>>719091036 (OP)
because "AAAA" fags i.e. ubislop and EA want to churn out homogenized and easily digestible dogshit for the masses that doesn't take any critical thinking or effort to experience, and so they bank on spectacle more than substance to sell their game. that means HUGE marketing budgets that do everything from plaster entire cities in propaganda to pay dipshit interns to shitpost on social media (and anonymous messageboards) and shill their product. aside from that, on the technical side of things, they want to shove unnecessary tech into their games because it's somehow better than what came before i.e. instead of stylized "cartoon-esque" characters made in blender or whatever now you have fully paid actors in mo-cap performing not-shakespeare on a green screen set and 50 quintillion polygons being shoved into their face with the latest shitvidia DLSS gaytracing shit-smearing "advancement in graphical fidelity" to push for more hardware sales alongside a vast and empty open world that is about as interesting as watching paint dry.
basically, it's soulless sludge for peons and you'll buy it anyway, but it takes hundreds of people across multiple studios to put together and that takes time. conversely, older games had smaller teams, smaller budgets, tighter objectives and thus the games were themselves more lightweight and less ambitions but overall less bloated and more focused experiences that generally delivered what was on the tin.
