The AAA video game industry stands at a turning point.
Facing runaway development costs, dwindling consumer trust, and rising market instability, big studios must adapt to a rapidly changing market.
Could the answer lie in the unlikeliest of places: reviving retro-style games?
That idea may not be as far-fetched as it sounds. A growing body of evidence suggests it’s not only possible, but perhaps essential, to reevaluate the market viability of 2D and 2.5D games.
The surprising success of retro style games like Shovel Knight, Cuphead, Octopath Traveler, and Bloodstained proves there’s a considerable and underserved market for games that marry classic aesthetics with modern design sensibilities.
Related: Why Millennial Devs Can’t Make Authentic Retro Games
To understand why going back might be the way forward, let’s look at the challenges facing the big game studios.
The AAA sector is plagued by issues eerily reminiscent of the circumstances that led to the 1983 video game crash.
These include:
- Market Saturation: Digital storefronts are flooded with releases, making it harder for even high-quality titles to stand out
- Skyrocketing Budgets: AAA games now rival or exceed blockbuster movie budgets, demanding massive sales just to break even
- Consumer Backlash: The constant push for monetization tactics like microtransactions and unfinished, buggy releases (looking at you, Cyberpunk 2077) has eroded consumer goodwill.
If these trends continue unchecked, the AAA segment could face a reckoning.
Related: Is a Second Video Game Crash on the Horizon?
So, what do retro style games offer?
The indie sector has shown that retro style games are more than a nostalgic indulgence—they’re a viable market with massive potential.
Consider the following success stories:
- Shovel Knight (2014): This love letter to NES-era platformers became a breakout hit, selling over 2.65 million copies and winning multiple awards. Its success has sustained developer Yacht Club Games for nearly a decade
- Cuphead (2017): With its hand-drawn animation inspired by 1930s cartoons, this challenging run-and-gun game sold over 6 million copies within three years and earned critical acclaim for its artistry
- Octopath Traveler (2018): Combining SNES-era JRPG aesthetics with modern HD 2D graphics, this Square Enix title sold over 3 million copies, proving that even AAA publishers can find success with retro-inspired games
- Bloodstained: Ritual of the Night (2019): This spiritual successor to Castlevania demonstrated that classic 2D gameplay could thrive in a contemporary market, earning over $20 million in revenue.
These games not only performed well commercially but also garnered lasting fan loyalty. They show that retro aesthetics, far from being obsolete, can provide a fan-pleasing and profitable alternative to the bloated complexity of many modern AAA releases.
Related: How AAA Studios Killed 2D
Given these factors, from a sheer business perspective, AAA should reconsider their approach. Re-embracing retro style games could address several of AAA’s most pressing problems:
- Reduced Costs: 2D and 2.5D games generally require smaller budgets and teams, lowering the financial risk associated with development
- Creative Constraints: Working within the stylistic and mechanical limitations of retro design can foster innovation and elevate craftsmanship, as seen back in the golden age of 2D gaming
- Appealing to Nostalgia: Retro style games tap into a deep well of nostalgia among generations X and Y. Even Zoomers appreciate the old classics’ timeless gameplay and aesthetics
- Rebuilding Trust: Releasing polished, artistically rich games could help AAA repair strained relationships with consumers, positioning studios as creators of high-quality entertainment instead of crass profit seekers.
Which brings us back to the question that kicked off this post: Should AAA studios revisit retro style games?
AAA studios must revitalize their catalogs to stay competitive. While cutting-edge 3D blockbusters won’t be going anywhere anytime soon, a return to the craftsmanship and charm of 2D and 2.5D games could provide the lifeline the industry needs.
By taking a cue from indie success stories and reintroducing retro style games, AAA developers could reignite the passion of disillusioned gamers and secure their long-term viability.
After all, when you’re heading for a cliff, the first to turn back is the first to make progress.
Get early access to my works in progress, the chance to influence my books, and a VIP invite to my exclusive Discord.
Sign up at Patreon or SubscribeStar now.
