Sony Interactive Entertainment seems to be strategically shifting away from active AA game development. It doesn't seem like much when a bigger platform like PlayStation moves away from trying to make lower-end games, but it seems to be following a pattern that may be out of control. AA games are starting to feel like a bad word, and development in this category of games seems smaller than years ago.

Some of the best AA games of all time are as memorable as many AAA games. The main issue is that AA games don't have the production quality of AAA games, so the possibility of being a blockbuster success is lower. This means investing in them seems like a bad move compared to a game that is more likely to sell millions of units with the same marketing budget.

PlayStation Doesn't Want To Make AA Games Anymore

This Has Led To Studio Closures

Shuhei Yoshida, the former Sony Interactive Entertainment Worldwide Studios president, was recently interviewed by AV Watch, translated by MP1st. In the interview, Yoshida stated that Japan Studio was closed because PlayStation wanted more AAA games, not AA titles. This is the studio known for Ape Escape, Gravity Rush, and more, but these are mostly AA games. The studio was "good at making AA titles," but Sony wanted bigger releases.

Yoshida was in charge of releasing first-party titles, and he was told to make powerful games to sell the PlayStation hardware. This meant development and scale had to get "bigger and bigger." So the path became clear: first-party games needed to show off the advancements the consoles made, and that meant bigger and better games. Pushing the limits of the consoles was not something AA was known for.

"The company wanted such things, and while we had to make them, the scale of development and the sales required were getting bigger and bigger." - Shuhei Yoshida

The core issue stems from the perceived risk associated with mid-budget games. Unlike AAA games, which can be spectacular successes, AA projects are uncertain and often end up creating small profits in comparison or no profit at all. The potential for significant losses on smaller investments is what creates an environment where risk aversion takes precedence. This is known to stifle ideas and focus on what works instead of experimenting.

Some Incredible Games Are Mid-Budget Releases

Innovation Comes From Constraints

It has become common for the gaming industry to focus on blockbuster AAA releases and overlook the significant segment of high-quality titles produced with modest budgets. While PlayStation wants less to do with these, AA games often demonstrate remarkable creativity and innovation, proving that financial constraints don't necessarily mean a lack of quality or potential. Several critically acclaimed and commercially successful mid-budget games prove that AA can be worth it.

Disco Elysium, A Plague Tale: Innocence, and even Sifu show how great and successful an AA game can be. For example, Sifu revitalized the martial arts genre with its challenging combat system and unique aging mechanic, adding layers of strategic depth and replayability. The combination of slick, fluid combat and the punishing, but fair, consequences of failure made it instantly appealing. Sifu is the kind of game that works well because it's so small and contained, but it likely wouldn't work as an AAA.

Indie development is less stressful, but they can reach blockbuster levels of success, which seems to often be the formula to success.

The success of AA games demonstrates that innovation and artistic vision can thrive even with limited resources. By focusing on core gameplay mechanics, compelling narratives, and unique artistic styles, developers can craft memorable experiences that resonate deeply with players. These mid-budget successes showcase the potential that exists outside the high-pressure environment and massive budgets of AAA development. Compelling gameplay is important regardless of how much money is spent developing the game.

When studios don't invest in AA, innovation tends to suffer. Playing it safe doesn't always work, and so many games and movies copy elements from others that seem to work in an attempt to play it safe. If it's not made with the thought of doing well and is just avoiding losing money, it won't feel new.

Indies Feel Like The New AA

It's Almost Like Publishers Aren't Needed For Indies

The slow downfall of the AA game market has left a noticeable gap in the video game landscape. While vastly different in their origins and overall structure, the old AA market and the current indie game scene are eerily similar. Some of the best indie games you can play right now are so good that they ended up finding success on the PlayStation store. If Sony doesn't make it, then people with creativity and dreams will.

Like AA developers, indie developers often work with minuscule teams and have limited funding, relying on innovative game design and clever marketing to lack massive financial backing. This inherent constraint has given indie developers a spirit of freedom in a way that AA developers don't often have. Indie development can avoid certain corporate stresses while having the potential to reach blockbuster levels of success.

The accessibility of digital distribution platforms like Steam and the open nature of console stores have made it easier for anyone to make games. The days of AA developers having to find a publisher to back the game to a storefront are long gone. Indie developers can reach a global audience on their own dime and often have teams that match AA studios, so the difference between AA and Indie seems to be a big publisher's backing.

It's Starting To Feel Like AAA or Bust

Either A Complete And Total Win, or A Painful Loss

PlayStation's move forward echoes the industry, which has been increasingly dominated by a relentless pursuit of AAA game development. This trend, driven by a complex interplay of financial pressures and market forces, is reshaping the landscape of gaming in big ways. The primary motivation behind AAA is the potential for enormous and sometimes unreal financial returns. However, the great cost can mean the end of a studio, as seen with Concord.

Sony shut down the studio behind Concord after losing a lot of money on it. This was a AAA game that should have done well on paper, but in practice, it failed. Sony lost hundreds of millions of dollars on a single AAA game, and that loss would have destroyed a smaller publisher. This need to constantly make big games has become a gamble that tends to hurt the industry and those who work in it.

It is understandable why PlayStation wants to go all in on AAA development. However, it's almost like playing a game that will ultimately end up with either total success or abject failure. The long-term health of the industry depends on finding a more sustainable model that can give room outside the spectacle of AAA games.

Sources: AV Watch, MP1st