Welcome to Coffee Talk! Let’s start off the day by discussing whatever is on your (nerd chic) mind. Every morning I’ll kick off a discussion and I’m counting on you to participate in it. If you’re not feelin’ my topic, feel free to start a chat with your fellow readers and see where it takes you. Whether you’re talking about videogames, the D’Antoni effect, sexy triplets, or roast pork vs. BBQ pork, Coffee Talk is the place to do it.
Gamers, writers, publishers, and developers frequently use the term “triple-A game,” but what does that really mean? It’s such a nebulous classification that means different things to different people, but it’s used so frequently that an outsider would think that is has a standardized definition. How do you define triple-A games? What factor or factors do you consider when labeling a game “triple-A?”
Do triple-A games require a certain budget? If so, what is the minimum amount of money? Do triple-A games need to be of a certain quality? If that’s the case, at what point would you know if a game is triple-A or not and who judges the quality? With all of that in mind, a game like Medal of Honor: Warfighter is terribly interesting. It was relatively expensive to make. The publisher thought it was a high-quality game prior to release. Critics and fans thought it was crap. I’m guessing that most people wouldn’t consider Warfighter a triple-A game, but I also imagine people supporting that choice with flimsy logic.
You guys and gals are better than most people (duh!), so I want to hear how you define triple-A games and what factors go into your definition of the term. Fire away in the comments section (please!).