• 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️@yiffit.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    You look at the credits to a lot of games these days and notice that the vast majority of people are in the various art departments or management with, like, 3 people programming it all and the same or fewer people in QA. And it can take upwards of an HOUR to get through all the credits because there are THOUSANDS of people working on it.

    Small teams deliver more concentrated quality, IMO.

    • tal@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      I don’t know if I can reduce it to the programmers making the game, though. Like…yeah, the most-replayable games I’ve played rely heavily on the code, and less on the assets.

      But there are also games where the art is pretty critical that I enjoy. Like, imagine games in the Myst series without the art and sound. Like, none of the code is particularly impressive. The puzzles are…okay, I guess. You play a game like that for the art and sound.

      Or Lumines. I mean, yeah, they had to get the gameplay loop right, but technically, it’s a very simple game, just a falling-blocks game. But the audio and to a lesser degree, the appearance, is important.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bboWlUppp-s

      Rez is maybe a little fancier codewise, but it’s just a rail shooter. It’s really about experiencing the art and music.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZLHB5e90pU

      And I definitely did enjoy those. In the case of the latter two, those were not AAA games, didn’t have huge teams creating assets, but it was still really the assets that made the game.