Former Ubisoft director, Clair Obscur maker slams AAA dev bloat: "It would've taken 25 years" to make my game

Cal Jeffrey

Posts: 4,452   +1,588
Staff member
Let's get back to fun: The video game industry has always been unpredictable, but the current trend in triple-A development raises serious concerns about its long-term viability. As costs rise and development processes grow increasingly bloated, many question whether the industry is on the verge of another crash. Recent statements by former Ubisoft creative director Guillaume Broche suggest the situation may be more dire than previously thought.

Broche, who founded Sandfall Interactive after his tenure at Ubisoft, recently commented that getting approval to develop Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 would have taken "25 years" at a larger corporate studio. His statement emphasizes the magnitude of bureaucratic red tape involved with large AAA developers. Fortunately, Broche escaped the constraints of corporate politics.

His departure from Ubisoft is a case in point. Broche told the BBC that he quit Ubisoft because he was 'bored' with his job and frustrated at the lack of creative freedom. That says a lot about the struggling publishing house, considering his titles included Assistant Creative Director, Associate Producer on Ghost Recon Breakpoint and The Division 2, and Brand Development Manager and Narrative Lead on the Might & Magic franchise.

"Projects like these [Clair Obscur] – with new IPs, original stories, completely original characters – are super hard to push through in a big company. There are a lot of approval steps, and in general, in big structures, you already have to have proven yourself and be pretty high up in the hierarchy just to have a chance at pitching this kind of project. For me, a project like this would've taken 25 years to make in a big company. And I don't have that much patience. We also wanted to do things our own way and really create an atmosphere. That's what this game is – creating a vibe."

His feelings are hardly surprising considering how the industry's biggest franchises – particularly Ubisoft's – have stagnated. Assassin's Creed, once groundbreaking for its parkour and crowd mechanics, has become a repetitive cycle of sequels offering more of the same with less polish. What began as a fresh and exciting series is now a shadow of its former self.

Despite attempts to refresh the series with features like settlement building and "museum mode," these additions failed to rekindle the magic. Ubisoft put multiple teams and studios to work revamping the franchise, but much of what they added felt like clutter. Even the mechanics that once made the series unique – like moving through crowds – now feel neglected, as if developers put little effort into maintaining them. In AC Syndicate, for example, Jacob or Evie sometimes perform the nudge-aside animation after they've already passed the person they were nudging.

Also read: Former PlayStation boss says gaming price hikes are inevitable, but lack of value is the real issue

It's easy to use Ubisoft as a whipping post, especially considering Broche's remarks, but this problem isn't unique to the French developer. Nearly every AAA studio has fallen into the same rut, treating microtransactions, season passes, and price hikes as the only solutions to declining revenue while ignoring the real issue: a growing lack of innovation.

If the industry doesn't change course, it will face a crash similar to 1983, with only indie studios surviving. The signs are already visible: players reject inflated prices and formulaic designs by playing their backlogs and waiting for sales. The days of blindly throwing money at games offering little in return have ended. If developers don't take risks and embrace new ideas, they'll face a market that no longer accepts their stale approach.

Permalink to story:

 
"while ignoring the real issue: a growing lack of innovation."

While no one would disagree that this is a problem - and not just in this industry --> hello Hollywood...

This isn't the MAIN issue. The main issue is simply that the "good ones" (see popular) cost a TON of money to make. Big developers can't afford to have their game flop, so gambling that users might like "something new" over buying a sequel of something that's already been proven to sell is a no-brainer for them.

The same thing has happened to Hollywood. It costs an astronomic amount of money to make a movie, and so the "big" movies are sequels, reboots or rehashes of similar plots (looking at you Zach Snyder).

Indie developers - of both movies and games - put up far less money to make their games, and the only way to make a profit is to stand out. Hence, innovation remains for these companies.

You'll see it in every industry. Whenever large amounts of money become involved, people are far less willing to gamble on something new.
 
Clair Obscure is kind of a mess on PC. And I guess I'm alone here, but I don't find the game to be all that interesting.

Just like a lot of UE5 games, everything is really foggy/hazy all the time which makes everything look washed out. I hate that about UE5 games.

