I've come to the sudden realization that all the games I loved in the early 2000's were made by teams of 20-25 years old fresh out of college.
Now that the medium has become much more lucrative and thus able to give more job security to game devs, it's not uncommon to see the same people rotting away at studios for decades.
Passion gone, spark lost.
My question is: do any of you know good studios/games made by passionate "young" people?
>it's not uncommon to see the same people rotting away at studios for decades.
yes it is, game development has a comically high turnover rate. even "nice" places to work at like Valve have people constantly coming in and going.
This. Lots of the people who worked at 80s Nintendo were gone by the 90s, lots of those were gone by the 00s etc etc.
Video games are not a prestigious or particularly well-paying career for wagies.
The problem is that young people that go to work in this industry are just trained slaves.
They go to "game design" school where they get taught how to think and how to work with unreal slop engine. This is also the reason all UI in games is the fricking same, graphic design suffers from this very issue aswell. Everything is centralized.
That was not the case in the 90's where lots of the genre defining games were made, nothing was established every individual had to find his own path and learn things their own way.
That's why we had all these cool different approaches and ideas.
this is the truth
t. software engineer dabbling in game development
Why do you have a job?
I don't know man, it just kind of happened.
Maybe you should try getting locked in the bathroom
Which bathroom?
I have some good news for both of you
well? don't leave us in suspense
>young people that go to work in this industry are just trained slaves.
This is true of every industry. Younger people are always just desperate to get and keep a first job in their career field. Older people know their value. This effect is stronger in any field where there's more "passionate" or idealistic young people. Creative stuff, helping others, and working with kids (teachers) are the main ones that get taken advantage of.
>This is also the reason all UI in games is the fricking same, graphic design suffers from this very issue aswell. Everything is centralized.
This makes me worry about the mass of studios adopting UE5.
the thing you're worried about now already happened in 7th gen with UE3. every fricking game had the same ugly, blurry look with low res baked shadows and textures that pop in 5 seconds after the camera teleports to a different room. UE has been a plight pretty much from the start. UE1 and 2 lead to some cool games. 3 was a disaster for the medium, outside of high skill studios like DICE (Mirror's Edge) and Rocksteady (Arkham Knight) who heavily modified it. UE4 initially seemed like an improvement. then games started to stutter, especially on PC. UE4 takes most of the blame for shader compilation stutter being normal and accepted. everyone else used it as an excuse,
>hey, if the biggest engine out there has this problem and everyone just ignores it then WE don't have to fix that in our engine either. games just stutter now, whatever.
UE5's main consequence will be horrific CPU performance of every game so even 5+ years from now today's games will still run like shit on any PC. made for 900p30 today they'll run at 1440p60 by the end of the decade. UE5's performance is optimized around the 9th gen console CPUs and 30 fps. devs are already cutting entire rendering features to hit 60 on consoles.
You have no idea how much I despise Unreal Engine and everything you said just made me hate it even more
It's because kino underground stuff made from young people never get recommended (with some exception, like Toby Fox was pretty young when he made undertale for example and FNF was made from a young dude aswell)
That and all they know how to do is create the same games. Ever notice that games are now sold on Graphics and Open World, not anything else? It's basically a homogenized industry where everything is the same because nobody can think outside the box in terms of game design. Timesplitters, Ultima, Wizardry, even odd games that were a mix of MMO/Singleplayer were crazy and innovative. It set the whole industry on fire. Now it's just boring 4 genre shuffle between FPS, Rogue, Platformers and games about depression.
>are now sold on Graphics and Open World, not anything else?
>are now sold
>now
I meant to say Graphics paired with Open World. I am getting old.
Team Cherry - Hollow Knight, Silksong (soon™)
Gemayue/Crespirit - Rabi-Ribi, Last Command, TEVI
Lucas Pope - Papers Please, Return Of The Obra Dinn
Whoever made Katana Zero
Ultrakill devs as well
Look at indies, no matter the country. The passion won't be found in established corporate names
these
Intravenous
Environmental Station Alpha / Baba is You (same dev)
>Lucas Pope
hes in his mid 40s, donno who the rest even are
also this thread is extremely gay.
It's majority contract shit now dood no one ever stays at one place its why they all want to use UE and they all have the same gimmicks beat for beat
It's literally the opposite, all the old veterans are gone now, they left because the game industry is a terrible meat grind. The industry is now filled with millennials and zoomers and indians who can't make games for shit
I don't agree. It's not rare at all to see veterans studio hopping or making their own and pumping an absolute mediocre game because their in-house dev cycle is strictly sticking to 35hr work week since they're old boomers.
