Support NeoGAF

[Guilty_AI]

"-Games that force you to be connected to the internet."

GaaS usually are multiplayer games anyway.

For starters, the idea mp games must be always connected to the internet is a myth. Many older MP games can still be played even without any company backing them up.

Secondly, i dont need to point out just the fact a game is multiplayer, especially if its competitive, is already enough reason to put off a lot of the aforementioned single player gamers.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

I’ve never understood why no one has ever really tried a single player live service game. Ie a big 100-200 hr game, like fallout, but then with a roadmap where a major paid expansion will drop every 6 months for 5+ years, with smaller updates and quests along the way. It costs a shit ton to build a world and all the character, then comparatively it much cheaper to keep adding to that world with new stories and content. Instead they do this for maybe one year with a couple of expansions if we’re lucky, then they go “meh, fuck it, let start again from scratch”, in a new engine and entirely new world, with entirely new assets, and release the next part in 6 years, if we’re lucky.

Like fallout new vegas cost a fraction of fallout 3 to make; and took a fraction of the time. We could have had another half a dozen or so new Vegas’s made by an external studio, as paid £40 a pop expansions or standalone expansions, between fallout 3 and fallout 4, and people would have eaten them up. It wouldn’t even need to delay the sequel if it was handled by secondary teams.

In theory I think Sony are trying to do this in part with the expansions that come every 2-3 years after a main installment. Like Miles Morales was to Spiderman 2018, or the UC4 expansion was to the original game. Or more recently, Burning Shores to HFW.

Could they be more consistent with the release timing of such expansions? Maybe. Perhaps they could do a roadmap laid out for the first 3 years, for example, that would include the base game and then bi-annual expansion story content every six months. Then, they could do a-la-carte game subscriptions where someone can buy the game and expansions as they release or pay the total price in monthly installments to get full access as the content's released. In exchange, the game checks online to verify the sub status, and make the next payment.

That seems like a "GaaS" sub-style model that could work for traditional titles and their expansions. I'm also sure 3P publishers would love it, because you still get the advantages of the B2P model (you're still essentially getting a sales transaction), just spread out over a period of time (a year, six months, three months etc.) instead of all Day 1. How they account for that in the fiscals is up to them. But IMO, it's amazing flexibility, though it'd require some form of credit card or bank verification, at least as an option.

Any payment method used could be leveraged for verification and the version of the game the user is paying in installments for has a license synced with the cloud server-side, and maybe with some hidden partition on a secured portion of storage. That should be enough for validation between the customer and provider, tho if they want to use a credit card or link their bank account that can be done too (maybe they get additional perks for doing so).

Every succesful online multiplayer game of the past 20+ years is GAAS.

Fortnite is GAAS. League of Legends is GAAS. Mario Kart 8 Deluxe is GAAS. Every multiplayer shooter like Call of Duty, Battlefield, Counterstrike, Halo, Destiny etc is GAAS. Fighting games like Street Fighter, Mortal Kombat or even Smash Bros are GAAS.

The hate for GAAS on this forum is irrational.

Well the difference with games like Fortnite and LOL vs. MK8D or SF6, is that the latter offer meaty single-player content as well, and you don't need to be connected online to play the non-multiplayer stuff. They're also IP with a history of single-player content so that helps with the aspect of perception as well.

Games like Fortnite, you simply can't enjoy them solo, they aren't built that way. So for people who want a SP experience, it's not even an option.

Yeah, that's pretty much the Gran Turismo 7 experience. Perfect example how not to do GAAS.

Dunno about that. Outside of some of the car prices GT7 regularly does rather hefty content updates, and it's keeping its community engaged. And it also added features like VR support at no extra cost.

Yeah some aspects of how it doles out content could be improved, but it's a quality enough game to where the vast majority are okay with the small annoyances here and there. There are far worst offenders than GT7 in the live-service/GaaS space when it comes to nickle-and-diming.

 

[ProtoByte]

So what you are saying is that IF SM2 was a smaller/shorter less bloated game using the same graphical assets it wouldn't have cost less or take less time to make ?

In fact if I read it correctly SM2 100% completion takes around 28 hours and SM1 took around 44 hours.... these are google numbers so they can be wrong... so SM2 is a lot less bloated than SM1 which for me is a good thing IF they are saving costs and time to release this games.