I do wish there were more big budget turn based games tho, and I think that sentiment is why the game is getting so much praise. But this game is only semi turn based since you have to dodge in real time, which I also hate.
 
This is the natural endgame of consolidation leading to the homogenization of gaming. If you want to push new ideas, it won't come from studios whos decision makers answer to a board of directors who are naturally going to be risk adverse.

Agreed. This is exactly what I'm alluding to each time I tell someone that major studios can't afford to make fun, creative games anymore. There's just too much money involved. Ironically, their commercial successes will be the brick around their neck that ultimately sinks major developers / publishers, because with great money comes great responsibility. Suffocated by their own shareholders.
 
Sadly most of these old highly popular IP’s are victims of their own success. Attempting to create new content based on well established highly successful franchises is prohibitively risky and only the companies with very deep wells of capital (Microsoft) are going to even attempt it. The costs need to come down across the board to foster creative freedom and a willingness to be bold. How do we do this? No idea, perhaps AI might be factor, but how to do this without alienating your human workforce.
 
Agreed. This is exactly what I'm alluding to each time I tell someone that major studios can't afford to make fun, creative games anymore. There's just too much money involved. Ironically, their commercial successes will be the brick around their neck that ultimately sinks major developers / publishers, because with great money comes great responsibility. Suffocated by their own shareholders.
they make games to make money. They dont make games to make fun games.

Its why indie devs are the best! AAA is starting to mean the opposite actually. Its wild how this has happened.
 
Clair Obscure is kind of a mess on PC. And I guess I'm alone here, but I don't find the game to be all that interesting.

Just like a lot of UE5 games, everything is really foggy/hazy all the time which makes everything look washed out. I hate that about UE5 games.

I do wish there were more big budget turn based games tho, and I think that sentiment is why the game is getting so much praise. But this game is only semi turn based since you have to dodge in real time, which I also hate.

Have you modded with the unsharp fix yet? Game looks stunning in 4K DLSSQ now, where it was previously blurry and garbled, "looking like a game from the late 90's", as one redditor posted. Coupled with Lossless Scaling 2x it's seeing 100-120fps too even on my 5070.
 
isn't fun games equal to more money..
or is that not the case anymore..?
Except making something new is seen as inherently risky; its much less risky to just release a new CoD, or Madden Roster Patch 2025, rather then invent something "new".

It's also important that while a lot of games get lauded, most of them do not ultimately sell because of lack of brand recognition. A classic example: Falcom's Trails series is (rightly) seen as one of the greatest JRPG series of all time, stretching across 13 games (and counting). Yet the entire series, across all platforms and re-releases, has sold *less* then Final Fantasy VII Rebirth by itself (which was seen as a massive disappointment in sales with *only* about 6.5-7 Million sold as of the latest numbers I can find).

Point being: A "bad" Final Fantasy will sell literally 10 times (or more) what an unknown but amazing JRPG will, because name recognition is absolutely a thing. And that's why the industry just re-hashes the same ideas with the same IP, because name recognition sells more then good games.

So ultimately: The studios are doing *exactly* what the consumers want them to do. Bitter pill to swallow, sure, but the sales numbers do not lie.
 
A lot of what they put in the AAA games is over-the-top and not needed. When the end game credits exceed the length of those found in 10 Hollywood films combined - they have a problem. AI is coming to Devs, I suspect we'll be able to artificially replicate most of the video game production jobs.
 
"Projects like these [Clair Obscur] – with new IPs, original stories, completely original characters – are super hard to push through in a big company....

Well, blame it on the buyers who blindfoldedly prepurchase the next Call of Duty or the next GTA or the next Assassin's Creed or the next FarCry.... and the big corporates are happy to churn out rubbish after rubbish. And the cycle repeats.

If you ask me, INNOVATION is dead. Except for people like him and Indie developers creating fresh new games with fresh new ideas. The rest are just the same old sequels or remakes milked to death.

I'll repeat : the so called "AAA" games are just another sequel, or remake rubbish. May the gaming humankind zombies be saved from current sad state of me-too gaming.