So you get those games coming out with some "quality" label such as "By the original creator of Halo/Fable/Fallout 2/L4D" and other meaningless labels, and all they need to do is convince a few investor to fund their game that's set-to-fail.
It's such a recognizable loop as well. 4 year dev cycles, uninspired work. All of this so they can finish their career and hit retirement.
I think there's a reason why streamer baits get popular. It's quick concepts of games made by high-school/college kids that gets popular because it brings true innovative gameplay to the community.
Anon games aren't made by one guy, marketing bullshit about TRS "creating L4D" means absolutely nothing and has nothing to do with the actual development process.
The fact is that game dev has low pay, long hours, and insane turnover. The actual people building the machine are fresh grads from some crappy full-sail game dev class because no one else will work in game dev.
I think lobotomy corporation director was around 30 when he made it. The entire game was coded by freshmen.
It’s a good game.
"People" fresh out of college are now 30 to 35.
Most of the studios/games made by young people are going to be in the indie scene unfortunately.
the decimal system is divided in 04 and 5-9 so you should have said 20-24
Old men are the future.
Old men boipussi was made for big Black person wiener
there will be
OLD MEN
RUNNING THE WORLD
A NEW AGE
I came in this thread to hope somebody posted this. You're cool.
They were once men
how many fortnite dances have you learned?
I'm 35. I played their game when I was a teen about 20 years ago. I made this thread because I've come to realize that the future lies with fresh ideas from zoomers, even if it comes with baggages like forced diversity or other homosexualry.
You insinuating I'm a zoomer is very insulting. I am fuming right now.
>Passion gone, spark lost.
> I've come to realize that the future lies with fresh ideas from zoomers, even if it comes with baggages like forced diversity or other homosexualry.
They have that now, what exactly is it you're expecting zoomers to fix? The reason games suck today is because those producing them are obsessed with changing the world and pushing their political views rather than making a fun game.
You can't expect people to make something entertaining when their focus is on other things. They're more worried about the percentage of black people, latino people, gay people, etc. they have in a scene than they are about whether they have an entertaining dynamic between the character's personalities.
Not to mention that people are generally less competent today overall since the bar is low and the chance of advancing or achieving anything is also low.
>The reason games suck today is because those producing them are obsessed with changing the world and pushing their political views rather than making a fun game.
As opposed to games that were made 30 years ago and were made by people who were against shit like satanic panic and "le violent games are ruining children"?
When ID made doom, metal music and demons were the evil that was destroying the youth.
As opposed to Kojima who was pushing his anti nuclear war rhetoric since MGS 1?
As opposed to GTA and Manhunt that were made to make fun of politics in their respective eras?
The only difference between 2000 and 2020 is that YOU'RE the old generation kids are making fun of. You're the old fart who holds them back. That's why you hate it. It was designed by this generation to make you hate it.
It's literally the opposite you fricking idiot
Game dev has zero retention and impossibly large turnover. No one wants to be in the industry and NO ONE wants to stay in it.
A few major publishers bought up every dev studio and long ago decided that burn-and-turn was going to be their employment model.
Why contain it?
It's not the devs being old, it's the medium. Too much has been "figured out". People aren't experimenting because they've found the formula. Experimenting produced brilliant games but it also produces a lot of failures, no sane dev would take the risk if they can just use the Ubislop formula and make a living.
The same thing happens to every medium, there's an initial explosion of creativity followed by decline as the low-hanging fruit has been picked and people just repeat what works. Brilliant people get bored and move on so overall quality goes down.
Hit the nail on the head.
I've noticed that my favorite game franchises went to shit the moment the old devs left.
This happened to Ys, the old music composers and battle devs left the company after Origins and now it's just outsourced shit.
The souls franchise will also be the same, the moment Miyazaki retires, the games will feel like shit.
Young people these days are part of Generation Z, i.e. Boomer part 2. Expect no creativity out of them, just revisionism and a demand for uniformity of tastes.
What was the last truly groundbreaking change to controls, gameplay systems, etc? Analog joysticks on PS1 controllers?
The Wiimote was a gamechanger but Americans were mad that it meant games became more accessible and diverse.
Gyro aiming is also a huge development that American consumers are holding back.
VR is a meme.
The next big thing will come out of the indie revolution we're currently experiencing.
