this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2025
740 points (96.6% liked)
Greentext
4741 readers
1339 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Usually whan people make this argument with BG3 as evidence it comes with the implicit assumption that Larian is a AA developer, not a AAA one. I haven't done enough research on what constitutes AAA vs AA and where Larian fits in that so I don't know if that's reasonable, but that's the argument.
I'm not really sure on which planet they think Larian is a AA developer. BG3 was certainly north of $100 million to make, and had like 300 people working on it.
Ubisoft recently coined AAAA games in order to justify price rises on their latest mediocre drivel, and the only games I've seen that deserve the term AAAA are BG3 and Red Dead Redemption 2.
To me, that's a product where absolutely no compromise has been made.
because Larion was 100% a AA developer before BG3 came out, and it's hard to justify changing their place in the industry based solely on the success of their breakout game. It's also important to remember that Wizards of the Coast were major bankrollers of the project, it wasn't solely Larion. Larion is independent again, and I imagine their next project will be closer to the quality of Divinity 2 (still an incredible game btw) than BG3.