

You don't care about AAA or indie games, that is just a line so that you can continue your attack on Nvidia's frame generation etc, probably because the other threads have started to die, so you need to create a new one, after all trying to farm for those points is hard these days.

I believe in questioning what is presented to me as the next big thing! I don't just accept what marketing and enthusiasm has to say, gimmicks should be put under a microscope and scrutinized just as we did during the Early Access fiasco. If you are the type to just run with it and accept things as they are then these threads will serve as nothing but an irritatint to you.

But as you can see with previous threads there are plenty who have opinions on the subject.

I have no problems with you asking, none at all but you're asking the same question over and over again but disguising it under the cover of something else, just in a new threads. You won't get any different answers if you want the same answer to what you perceive as the problem in all your threads than you've already had.

You're old enough I believe to know how technology works, it starts as something and then over time it will morph into something new and better or it will die by the wayside. It's happened throughout our entire history, some technology works some don't. In three or five years time the tech you're complaining about might have died a slow death or it could be the thing to the greatest leap forward we've know in gaming so far, we don't know but we need these upgrades to find out where it takes us in the future.

Today's new technology is already years old the moment it hits the stores.

[SpeedFreak1972]

triple A 1 word: overrated

[The Brown Hornet]

BJWyler a écrit :

The Brown Hornet a écrit :

If you are choosing to be simple minded and singularly focused then thats probably all you see in the thread. Especially considering you are one of those posters I'm referring to.

But he's not wrong. You open up this very thread by stating you need to exaggerate in order to make your point. That just means your point isn't very strong to begin with.

At the end of the day, graphics technology was the primary factor in the advancement of PC tech. Not all of it was leaps and bounds. Most of it was incremental. I remember the days (vaguely) of going from CGA to EGA to VGA. Then one day there was this breakthrough of 3D graphics. What a marvel that was! From a personal standpoint, that was the last big innovation in graphics for me, before everything went back to being incremental.

But I do remember the day I first fired up Guild Wars on a desktop PC I built specifically to play the game since my other computers were lacking in the power at every level. I thought I had never seen such a realistic and beautiful rendition of a world. Then, one day I fired up Vanguard: Saga of Heroes, and it was even more beautiful and realistic.

And then more games came, and I had to keep upgrading in order to play them. Just like I had to upgrade from Aquarius to my DOS Commodore 64 with 8" floppy to my IBM with 5.25" and windows 3.0, then something else with both 5.25" and 3.5" floppies and Win 3.11. Then there was the Gateway running Windows 95, followed by an HP with 98.

That's PC tech, and especially PC gaming, bud. You don't have to like it, but quite frankly, I wouldn't enjoy it any other way.

Exaggeration is literally the hallmark of Steam Discussion Forums in general. I'm just nice enough to admit that I'm using exaggeration for effect; something we should be used to as gamers. We love exaggerated gameplay, graphics, effects, frames, sounds, and Nvidia knows it hence why their current GPU 's is nothing but exaggerations! Which takes us back to the question how as a gamer can you despise Triple A and all is exaggerations but embrace Next Gen tech and all its exaggerations?

See what you did there.....

[BJWyler]

The Brown Hornet a écrit :

BJWyler a écrit :

But he's not wrong. You open up this very thread by stating you need to exaggerate in order to make your point. That just means your point isn't very strong to begin with.

At the end of the day, graphics technology was the primary factor in the advancement of PC tech. Not all of it was leaps and bounds. Most of it was incremental. I remember the days (vaguely) of going from CGA to EGA to VGA. Then one day there was this breakthrough of 3D graphics. What a marvel that was! From a personal standpoint, that was the last big innovation in graphics for me, before everything went back to being incremental.

But I do remember the day I first fired up Guild Wars on a desktop PC I built specifically to play the game since my other computers were lacking in the power at every level. I thought I had never seen such a realistic and beautiful rendition of a world. Then, one day I fired up Vanguard: Saga of Heroes, and it was even more beautiful and realistic.

And then more games came, and I had to keep upgrading in order to play them. Just like I had to upgrade from Aquarius to my DOS Commodore 64 with 8" floppy to my IBM with 5.25" and windows 3.0, then something else with both 5.25" and 3.5" floppies and Win 3.11. Then there was the Gateway running Windows 95, followed by an HP with 98.

That's PC tech, and especially PC gaming, bud. You don't have to like it, but quite frankly, I wouldn't enjoy it any other way.

Exaggeration is literally the hallmark of Steam Discussion Forums in general. I'm just nice enough to admit that I'm using exaggeration for effect; something we should be used to as gamers. We love exaggerated gameplay, graphics, effects, frames, sounds, and Nvidia knows it hence why their current GPU 's is nothing but exaggerations! Which takes us back to the question how as a gamer can you despise Triple A and all is exaggerations but embrace Next Gen tech and all its exaggerations?

See what you did there.....

Because, as I said before one doesn't equate to the other. What you want to do with your argument is say that if people don't like sprinkles on their ice cream, they shouldn't like sprinkles on anything. That's just a fallacy.

[RiO]

BJWyler a écrit :

At the end of the day, graphics technology was the primary factor in the advancement of PC tech.

The problem is that a lot of current day advancements like ray tracing and temporal upscaling are not actually advancements in the sense of upgrading either graphical fidelity or winning back performance and making frame times shorter and faster.

They're mostly about enabling publishers and their contracted development studios to cut corners and get stuff done cheaply without having to e.g. handcraft suitably convincing lighting systems.

Ray tracing just fixes that for you. And sure, it uses obscene amounts of processing power compared to a well-optimized handcrafted solution that - with some artist care for also baking proper lighting into environments - is functionally equivalent and convincing enough (if - in the case of heavily stylized works - not actually straight up better) and could work with a fraction of the hardware resource use.

But you know what? Temporal upscaling means you can leisurely screw about and use maybe quadruple the resources and render time and all that unoptimized muck will still be hidden away by the hardware 'doing its magic.' You just don't have to care anymore.

Complete and utter creative bankruptcy; a cumulative utilities bill forwarded to the gaming audience that would make Enron blush; and a neat fire hazard brewing in every gamer's house - because to pull off all that number crunching magic the video cards need to draw so much juice through unreliable, ill-secured connectors that nowadays there are near-daily incidents where those connectors overheat, melt, short-circuit and if you're particularly unlucky spark a flame that will grow wild and burn your house down.


This isn't technological advancement to be enthused about. It is technological recession to be damned well angry about.

[matt]

I should have checked who created the thread before clicking on it. But "AAA" is just a meaningless buzzword used by marketers. Someone already labeled their game "the first AAAA game", which is either hilariously dumb or a savvy marketing move depending on your point of view.