>Gyro aiming is also a huge development that American consumers are holding back.
I wish more games would force gyro for aiming
frick you, learn how to use an aiming system for consoles that isn't slow and autoaiming for you
>The next big thing will come out of the indie revolution we're currently experiencing.
The indie game >REVOLUTION!
We're in the effing renaissance, bro!
No, we aren't.
NTA but I can see why some people say that because AAA companies haven't put out anything good in years. All the good games have been coming from AA or independent studios
VR game boom in 2016-17.
The DS touch screen and the Wii with its waggle controls but subhuman Black folk thought they were for kids and casuals so the PS3 and shitbox 360 with their movie games took off instead.
Sure the Wii wasn't a powerful console but it was perfect for shooters, almost on par with mouse+keyboard on pc. But noo kiddy console for casuals noo I don't want to move my arms
Meanwhile the most popular game on xbox is a shooter with aim assist
For all of the shitposting about the Wii U tablet, it worked amazingly well for Pikmin 3. Being able to look down and see a map of the area where you could just draw lines to lead squads of Pikmin felt very good, and I don't even like RTS games. I know that's a pretty niche example though
I wouldn't say groundbreaking, but when it's actually used, the adaptive triggers on PS5 controllers is pretty cool.
WE'RE 100% BLACK!
Desperate
Your turn
Its not like old fricks, just up and become Khronos and start devouring every upstart Zeus or some shit, but how can you inovate when the basics is the same shid and piss for 20 years, you would need some new tech, offcourse why wouldnt the first guys out that made the standard for a previously none existing one not take up the spot.
Why contain it?
's cool.
Big studios took over, big corpo dick took over.
All these sequels, remakes, demakes, dlcs, that’s what killing the industry.
There’s no innovation, just reiterations pumped out by money grubbing meat grinding companies.
And it won’t change because if you aren’t working for big daddy microsoft, snoy, or nintendie then you’re going to get paid less than peanuts in comparison.
Mix of these two things and "Data driven decision making" are actively stifling creative risk taking. You can't make something unless you can prove it will be profitable to the MBAs, and the only proof that something will be profitable is that it already has been, so original game ideas generally get snubbed from the offset. Then all of your sub systems have already been 'solved' so even the features of the game end up feeling the same as competitors/predecessors, and you've relegated yourself to a content treadmill. So it's a mix of young people forced into boxes and old people in high up roles that don't have any creativity due to established business practices.
Source: I work at a live services game studio
the only thing I'd add beyond all this and the terrible pay/hours driving people away is that western game dev long ago decided to ask for story/character/"experience" pitches whereas Japan still uses internal demos as pitches.
ah yes, the delightful 'experience' pitches where some guy with a powerpoint set to music tells us about how this game will be so frickin cool. Working in AAA has definitely soured me on a lot of this shit, at least with indies I can say that someone is probably following their vision, good or bad.
It's bad, but it also sounds like something that's gonna sort itself out. Those studios are going to make bad games that flop and then get shut down. It feels like this process is already starting, the big studios who once revolutionized gaming are putting out turd after turd, and while some of them can afford to make some mistakes, they can't keep it going forever. Hell, some of them have even given up on videogames entirely, opting to take their IPs and turning them into frickin' TV shows instead because that's all they know. They don't know how to make videogames anymore
>Those studios are going to make bad games that flop and then get shut down
Anon there are essentially 4 publishers that completely own game development and investment and they've all been cranking out complete dogshit and making massive profits for decades
Normalgays and children have lower self-respect it's true, but even they have limits on what they will tolerate. The fact that fricking Pokemon is falling out of favor should be telling enough
It's just wishful thinking, anon, and it's wishful thinking every generation of gays on this board has gone through. I was mad about anime breasts and declaring the industry was gonna collapse when I was a dumbass teenager, too.
Fact is that gaming as an industry, yes even without mobage, has done nothing but grow dramatically year over year since the 90's. It dwarfs movies and TV and music combined and continues to grow as more markets open in SEA and Saudi Arabia
>Pokemon is falling out of favor
Not falling fast enough
Unfortunately the people making decisions will just golden parachute their way to other studios and continue fricking things up. Or people like them will be put in charge, since 'business leadership experience' is what gets people in charge of growing studios.