Dark fantasy minus the grim plus heroes you can root for battling overwhelming odds
AAA should do a lot of things, and they will fail as long as they keep clinging to the cult of the usurpers ruling them through bureaucracy. Until they cut the dead weight, abandon the corporate Code of Conduct they’ve been saddled with, and finally give up the quest for Moar Power, there is no future for them. The PSWii60 generation was almost two decades ago and it was the last time consoles had any relevance to the industry. Aside from Nintendo, who remembered with the Switch that a console’s job is to offer something unique and different, the industry is not showing why it can’t just be replaced with a Steam Deck instead of a next gen console.
Until they do that, it’s over for them.
Reports of Gen Alphas and younger Zoomers choosing retro games over Current Year mudgenre slop tend to vindicate the Big N and bode poorly for the rest of AAA.
Another benefit of doing smaller projects: you can afford to innovate more. When every project is a gargantuan blockbuster, taking risks is simply unconscionable, but that leads to everything getting samey and boring. If you have more, smaller projects, you can afford to try something new because if it doesn’t work out and they fail, it’s not the end of the world.
Right? I am old enough to remember when the big studios used to take risks.
One thing I appreciated a lot about the visual direction of Octopath is that they took the (original) 3D animation route. They built a physical set (possibly turntable?) and then animated on top of it.
If people want 3D, they should consider having more practical effects and props opposed to digital. IMO, it almost always fits better.
That and there’s lots of style points to be had for having . . . well, style. Most games look the game because they run on the same game engine. Meanwhile, taking to more analog resources to build media makes you stand out.
I’m not interested in 2d. But PS1 and PS2 style games, yes. Like recently I have been playing Red Faction and Ion Fury (which is a slight modernization of Duke Nukem engine but a female protagonist). I see no problem with these engines. Ion Fury’s level design they made too big of levels. I’d prefer more level and a bit smaller. The thing is studios used to reuse the same engine over and over rather than keep trying to make eaxh release more graphically amazing. Games like Deus Ex Human Revolution and Mankind Divided have a pretty perfect engine. Just make new levels, a few new enemy models etc. and churn it out. Smaller games, and cheaper. Instead of sinking a billion dollars developing the 80 hour gameplay game, sink 100k or less churning out a new levels in an old engine for 5 hours of gameplay. No more open worlds or even finite but overly large levels. Make games that require less time investment, and reuse old engines so there is no need for an annoying tutorial. And if they do want to make new engines, drop Unreal and make proprietary engines with lower graphics and then reuse the crap out of them.
I was waiting for you to mention Vampire Survivor as an indie game with a lot of impact. Goodness, it invented a whole new genre. My husband plays the Deeprock Galactic version whenever he needs to chillax. Sooo many spinoffs.
I wish AAA would wake up and smell the coffee, but I don’t see that happening anytime soon. They’ll go to their deaths screaming Death Cult cant.
Just played it for the first time last night at a buddy’s house. Yep, the game’s legit.
AAA game companies are already taking their stab at this with “remastered” versions. Almost always paired with removing the originals from storefronts and doubling the price tag (or worse.) Usually with lots of processing/RAM/disk space bloat and some questionable decisions relating to “updating the game for modern audiences.”
You get the nostalgia points, don’t have to worry about 90%+ of the game design, and you can keep the costs low (especially since most of these remasters cheap out with AI upscaling and the like.)
Indies are going to keep digging into various aspects of the retro world, especially since to them the cost prohibits making the modern AAA style of game from the start. But I don’t see AAA companies really digging into it any time soon. At best they will wait until an indie company gets a hit and then either buy the company out right or else make their own clone of it.
I’m currently saving up money to buy every single 6th generation game console (only have the PS2 at the moment) and am also in the process of learning to work with low-level graphics APIs (DirectX & OpenGL). I can confidently say I have a far greater preference for low-level frameworks than monolithic engines such a Unity and Unreal. At the rate things are going, PS4 will be the last modern console I’ll ever play. And if I ever manage to get anything published (even if it’s only as a personal project), you can definitely count on the fact that it’ll have more inspiration from a studio like Looking Glass than anything modern AAA has to offer…
A worthy goal. I’ve had a PS2 since 2001, an ex-roommate gave me his Dreamcast in lieu of rent some years ago, and I just got a Gamecube for St. Nicholas’ Day. So all I need is an original XBox, which I could take or leave, frankly.
