Larian Do you Consider Larian an AAA game Studio?
- Thread starter Couchpotato
- Start date
Larian Studios Games not fitting in one of the other prefixes
I suspect their next game will have to be quite massive if there are still people who actually think BG3 wasn't AAA.
Not there yet.
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2024
- Messages
- 10
So if a team of 400+ and budget of around 100 million isn't quite there, what's the cutoff point?
Exactly. If that wasn't confirmation enough, I don't know what is.
Good ol' wiki says AA is 40-100 people and AAA as anything more than that. Probably a little bit low on the headcount unless they mean FTE for the entire duration of development. 400 and 5+ years dev is without a doubt AAA territory.
Definitely AAA, but I still consider them an indie studio. To me indie is not about the budget (although most of the indie studios have a small budget), but about the independence from big fish publishers like Microsoft, Ubisoft and EA. I'm on the fence about clasifying CD Project as such, mainly because of GOG, which would make them the big fish publisher (same with Valve).
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2014
- Messages
- 899
CD Projekt owns both CDPR and GOG.com. So I suppose it depends more on the freedom CDPR has for developing games than the fact its parent company also owns a small publishing business.
CD Projekt has external members of the board (including the director, apparently) and shareholders, so I have no idea how much freedom they really have.
Something like The Last of Us, Cyberpunk, Red Dead Redemption 2, GTA, Zelda TOTK, Starfield.
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2024
- Messages
- 10
Yes, those would be AAA games as well.
That's what I like with Wikipedia. They wouldn't add Skyrim to the list of best-selling games because there's no "reliable reference" (more an internal dispute, apparently), but they would add a meaningless category which is probably a typo from one source and an attempt to impress from another.
Then they also define 'AAA+' and, maybe the answer we were looking for, 'III' (indie games that have relatively high budget, scope, and ambition).
Then they also define 'AAA+' and, maybe the answer we were looking for, 'III' (indie games that have relatively high budget, scope, and ambition).
*Deleted
Last edited:
Ubisoft coined that phrase so yeah take it with a grain of salt.
They use it to justify selling games over $70.
What games were over $70 for just the base game?
Skull and Bones that game cost them a fouturne over two decades to develop.
www.pcgamer.com
Ubisoft CEO defends Skull and Bones' $70 price tag, says it's 'a quadruple-A game'
The high price of the upcoming high-seas adventure came into question during an investors call.
www.pcgamer.com
It's only $70+ if you purchase the Premium Edition that comes with some extra goodies.
I think the author of that article was just bored considering there have been several other games priced at $69.99 the last few years. Maybe because it's the first Ubisoft game to be priced that high, but still...
I think the author of that article was just bored considering there have been several other games priced at $69.99 the last few years. Maybe because it's the first Ubisoft game to be priced that high, but still...
JFarrell71
SasqWatch
Nobody needs to defend a $70 price for a game from a large developer these days. That's what they cost. And a lot of them are worth that, considering how increasingly large and expensive to make games have become.
Skull & Bones sounds like a dud, though.
Skull & Bones sounds like a dud, though.