We are already killing gaming innovations by keep buying another remake.
 
This article pisses me off with this...
If developers don't take risks and embrace new ideas, they'll face a market that no longer accepts their stale approach.

how many times have you rolled the dice with your career? when you have a family to support? let me guess, NEVER!

its not about 'new ideas' its about a polished, stable product that shows effort went into it. AAA has turned into any other large corporation...build the assembly line, start producing....but it reflects more in gaming because its an immersive experience (thats what makes this market unique from alot of other markets).
 
Clair Obscure is kind of a mess on PC. And I guess I'm alone here, but I don't find the game to be all that interesting.

Just like a lot of UE5 games, everything is really foggy/hazy all the time which makes everything look washed out. I hate that about UE5 games.

I do wish there were more big budget turn based games tho, and I think that sentiment is why the game is getting so much praise. But this game is only semi turn based since you have to dodge in real time, which I also hate.
I've only bought 2 games at full price in the last 12 years Baldur's Gate 3 and Expedition 33, and both were worth supporting the studios for.

Expedition 33 has a really great story that is super unique and refreshing, plus the characters are well thought out individuals that aren't flat and dull. I'm not the biggest fan of turn based games anymore, even though I've played nearly all of the final fantasy series but this new system is quite refreshing.

Funnily I also got the same sort of feel about the foggy/haze. It does fit most areas but I find it lingers a little bit too much in other places where it shouldn't. There are probably some colour reshade mods that will fix it though.
 
Clair obscure as much as I love it isn't really all that innovative, imho.

it's a damn fine example of a game that was built by passionate people though, they like many others were missing that old type FF turn based game and built their own.

many pieces of it though have always been there, turn based system, thats FF, legend of heroes etc etc. its parry/dodge system has hints of legend of dragoon in it, just wondrously expanded, the battle menu looks like persona but in a nice suit.

it's a game made by fans for fans.
 
Clair Obscure is kind of a mess on PC. And I guess I'm alone here, but I don't find the game to be all that interesting.

Just like a lot of UE5 games, everything is really foggy/hazy all the time which makes everything look washed out. I hate that about UE5 games.

I do wish there were more big budget turn based games tho, and I think that sentiment is why the game is getting so much praise. But this game is only semi turn based since you have to dodge in real time, which I also hate.

I found it very nice and beautiful rendered, there is a blur and depth of field filter applied (specially ugly on the over world map) that is applied with EPIC preset, try HIGH (I think its the post process or shader specifically but not 100% sure)
 
I found it very nice and beautiful rendered, there is a blur and depth of field filter applied (specially ugly on the over world map) that is applied with EPIC preset, try HIGH (I think its the post process or shader specifically but not 100% sure)
It's definitely an impressive game on a technically level, and I haven't gotten very far yet, but I just find more and more with UE5 games I find the visuals to often have a level of haziness beyond the upscaling and camera effects that I find really muddies the overall presentation. It could just be that because UE5 does volumetric effects a lot better than UE4, devs tend to be heavy handed with it.

It's like devs think it would be a crime for us to be able to see objects in the distance clearly. I use a 65 inch 4K TV to play games with my PC and its annoying to have the big TV and the ability to play games in high res just for all the distant detail to be foggy.

/rant
 
they make games to make money. They dont make games to make fun games.

Its why indie devs are the best! AAA is starting to mean the opposite actually. Its wild how this has happened.
Both big game studios and indie developers are both looking to make money. The main difference is how fast they are hoping to turn a profit. To speed up this process, they throw more people on the job though they have no game creating passion, and also fix a tight timeline. All these manifest itself in the end product where it’s lacking in gameplay and story, and often very buggy and unpolished at launch. Indie game makers are usually small and privately funded, so there is no urgency to try and turn a profit to please shareholders. Hence, I feel big game studios are bound to fail if they continue this path.
 
The industry might be bloated at the top, but it’s also diversifying. We’re entering an era where the success of a game is no longer about cinematic trailers or brand legacy, but whether it actually feels like something worth playing. That’s a healthy correction in the long run.
 
Back