Then those studios will die too. Either those investment bankers learn how to facilitate good game development, the game studios learn to keep out those fiscal blood suckers, or every major studio goes bankrupt. Whichever happens first doesn't matter much to me
You say that like no industry has ever crashed before, like the gaming industry itself hasn't crashed before. Countless companies have fallen just because they think they're too big to fail, and gaming is no exception to that
>You say that like no industry has ever crashed before, like the gaming industry itself hasn't crashed before.
I say that because I DO know about industry crashes and the games industry crash. The circumstances for it today simply don't allow for it to happen again without a fricking apocalyptic loss of energy generation.
>Companies can fail!
There's a pretty large difference between a company failing and an industry collapsing. For an industry to collapse the demand has to be so low and supply so costly that selling the product simply isn't profitable.
You're arguing from a place of total ignorance and sheer ideology.
This is all ideology, no one has posted a single graph, article, or credential, yourself included. And I never said the vidya industry was going to collapse, AAA haven't had a monopoly on vidya for years now. But a lot of the bigger studios are going to eventually tumble because they're being filled with incompetent people. Videogames just have a long turnover time, for both success and failure
>AAA haven't had a monopoly on vidya for years now
kys
What's wrong with that statement?
name 3 successful, even indie titles, that didn't have a million $ marketing budget.
Just off the top of my head:
>Pizza Tower
>Binding of Isaac
>Minecraft
>Terraria
>Noita
>Baba is You
>Cruelty Squad
>Unturned
not to mention Stardew Valley making truckloads of frick you money
>I never said the vidya industry was going to collapse
You did but if you're agreeing that the industry won't collapse now we're back on the same page
>AAA haven't had a monopoly on vidya for years now
I'm not sure you know what a monopoly is. Not only do a handful of publishers own all of the investment capital, they're massively vertically integrated and own every dev studio that isn't 3 guys in a garage.
>a lot of the bigger studios are going to eventually tumble because they're being filled with incompetent people
Clearly you don't understand the insulating nature of monopolies, especially when demand is only rising.
Even if a company completely screws the pooch over and over for enough years to actually be unable to cover its debts or get more loans they'd just get swallowed up by another large player.
I know you want bad games to mean failed business but it's just not how the world works.
>You did
Point to where I said that
>Not only do a handful of publishers own all of the investment capital, they're massively vertically integrated and own every dev studio that isn't 3 guys in a garage
Point to where that is the case
>Even if a company completely screws the pooch over and over for enough years to actually be unable to cover its debts or get more loans they'd just get swallowed up by another large player.
>I know you want bad games to mean failed business but it's just not how the world works.
It is exactly how the world works. Why do you think people have been complaining about EA and Xbox buying up game studios for the past decade? Because those studios get dissolved and their IPs die. They're dead and gone because they didn't do well enough to stand on their own
>point to where game dev is vertically integrated
Microsoft owns Bethesda and a hundred other studios you fricking clown.
EA has been swallowing dev studios whole since before you were born
>EA and MS bought failing studios to use their failed IP's!
Holy shit what a moron.
No, dipshit, the idea when there were still independent dev studios to buy was that you bought ones with GOOD reputations and then rode that good reputation into the ground until it was no longer profitable.
Also it's fricking hilarious that you acknowledge them buying out studios and engaging in vertical integration right after saying that's not a thing and asking for examples of it.
God damn, son, could you possibly be any more wrong?
Good studios don't get bought out by other studios, simple as. Call it whatever you want, but that studio failed
>Good studios don't get bought out
You can't, if this were truly beneath you then you wouldn't be responding at all. But you want to appear superior in this entirely hypothetical conversation so you keep replying even though all you can eek out now is memes that you get from the Twitter gif search function
If they were successful they wouldn't need the stimulus from a buyout
So your argument is basically that publicly traded companies are the bane of creativity. And from
that the best way to be successful and creative is to transition almost entirely away from making games and into being a distribution platform that then gets to have infinite money to just do whatever they want. Again, not from actually being successful game makers, but successful platform managers.
Do you have an example of a private company with this supposed level of success from being good that isn't a sales platform company?
Arguably, 2004 Valve. Half-Life 2 had just released to critical acclaim, and they were about to hit it out of the park again with Portal and TF2 3 years later
Okay, sure. But it's not 2004-2007 anymore. And Valve didn't continue on that path to continue making waves like that in games. Hell, Portal's practically a small-scale counter example, where Valve just poached a digipen team and gave them resources and published their shit, just without the middle man of them retaining their 'studio' name. Valve's the big publisher in their case, and the guys who made Portal have gone on to make... What, since then?
