@yboucher @killlo Ah, sorry, might've got my city wrong. Offices in Asia? But, its not a matter of fidelity but costs. Some of the titles mentioned elsewhere that are simply dropdead gorgeous likely have 2x-3x the budget of other games.

And I'm living in Hawai'i, so if its more expensive than here, then I *really* feel sorry for those folks @_@

Personally, while I expect the next generation is underway, Sony and Microsoft need to be working on ways to lower game costs back down to $50 or even $40 a game for this AND next generation. I remember paying $80+ for games, and don't really want to get back to that point.

@killlo Then the problem shifts to "can we afford to make better graphics?" Ubisoft and Epic have art departments in Hong Kong just to try and keep costs under control.

@redroach @jayd02 Well, costs will be cheaper in proportion, but the creation of graphics assets (models, textures, animations, etc) will continue to skyrocket with each jump of graphics. Its like a Hummer owner saying he found a great way to save money washing his car while he's paying out the nose at the gas pump.

@PodXCOM I can wait, simply because I'm tired of photorealism being the primary drive of graphics. With the hardware we have now, there's so much more that could possibly be done! Again, going back to smaller titles, I've seen a lot more creativity, visually, than the typical AAA game. And, certainly, I want to see an updated Okami!

@OJ_the_LION As competitive and limited as retail space is, there's likely less incentive to stock smaller titles. By going digital, there's significantly less financial risk for smaller companies (you don't sit on dead inventory). Going through Steam, for instance, there's such a fantastic variety of unique games of all types. Same if you're on a smartphone like iOS or Android.

Until we purchase differently, however, I feel you're right except its more we won't see a more diverse AAA-lineup. Right now, for retail, the cards are too stacked against smaller developers, I think.

@jayd02 @redroach Its coming up with game ideas that are financially viable. There are tons of great ideas out there - the problem is, "will it sell?" I've seen too many good games fail to believe "if its good, it'll sell" anymore.

Also, PUBLISHERS aren't getting creative. They're the ones fronting the money. Developers would likely love to do other things, but need publishers to pay the bills. That's why Kickstarter is so important, methinks.

@OJ_the_LION My biggest problem is the market is so risky and competitive now, that its not willing to forgive promising, but flawed, titles like it used to.

@jayd02 Don't worry about the top-end. Worry about the rest of the game market. Also, you're looking at some REALLY high budget games there (MGS4 was rumored to be, what, over $70 million?). GTAIV was over $100 million. Time to make those games cost a LOT of money.

Instead, look at everything else; this generation is considerably less diverse than last generation due to development costs. A PS2 AAA-game cost $10 million. You can't even make an "average game" now for less than $20 million. This is making publishers more and more conservative. Its easier to take risks when the game "only" costs $1 million than when it costs $20 million to make, because its easier to at least recoup your costs and not lose money. Factor 5 close down, and Free Radical nearly went out of business because a SINGLE title flopped.

@YukoAsho Exactly. This generation is already too expensive for many of the games that made last generation so great, at least for the retail market. Instead, we're seeing all the really interesting, creative stuff being done on PSN, XBLA, smartphones, and indie PC.

Costs are already at the point where large studios are beginning to outsource art jobs.