But they're not saving costs, that's the whole point. I don't think you properly read my post.
Spider-Man 2 cost 3 times as much as Spider-Man 1 despite the latter being essentially a new IP for Insomniac, and taking just as much if not more time.

 

[Danjin44]

For starters, the idea mp games must be always connected to the internet is a myth. Many older MP games can still be played even without any company backing them up.

Secondly, i dont need to point out just the fact a game is multiplayer, especially if its competitive, is already enough reason to put off a lot of the aforementioned single player gamers.

I agree, and there are GaaS games that tells you that you have the option to play it solo but you have to be alway online which is dumb as fuck.....If you give me option to play it solo then I should be allowed to play it offline.

Games like From's games have online features but they also allow me to play completely offline if I want to.....this how should be done.

 

[Angry_Megalodon]

Whenever GaaS are discussed I get the feeling that many people think all of them are multiplayer games without any story, worldbuilding or real content other than the gameplay and loot.

A game like Fortnite could not be any more different from Genshin Impact, to mention the 2 biggest names out there. The second is a traditional adventure RPG game that is levels above everyone else in the genre thanks to being a GaaS (their budget is 20 times bigger). There is a new paradigm in successful GaaS: they have the quality of "traditional single-player games" but extended in time.

As ever, western developers got it all wrong and they think a successful GaaS is comprised of brain-dead gameplay, no-story mode and loot boxes. That cannot be any wonger. Games like Genshin or Arknights have flipped that over. The good GaaS are here for the long haul and actually, they are the only feasible option for certain types of AAA games.

For example, Starfield should have been a GaaS. Like No Man's Sky, it was the only way to become what was supposed to be.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

Whenever GaaS are discussed I get the feeling that many people think all of them are multiplayer games without any story, worldbuilding or real content other than the gameplay and loot.

They are that. (gameplay and loot)

A game like Fortnite could not be any more different from Genshin Impact, to mention the 2 biggest names out there. The second is a traditional adventure RPG game that is levels above everyone else in the genre thanks to being a GaaS (their budget is 20 times bigger). There is a new paradigm in successful GaaS: they have the quality of "traditional single-player games" but extended in time.

how do you "extend the time"?

As ever, western developers got it all wrong and they think a successful GaaS is comprised of brain-dead gameplay, no-story mode and loot boxes. That cannot be any wonger. Games like Genshin or Arknights have flipped that over. The good GaaS are here for the long haul and actually, they are the only feasible option for certain types of AAA games.

is the opposite. you need good gameplay, mechanics and systems to "extend the play time"

that's the curse and blessing of these games

For example, Starfield should have been a GaaS. Like No Man's Sky, it was the only way to become what was supposed to be.

no. Starfield and Death stranding (similar games in a weird way) use procedural generation to boost the playtime.

the issue with GaaS is the time commitment that they required. (for devs and players) and because they need to keep people engage for a long time, they inevitable will need to implement mechanics, or design patterns like game-loops or systems like crafting to do so. and a lot of those end up being mindless repetitive time sinkers.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

the issue with GaaS is the time commitment that they required. (for devs and players) and because they need to keep people engage for a long time, they inevitable will need to implement mechanics, or design patterns like game-loops or systems like crafting to do so. and a lot of those end up being mindless repetitive time sinkers.

"Mindless repetitive time sinkers" will always lose out to rewarding, unique, and enjoyable.

GAAS games have gotten so popular over the years because only the elite thrive. Mediocrity is punished severely. Iron sharpens iron.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

"Mindless repetitive time sinkers" will always lose out to rewarding, unique, and enjoyable.

this is why I didn't use boring

you could have a rewarding unique and enjoyable mindless, repetitive, time sinker game loop

GAAS games have gotten so popular over the years because only the elite thrive. Mediocrity is punished severely. Iron sharpens iron.

well..i think is complicated.

it seems the modus operandi of GaaS is as follows:

release a game > dev/publisher finds out is not enough:

• not enough content.
• not enough polish.
• not enough "end game"
• not enough MTXs

then Dev/Publisher are in a race against the clock to fix the game, which means a huge commitment of resources (time, money and workforce)

is in this stage where a GaaS can die or live; the ability to listen and implement the community's demands fast enough.

and i think this is the ND's realization, a company that wants to make a GaaS has to be willing to become slaves to that game.