And your only example of a studio that can grow is one that makes innovative platforms and tech rather than games, and isn't even a studio. I'm not gonna say Valve is bad, because they're not, but current Valve is much closer to being one of those giant publishers that subsumes other companies than a studio that produces good games and secures its own existence.
The very nature of corporate growth/stability requires that your two metrics compete against each other, unless 'good games' means repeatable success and a lack of innovation.
You didn't ask for examples of studios that can grow, you asked for examples of successful private studios that aren't Valve because you thought that was the question that would win you the argument. There's plenty of smaller game developers that are standing on their own, studios that can produce games without having to fall backwards into stagnation and mediocrity or sacrifice themselves to a bigger company.
>Consumer Softproducts
>Nolla Games
>Concerned Ape
>Supergiant Games
>The Behemoth
My argument is that part of running a successful company is being able to defend yourself against destructive forces. Whether that force be the costs of running your company, or bad actors looking to subsume you, you need to be able to ensure your own existence while continuing to produce the product or service that your company aims to produce. And without going into what a major source of innovation Valve is even without regularly producing games, they were used as an example because they're a private company. Because they chose to be private, they don't have to deal with hostile takeovers from investors. If other companies want to mitigate that risk, they should do the same thing. Bioware should have done that but they didn't, and they died for it. A game studio doesn't need to be private to be successful, it needs to be private to survive. Because as you yourself pointed out, studios being bought out and picked clean by bigger companies is such a common practice that there's even a fancy name for it
You keep trying to make these misdirected generalizations of what I'm saying, it's really hampering your understanding. So to make this really simple for you and prevent further confusion:
A good game studio is a company that can:
>Produce good games
>Secure its own existence
They're still working on shit, but most of their focus is going into platform development and hardware R&D. It's meaningful work but not something they can show off every year or two to wow the public
Successful studios do.
>Good studios don't get bought out
>Who is Maxis
>Who is Popcap Games
>Who was Pandemic Studios
They may have made some good games but they weren't good enough to stand on their own two feet
>Then those studios will die too
>Videogames just have a long turnover time, for both success and failure
You've pointed out the reason your argument about this shit ending doesn't work. Yeah some AAA studio will flounder. Then the reason it floundered will continue to another one. And another one, and another one - and this is often taking place under a huge publisher umbrella that has enough other shit going on to not even care. It's a cycle of growing studios that will grow and either stagnate into doing the same shit repeatedly or die, but they (being the grade of studios in this particular phase of being) will never actually fully go away in any time scale relevant to you.
Maybe the industry changes and gets better, but that's a human generation or global catastrophe away. Also, it's probably going to get worse, as lowest common denominator designs get pushed for a reason, and there is an ever-growing population of people served by generic repeated comfort food designs.
Kids don't know how to make RTS games and stuff so idk what you are talking about OP.
This is a problem with legacy ips and original creators.
>make game when you're 25 years old, full of life, and will to change the world
>get told to make a sequel or remake the same game when you're a cynical, wasted 50 yeard old geezer that's on his way out
of course there's going to be zero consistency here
no one older than 40 should have any creative input on videogames
Or rather, if you're an older person then you shouldn't hire young people for your development team. Young people can make their own games if they really don't want to be around veterans.
>no one older than 40 should have any creative input on videogames
You're gonna be 40 too at some point zoomer. And that that point you'll want games made by people your age, not xoomers whom you can't relate to.
The fact that you even thought for a moment that a zoomer would care about respecting 20+ year old games speak to how small your brain and penis are.
>do any of you know good studios/games made by passionate "young" people?
No
Most people out of college are indoctrinated søy sipper more concerned with activism rather than making a good game.
I went to college to learn how to pump oil out of this shitty blue rock we call a planet, and I for damn sure am not a zoy sipping homosexual.
I imagine this is why indie games are so appealing however they have their own issues. We don't have young people with creative control, backed by companies with budget and resources. I almost never play an indie game and feel like it actually fits in with early 2000 games in scope and design. Even games that nail the quality are often very short (A Hat in Time for example). We have all the creativity still but what we got back then isn't replicable really outside of occasional anomalies. There's also something else going wrong honestly. Why is it that we have tools as simple as RPG maker but not a single indie RPG is ever as good as like dragon quest games? Or really any of the iconic SNES RPGs. These games were made by small teams, in assembly. Have we just progressed to being completely incompetent or was there something about company structures and limitations that pushed these young small teams to excellence? 15 years ago when indie engines were taking off more I expected things to be a lot different by now. I felt the same about Netflix originals though too and it turns out some limitation and restraint is extremely important even if it's coming from morons who own you.
