@Moon @lain
>You can just see a real decline in the "artistic" qualities of Hollywood movies while the production quality is extremely high.
Same situation as AAA games. Graphics of high technical quality, or movie production quality, is something you can throw money at. It's more like a commodity, and can often even be outsourced. It gets great ROI.

But you can't do the same with with story, or in video games, gameplay that's fun. The amount of money you put in doesn't correlate well with the quality. It's artistic and novel, and it matters what is chosen, and what is chosen is core to your business. Like if you're not choosing it, you're not a developer, you're a publisher. Or for movies, you're not hollywood, you're wall street.

So AAA Devs and Hollywood suck at the artistic but are good at the technical (production quality / graphics). But there's two fatal problems with this:

1) A way oversimplified formula: Sales = Artistic * Technical
means that shit story and gameplay eventually turn to shit sales no matter how good the graphics are.

2) If money can be turned into Technical, that means that all an indie studio with good artistic needs to out-compete AAA in every way is investment money.

In long run, this means AAA and Hollywood had ONE JOB: Artistic, which they fumbled for incest and ideology. The investment money will find its way elsewhere, to somewhere with Artistic. It just takes time.

(and investment firms that also do their ONE JOB: ROI. Hollywood is running on woke investment of pension fund managers who are pissing away other people's retirement accounts for ideology)