 

[NeoIkaruGAF]

Yeah, right. As if they’re gonna disappear overnight.

Hopefully in 20 - 30 years the new gamers will be taught about this dark era of gaming by a fat bearded Youtuber.

Afterwards, they'll share this information in the school playground, laugh at the stupidity of gamers from the 2010s and 2020s and go to the nearest gamestore together to check out the latest physical releases because their parents raised their kids with values that matter

It seems like we have a “dark age of gaming” like, every few years.
I remember when people were hoping for the end of the dark age of dudebro green/brown shooters. It wasn’t that long ago.

 

[KXVXII9X]

Whenever GaaS are discussed I get the feeling that many people think all of them are multiplayer games without any story, worldbuilding or real content other than the gameplay and loot.

A game like Fortnite could not be any more different from Genshin Impact, to mention the 2 biggest names out there. The second is a traditional adventure RPG game that is levels above everyone else in the genre thanks to being a GaaS (their budget is 20 times bigger). There is a new paradigm in successful GaaS: they have the quality of "traditional single-player games" but extended in time.

As ever, western developers got it all wrong and they think a successful GaaS is comprised of brain-dead gameplay, no-story mode and loot boxes. That cannot be any wonger. Games like Genshin or Arknights have flipped that over. The good GaaS are here for the long haul and actually, they are the only feasible option for certain types of AAA games.

For example, Starfield should have been a GaaS. Like No Man's Sky, it was the only way to become what was supposed to be.

I'm still not a fan of GaaS and it still has its share of problems like gacha mechanics, FOMO, and unnecessary grinding.

At the same time I'm playing Honkai Star Rail, and despite those complaints, I'm really drawn into the game. The game has some decent writing and the characters have actual personality so to potentially watch them grow over a series of years is nice.

I think the company uses the money they make to put back into the game. That finale fight at the first world was made with lots of love and care. They went all out for it.

I think of it as dealing with all the F2P bs to experience those pockets where the devs go all out.

I think the Yakuza/Like a Dragon Series is kind of comparable to a Single player GaaS game. Over the course of 7+ games you get to know the characters and locations since a lot of it is recycled from game to game.

At the same time I think it also highlights the limitations of having an ongoing game for a long time. Eventually they needed to change things up and create new cast of characters, location and gameplay.

Fortnite has constantly made changes and new modes to keep things from getting stale as well. I also think Nintendo did multiplayer GaaS right with Splatoon 2 (haven't played 3).

There's definitely ways to improve the GaaS model. I'd just caution on the addictive effects of this model.

 

[PendekarRajawali]

 

[Kupfer]

Yeah, right. As if they’re gonna disappear overnight.



It seems like we have a “dark age of gaming” like, every few years.
I remember when people were hoping for the end of the dark age of dudebro green/brown shooters. It wasn’t that long ago.

And still we got Gears of War, Killzone 2 and Resident Evil 5 from this era, which where and still are great games. And although that trend had to end it wasn't nearly as player unfriendly as GaaS are, whose sole reason for existence is to milk the players to the hilt.

 

[Guilty_AI]

I agree, and there are GaaS games that tells you that you have the option to play is solo but you have to be alway online which is dumb as fuck.....If you give me option to play it solo then I should be allowed to play it offline.

Games like From's games have online features but they also allow me to play completely offline if I want to.....this how should be done.

I was actually refering to MP modes themselves. You can still pick up old games like Quake, Diablo 1, Descent, Age of Empires 2, etc; and play competitive or coop by setting up your own servers or using LAN, no need to be tied to company servers and login accounts.

In fact, even some modern games let you do this like Prodeus, Baldurs Gate 3, Grim Dawn, Minecraft (Java edition), etc.

 

[Danjin44]

I was actually refering to MP modes themselves. You can still pick up old games like Quake, Diablo 1, Descent, Age of Empires 2, etc; and play competitive or coop by setting up your own servers or using LAN, no need to be tied to company servers and login accounts.

In fact, even some modern games let you do this like Prodeus, Baldurs Gate 3, Grim Dawn, Minecraft (Java edition), etc.

The problem with online only games is they have expiration date, when the game server gets shut down you no longer have access to the game which makes the game nothing more than piece of scrap plastic.

