I spoke to over 40 game developers whose companies had been impacted by layoffs in the last year. They shared with me the explanations companies gave them for what was causing the sudden loss of their livelihood, but they also told me why those explanations didn’t always seem to match reality.
I would say yes and no.
Games definitely have become way better technically especially the graphics. And there are plenty of great games coming out regularly. Plus when looking at the past there might be some survivorship bias, as we might just remember the good ones and forget about all the crap that also existed.
What has however changed and influences new releases massively is monetization. Especially when paired with the ever increasing budgets that we see in the AAA releases. That leads to decision making not based on what makes a game actually good, but how can we squeeze as much money out as possible.
I want to push back on the survival bias, games today are a lot more homogeneous and similar than ever before.
In terms of innovation, big studios rarely try actually new things, and so games are far more similar now than ever.
Open world games are a clearly established genre with the same mechanics (side quests, big compass up top, rescue the villagers/destroyer enemy camps to free an area). Shooters are an established genre with virtually the same mechanics. XYZ Simulator. Sports franchises. Driving games. Top down rogue likes. They’re all very similar within their own genre.
The games that have been hits lately either rewrite a genre (like Souls games did) or execute it very well (like Bauldur’s Gate 3), or they’re nostalgia bombs like Animal crossing or Hogwarts legacy that are able to pull in a broader audience.
It’s hard to pitch that EA spend millions/billions on a cool new untested idea when they know they’ll make the same money releasing Call of Duty or FIFA with a fresh coat of paint, risk free.