Forum
Filter     |   View Watchlist
[ Print Friendly ] [ Watch Thread ]

Streetrip Sponsor
What is a "Triple-A" title?I'm hearing this crop up more and more in videogame industry jargon. Games being described as "Triple-A" titles, is this based on the revenue they're going to shift? The number of units shifted; the marketing footprint; the money spent in development? etc etc

I've heard Halo: Reach being coined as a triple=A title a lot. For a long time I've just let it slide because triple A just seems to conjure up thoughts of "BIG". In other medias such as films, a "Triple-A" filmed, would probably be what we call a blockbuster, namely due to box office sales.
Now, the bit which niggles at me the most is, are there "Double-A" titles or "Single-A" titles or even "Triple-B" or "Single-B" titles. Who determines what falls into each category? Developer/Publisher/Media/Revenue?

Is there a need for such classification? Is a really good game, not just a really good game outside of all the hype/glamour/loudness of it all?
#1  Posted 4 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote
10 REPLIES Watch  |  Sort by Likes · Date
aliencaboose
Let's put it this way, an A+ is a double A & whats after 2?...
wait I know this one! 3
OK So Triple A =A++=AAA

its Triple A because saying
"A plus plus" sounds worst then saying Triple A.
& you do hear A+ & B & B+.

( In fact I just read a review of Halo:Reach,
where the Reviewer called it:"an A+ game".)
#2  Posted 4 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote
IdleByzan
Triple A titles in both movies and games just means that the company that owns the rights to them is going to put the bulk of their advertising abilities behind it.

Think about it like this Nintendo releases a Mario game and a new IP Wii game next holiday. Thought the new IP game may be better and could possibly sell more, Mario is a known property. It has a fan base, so Nintendo will advertise both but put more money into showing off the Mario game because they know people will buy it. Mario the Triple A title for that holiday.
#3  Posted 4 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote
Streetrip Sponsor
In reply to aliencaboose, #2:

I'm very aware that AAA>AA>A>BBB>BB>B...etc, it's not the name of the grade I'm curious of, it's what qualifies a game to each grade. For instance when Respawn says "The studio will be working on a AAA title", what can we expect?

In reply to IdleByzan, #3:

That's a neat concept. I'm pretty sure that a game developer studio requires rights to an IP before making a game otherwise that would get seriously messy. But I think I know what you're getting at, as in if developer and publisher were both from the same company, E.g. Oblivion being developed by Bethesda Game Studios and published by Bethesda Softworks. Under that guise though of original IP vs sequel...does that mean that a pre-requirement of a AAA title is that it's a sequel/part of a franchise?

Is it not just me that finds it really weird, that a phrase like AAA-title is just consumed without question of what it actually means? I think everyone has this really fuzzy idea of what a AAA-title is, yet when you ask lots of people "What is a AAA-title?" you get some hesitation and very quickly come into comparisons like "Oh a AAA title is like MW2/Halo 3/Half-Life 2" but no one actually gives a description of what one really is.
#4  Posted 4 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote
Matheau
In reply to IdleByzan, #3:
Triple A titles in both movies and games just means that the company that owns the rights to them is going to put the bulk of their advertising abilities behind it.

That's not technically true and the rights. Fallout 3 is arguably a Triple A title, but Interplay, not Bethesda, still owns the rights. That's actually why there is so much legal trouble between those two companies now.

There's no "standard" for what truly is a AAA title. The best rule of thumb is any video game that receives enough publicity that people (especially non-gamers) that have absolutely no interest in the game have heard about it. For example, you can find plenty of people that have never played a single JRPG that have heard of Final Fantasy. Plenty of people that never picked up an MMO have heard of World of Warcraft and Everquest.

The one thing is the game has to reach this level of recognition specifically through marketing. A few games are recognized more through controversy than actual marketing on the part of the company, so that recognition does have to be intentional. It doesn't specifically need to be a high budget or well made title, but generally speaking those do go hand in hand. Companies aren't going to usually create a huge marketing campaign for a game they churned out in two weeks on a budget of nearly $30.

The nature of the IP really does not matter, nor does it have to be a sequel. There are a lot of Mario games out there that are not AAA titles, since Nintendo never really marketed them. On the other hand, I am pretty sure the original Halo was getting enough marketing that it was about as well known as the Xbox console itself.
#5  Posted 4 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote
Tick Forum Mod
Nice read for you
#6  Posted 4 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote
IdleByzan
In reply to Matheau, #5:
In reply to IdleByzan, #3:
That's not technically true and the rights. Fallout 3 is arguably a Triple A title, but Interplay, not Bethesda, still owns the rights. That's actually why there is so much legal trouble between those two companies now.\.

Not true in the least. Bethesda Parent company bought the rights to Fallout almost 5 years ago. The mmo rights where maintained by interplay but that has also fallen to Zenimax. The legal battle is over if Interplays did develop an mmo before the contractual time period expired.
#7  Posted 4 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote  |  + 1 Ditto
Matheau
In reply to IdleByzan, #7:

Bethesda's parent company initially only licensed the Fallout series. They didn't buy the rights until maybe a few months before Fallout 3 came out. Technically, they owned the rights when it came out, but for most of the development and marketing period, they didn't actually own the franchise. So Bethesda was developing and marketing a triple-A title for a franchise owned by Interplay for years.

The MMO is also not the only legal trouble that occurred between Interplay and Bethesda over Fallout. It is just the most well known. There were more minor issues that occurred prior to Fallout 3 coming out when Interplay still actually owned the rights.
#8  Posted 3 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote
IdleByzan
In reply to Matheau, #8:

Interplay didn't publish or market Fallout 3 they had no part of it Zenimax was in complete control of it. Zenimaz always owned the rights to Fallout III its their game.
#9  Posted 3 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote
Vnub Tha Nubz
In reply to aliencaboose, #2:

Its like algebra class allover again...
#10  Posted 3 years ago  |  Reply  |  Quote
Please sign in or sign up to post a comment.