If the game like Elden Ring server ever gets shutdown I can fully enjoy the game offline....this also true with MP only game as well, if players allowed to set up their own server then the game can stay alive forever.

 

[kyussman]

Sony were so late to the party with this.......even I could see that and I'm an idiot that knows nothing about big business.......they are gonna waste so much money.

 

[Generic]

For starters, the idea mp games must be always connected to the internet is a myth. Many older MP games can still be played even without any company backing them up.

Secondly, i dont need to point out just the fact a game is multiplayer, especially if its competitive, is already enough reason to put off a lot of the aforementioned single player gamers.

You can play Quake 3 with bots but what's the point?

Also I refuse to believe people would pull off from a game purely because it's multiplayer... do people like this really exists?

 

[mdkirby]

Some do just that though, Truck Simulator games are basically this. Then there's also ARPGs like Diablo and Grim Dawn which follow similar formulas, games like Trailmakers and No Man's Sky, 4X games, or episodic games that release story content slowly over the years.

I dunno man, most that list is pretty questionable, and multiplayer focussed, not big world single player narrative stuff, some of it like diablo being full of some of the most egregious micro transaction GAAS hell around.

Episodic games, at least all the ones im aware of are just one (not usually overly long) story that they've chopped up into half a dozen short pieces to drip feed out over a year or so. Can't think of any that have had a particularly protracted release schedule/cadence with continual support. Each scene is generally handcrafted for the purpose of that standalone scene too, so its not like they have a big world to just plonk in more narrative/quests.

No mans sky would probably be the only one that would count, but even then they've really pretty much pivoted to multiplayer with a lot of the usual GAAS stuff, except some how miraculously not monetised any of it, which is baffling, but admirable.

Either way non of them are narrative big game self contained single player stories, where you sink in 100hrs, but then they have a massive world they've built to easily slip in new fresh stories/expansions at a steady cadence. I had hoped destiny would have been this when they were originally pitching it as 'but you can play it single player'.

In theory I think Sony are trying to do this in part with the expansions that come every 2-3 years after a main installment. Like Miles Morales was to Spiderman 2018, or the UC4 expansion was to the original game. Or more recently, Burning Shores to HFW.

Could they be more consistent with the release timing of such expansions? Maybe. Perhaps they could do a roadmap laid out for the first 3 years, for example, that would include the base game and then bi-annual expansion story content every six months. Then, they could do a-la-carte game subscriptions where someone can buy the game and expansions as they release or pay the total price in monthly installments to get full access as the content's released. In exchange, the game checks online to verify the sub status, and make the next payment.

That seems like a "GaaS" sub-style model that could work for traditional titles and their expansions. I'm also sure 3P publishers would love it, because you still get the advantages of the B2P model (you're still essentially getting a sales transaction), just spread out over a period of time (a year, six months, three months etc.) instead of all Day 1. How they account for that in the fiscals is up to them. But IMO, it's amazing flexibility, though it'd require some form of credit card or bank verification, at least as an option.

Any payment method used could be leveraged for verification and the version of the game the user is paying in installments for has a license synced with the cloud server-side, and maybe with some hidden partition on a secured portion of storage. That should be enough for validation between the customer and provider, tho if they want to use a credit card or link their bank account that can be done too (maybe they get additional perks for doing so).



Well the difference with games like Fortnite and LOL vs. MK8D or SF6, is that the latter offer meaty single-player content as well, and you don't need to be connected online to play the non-multiplayer stuff. They're also IP with a history of single-player content so that helps with the aspect of perception as well.

Games like Fortnite, you simply can't enjoy them solo, they aren't built that way. So for people who want a SP experience, it's not even an option.



Dunno about that. Outside of some of the car prices GT7 regularly does rather hefty content updates, and it's keeping its community engaged. And it also added features like VR support at no extra cost.

Yeah some aspects of how it doles out content could be improved, but it's a quality enough game to where the vast majority are okay with the small annoyances here and there. There are far worst offenders than GT7 in the live-service/GaaS space when it comes to nickle-and-diming.

yeah we’ve had season passes on single player games for years, which would get you a promised number of expansions/dlc they’d drop over the subsequent 18 months, but it always baffled me why they never did “season 2/3/4” as subsequent passes to keep the ball rolling.

