“It’s ridiculous and meaningless,” say many developers about the industry’s most overused term: Triple-A. Despite years of evolution, the label for big-budget productions continues to dominate the gaming world and shape expectations.

The term Triple-A has long been associated with high-budget, high-quality games, but its relevance and definition have been increasingly challenged. One of the earliest games created as a “blockbuster production” was Final Fantasy VII, with a $40 million budget. Today, Triple-A games can cost ten times as much, prompting criticism from industry veterans about how the label influences games, player expectations, and development strategies.

While the origins of the term are debated—Final Fantasy VII might have popularized it, but it wasn’t the first game made as a blockbuster—it has come to represent an ideal in the gaming world. According to a report by GamesRadar, developers reflect on both the benefits and the flaws of this label. The term, which became prominent in the 1990s, likely stems from U.S. credit ratings and evolved into a shorthand for large-scale, resource-intensive productions akin to Hollywood blockbusters.

The Dark Side of the Triple-A Obsession

Charles Cecil, co-founder of Revolution Studios, recalls hearing the term for the first time at Virgin Interactive’s California offices. To him, Triple-A represented a corporate obsession with profits over creativity. “It was a dark time for independent studios,” he explained, noting how publishers prioritized revenue at the expense of artistic freedom. While he admires massive productions like Grand Theft Auto, he dismisses the label as “pointless and absurd.”

Chris Charla, director of ID@Xbox, finds the term difficult to pin down. He recalls its derogatory use during his early days as a journalist, when it was a way to criticize overhyped games. Today, he sees it as an attempt to emphasize gaming’s distinct production values compared to cinema. However, others, like Alex Hutchinson, associate it with ambitious Japanese games from the early 2000s, such as Shenmue.

Has the “Triple-A” Label Lost Its Meaning?

The confusion around Triple-A isn’t limited to players—developers themselves grapple with its implications. James Dobrowski, founder of Sharkmob London, notes that even his team can’t agree on its meaning: some link it to massive budgets, while others associate it with advanced graphics or compelling narratives. He warns that as smaller studios use accessible tools to create graphically competitive games, the label places unfair pressure on them to meet unrealistic expectations.

It’s not just games that suffer. According to industry veteran Kish Hirani, job postings requiring “Triple-A experience” can deter talented developers. Alex Hutchinson adds that framing games in financial terms alienates players and reduces a culturally rich medium to profit-driven metrics.

The Success and Pressure of Marvel’s Spider-Man 2

Despite these criticisms, some argue the term still holds value. Chris Charla suggests that Triple-A games often define key cultural moments by reaching mainstream audiences. However, others warn that clinging to this label stifles creativity and perpetuates a system that prioritizes business over artistry.

One notable example of this was Ubisoft’s bold move to coin “Quadruple-A” for its Skull and Bones project, aiming to hype the game. While the future of Triple-A remains uncertain, one thing is clear: the gaming industry must reconsider how it uses, defines, and applies this label in an ever-evolving landscape.

Source: 3djuegos