Good post OP, gamer dads and the homosexual devs who cater to them are part of the reason games have been so shit for the last decade. b***hes like the creator of the original God of War series who swear they know better than everyone else because theyre an old, fat frick with nothing but shitposting on their schedule.
Old, crusty casuals are almost as big a problem as trannies
Yeah, David Jaffe is a perfect example of game devs hitting rock bottom and why they shouldn't keep delivering shit "just because they did the original thing back then!".
They might as well be two completely different people now, if he can't provide value right now what's the point on having him around?
Can you believe that the punchable soiboi that is Cory Barlog actually co-directed GoW2 alongside him? GoW2, a fricking brutal (and fun) game? Yes, the same Cory that "envisioned" the dogshit nuGow that we're enduring right now. What the frick happened to him? I'll tell you what happened: he was 31 back then and he's 48 now. Age poisoned his mind.
Not saying that 100% of human beings become boring, empty husks as they grow older. But most people lose the will to push boundaries and be a little bit transgressive at times which is where the spice of life is at.
I'm going to add Ken Levine to that list. BioShock games are way overrated.
Past, like, 2005? No. And the money in it is the problem.
>My question is
You can just ask a question. You don't have to make a declaration.
That's a turn of phrase we use in my mother tongue when doing public speeches. I didn't want the thread to devolve in the usual shitflinging and by trying to create a pompous opening post I'd thought I could attract a more intelligent audience.
I think we're doing fine. Except for a dozen post I'm getting the engagement I'm looking for. Not enough recommendations however.
Ganker hates passion projects like Hi Fi Rush
Mikami may be passionate but he isn't young, motherfricker made God Hand
Mikami didn't make Hi Fi Rush, his protege at Tango did.
moron it's not about "stimulus." If EA offers the owner(s) of a privately held studio fifty million dollars to hand it over 9 times out of 10 they're gonna do that.
If that doesn't work they'll do a hostile takeover like they did with Bioware. The founders refused to sell a controlling share to EA so EA literally bought an entire investment firm just because it had enough Bioware stock to push EA into 51% ownership
They ran that risk when they decided to be a publicly traded company
>you are right and I was wrong
neat
If that makes it easier for you to digest. I'm just sayin', you don't see Valve with this problem
Valve is privately funded by Gabe Newell's vast Microsoft fortune, they don't need to make shit (and haven't in quite a while)
I love passion projects like HiFi Rush.
when i think of young people making games, i think of all those indie games flooding steam that are just soulless copies of older games
>are just soulless copies of older games
You got to start somewhere, except they stop at that
>just soulless copies of older games
Perhaps the same could be said of AAA slop!
I think nothing wrong with someone trying something new outside the typical genres, but i do think it's sad when they are afraid to do something interesting and odd they would like to make. Sometimes it's all about making the game you would like with a team that has the same passion you do. When that happens you change the world or at least have that sense of feeling the accomplishment of doing something from start to finish.
>Sometimes it's all about making the game you would like
If you have an idea but it's boring you get nothing out of it, it's easier to make things that you know they will work out
I may be old and ugly but my partner in crime is younger i think, we've never met.
So wait, are you going to ignore the influence of money on this situation? Back in the 90s and early 2000s, the game space was MUCH different time for game development, in the sense that they were working in an entirely new, rapidly evolving medium with no way to know what kind of games would sell well. The industry was literally made up of hobbyists who had no standards for the quality of their work, and were making shit up as they went. Literally throwing shit at the wall and seeing what sticks (and I mean this in the best way possible). Today, the industry is made up of professionals whose JOB it is to create products for companies who only care return on investment.
Now mind you, I don't mean to imply that's not how its always been. Just that standards have been set over the past 20 or so years in the industry that constrain that experimental ethos that gave birth to some of our favorite video games of all time. The problem isn't age. It's money.
yeah dude cant wait for some lgbtpoop mental illness anal log horror games made by zoomies
Old men...
Are built for savage beat ups
Ouch, why?
This man released his game Unturned on Steam in 2014 at the age of 16. It became one of the most popular games on Steam at the time and still holds relevance today due to its accessibility and modding tools
Lethal Company was also made by one guy at 21, but Ganker's gonna dismiss it outright even though it was evidently a passion project for him.
That's cool, I didn't know he was so young