AAA will need a “come to Jesus moment”, but that won’t happen as long as venture capital papers over their failures and keeps these studios disconnected from an actual market response/reward signal. Very anti-capitalist in nature from “venture capitalists”.
Disney should be getting the same type of signal from their persistent failures with movies and streaming that push messages their customers reject. But, the woke can’t admit mistakes or failure, so I expect the Disney decline to drive ever downward until something gives.
In both cases, we see organizations that are no longer performing the function for which they were built. The advantage then should be on the side of independent creators or studios who are willing and capable of creating novel and fun 2D/2.5D games. Market them to gamers and see who succeeds.
The audience is underserved by the AAA studios who don’t want to give those customers what they want. That audience may be there for the taking for creators willing to exploit the AAA studios’ disregard.
The whole corporate funding system has been perverted from what good it initially served, if any. Since at least the Tech Bubble, VC has been geared toward two ends: 1) yield chasing that props up Death Cult-aligned megacorps 2) throwing funds at venal startup CEOs that glue egg timers to iPhones in the hope of an ROI when the founder cashes out on exit.
Anyway, your point stands. No one in corporate America has made anything new and useful since the 80s. A reevaluation is long overdue.
“Anyway, your point stands. No one in corporate America has made anything new and useful since the 80s. A reevaluation is long overdue.”
I’d say that’s mostly because the entire American economy seems to revolve more around investors going from hype to hype rather than building anything sustainable. All you see is people who are only concerned with media manipulation and ‘gaming the system’ in order to boost stocks when they’d be better off with taking the long road and actually create something which is useful & practical.
I once heard the claim go around that most Western economies (if you look at their debt-to-GDP ratio) are basically bankrupt, and I’m definitely convinced this is true. You always have this hot-air balloon with truly ridiculous sums of money going around, but no-one’s actually producing anything.
All the government bailouts have done is delay the collapse of this broken system by creating zombified corporations with fundamentally broken business models which are only able to stay afloat through repeated cash injections.
It’s only a matter of time before this house of cards goes floorward, so taking an economic approach with a social bent is absolutely paramount if you genuinely want to improve the lives of your citizens…
You’re spot on. A while back, some players on the periphery of the tech startup game gave me a look behind the curtain. The whole racket operates like a casino, with VCs and founders moving chips around the table while adding zero value. To them, the victory conditions are having a big initial funding round, riding the gravy train, and exiting with a golden parachute before it runs out. No thought is given to building anything for future generations.
Related to this, I recently stumbled across an article about a California-based tech AI-something startup named Greptile, which got “famous” (maybe infamous) for the fact that they proudly advertise their 84-hour workweek and their lack of belief in work-life balance (no, I really did type 84, it wasn’t a mistake). “It’s like a rocket launch” the CEO says. At least he has the decency to be upfront with new interviewees about that, but given that he is almost assuredly planning to get a big funding round and then jump out of the metaphorical plane with his golden parachute, this sounds like little more than desperately squeezing his workers for every drop of labour he can possibly get. Given the fact that it would surely be more effective to pay two workers to take shifts rather than pay one worker to do the same work and hit burnout/diminishing returns, that makes it even clearer that he doesn’t expect the business to be around long enough for it to be worth the effort of hiring more workers. Disgusting. What an inhuman system.
While I’m here, I’d like to recommend the entire catalog of developers Torch60. They seem more like hobbyists rather than professional developers (all their games are free, for crying out loud!) but they’ve produced about six games in the last few years, which are nicely stylised JRPGs with a Kirby aesthetic and surprisingly complex moral choices. I’m particularly fond of Soma Spirits and its sequel, Soma Union. Definitely worth a try if you have a spare evening or two. Soma Spirits in particular has more replay value, with short levels and three or four different endings.
Minor correction, it’s actually five endings.