安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
讨论规则及指引
举报此帖
does kojima productions count as indie at that point?
Sonic
GTA
Street Fighters
Mortal Kombat
You make a decent point about Nintendo also being AAA.
They seem to be strutting the line of games first pretty well though, despite how much they hate their customers. Very few MxT in Nintendo first party games, if any.
If Kojima has to answer to investors in regards to game sales, then no, they're not indie. If they don't have investors, then yes, they're indie. That's how I'd look at it. Then the game can stand on it's own merits without the lingering question of intention behind design decisions that reek of greed.
I don't need one -- whether it's "AAA" yes/no, "Indie" yes/no, genre, ... I look at games, not at labels that people stick on them.
Still, while I don't stick labels on games, other people do. And then they talk about "AAA" games, or "FPS" games, and other stuff, and I need to have some idea what they are talking about.
For "AAA", I seem to do reasonably well to assume it's about "games made by Ubisoft, EA, Rockstar". Budget is a bit of a problem since I don't know the budgets for a game, so "high budget" doesn't really work -- and it would still require a boundary where the budget is high enough for AAA.
The problem comes in when we’re trying to determine the edges of the classification. Where exactly does the line get drawn, and how?
Like for example, why is Elden Ring considered AAA, but Baldur’s Gate 3 is labeled as indie or mid-tier? What’s the difference between FromSoftware and Larian Studios that makes this distinction?
If you are a retailer, it probably means something to you. But if you're a connoisseur, it doesn't mean much.
I look at games to see whether I think they're fun or not, I don't care about the labels "gamers" want to put on them.
I think it is about the quality of the game considering also the budget, polish and complexity / number of features.
When a company makes more such games and can afford working on multiple ones at the same time, you can already say it is an AAA company.
When they fail to deliver quality, they gain bad reputation. But everyone tries to take our money, indie developers too with their Early Access games. Some end up really good but not everyone is equally skilled.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_credit_rating
aa are more in dozen employees and only for one year, it is why they often release jrpg every year
indy few dozens employees, sometime less than 10 and is not rare it is only one dude, it is possible they have another job and their game is only extra $$$, but they may work in something else to pay their bill, but the guy repair computer or give advice how to fix pc
aaaa is equivalent to walt disney and their crappy movie of 200 millions $$, budget at least 100 millions $$ maybe 200 millions $$, their price is alway the most expansive