Those leaks from insomniacs slides were certainly interesting. About more regular smaller games that extend the main release (and are highly profitable). I’d love them to just scrap most of their GAAS games they committed to, and then just have all those teams switch to doing these AA supporting games in between the major releases. They could literally be releasing 3x the number of games per year if they did that.

 

[Guilty_AI]

You can play Quake 3 with bots but what's the point?

You can also play it with others, set up a LAN or your own server and play amongst your friends, no reliance on company servers or login accounts.

Also I refuse to believe people would pull off from a game purely because it's multiplayer... do people like this really exists?

Of course they would? A person who doesn't like fighting games won't play Street Fighter, a person who doesn't like difficult games won't be playing shmups, and a person who doesn't like playing with other real people won't play with other real people. I don't know whats so hard to understand about that

 

[Guilty_AI]

I dunno man, most that list is pretty questionable, and multiplayer focussed, not big world single player narrative stuff, some of it like diablo being full of some of the most egregious micro transaction GAAS hell around.

Episodic games, at least all the ones im aware of are just one (not usually overly long) story that they've chopped up into half a dozen short pieces to drip feed out over a year or so. Can't think of any that have had a particularly protracted release schedule/cadence with continual support. Each scene is generally handcrafted for the purpose of that standalone scene too, so its not like they have a big world to just plonk in more narrative/quests.

No mans sky would probably be the only one that would count, but even then they've really pretty much pivoted to multiplayer with a lot of the usual GAAS stuff, except some how miraculously not monetised any of it, which is baffling, but admirable.

Either way non of them are narrative big game self contained single player stories, where you sink in 100hrs, but then they have a massive world they've built to easily slip in new fresh stories/expansions at a steady cadence. I had hoped destiny would have been this when they were originally pitching it as 'but you can play it single player'.

I think NMS and Grim Dawn are the best examples that would fit the category you want. Both are big world single player games with narratives that are still worked on and get updates and content to this day. They both have MP but they're more like an extra flavor to the game and aren't an essential element of the experience (and both can be played offline without needing accounts or online checks and stuff). And neither has any egregious forms of monetization.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

this is why I didn't use boring

you could have a rewarding unique and enjoyable mindless, repetitive, time sinker game loop

If players are describing your game as "mindless, repetitive, and a time sinker" they'll just go play superior games that have better descriptors.

You'll notice most SP games don't get finished by players. That's because most people feel they're mindless, repetitive, time sinker experiences.

well..i think is complicated.

it seems the modus operandi of GaaS is as follows:

release a game > dev/publisher finds out is not enough:

• not enough content.
• not enough polish.
• not enough "end game"
• not enough MTXs

then Dev/Publisher are in a race against the clock to fix the game, which means a huge commitment of resources (time, money and workforce)

is in this stage where a GaaS can die or live; the ability to listen and implement the community's demands fast enough.

and i think this is the ND's realization, a company that wants to make a GaaS has to be willing to become slaves to that game.

This ignores the most important aspect of GAAS. How quickly does your base game get boring?

Games like Destiny 2 and Halo Infinite get boring fast. That forces developers to churn out content at a blistering rate to entice players back.

Games like Minecraft and League of Legends can be played for months and months and they stay fresh the entire time. That allows developers to take their time when it comes to content.

Naughty Dog realized they were making a Destiny 2 / Halo Infinite type of GAAS so they (thankfully) called it quits.

Bungie has likely been invaluable to PlayStation warning them not to make the same mistakes they did.

 

[BlackTron]

GAAS games have gotten so popular over the years because only the elite thrive. Mediocrity is punished severely. Iron sharpens iron.

This is an interesting take on why GaaS games are popular. I didn't know that what the mass market millions of gamers wanted was an online experience of being pitted against elite FPS players, and this was in fact the key to making the most successful game.

I have this far-out, fringe idea that Fortnite might be popular for different reasons than that, but I want to get my head examined before I embarrass myself with some crazy theory

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

This is an interesting take on why GaaS games are popular. I didn't know that what the mass market millions of gamers wanted was an online experience of being pitted against elite FPS players, and this was in fact the key to making the most successful game.

False.

I have this far-out, fringe idea that Fortnite might be popular for different reasons than that, but I want to get my head examined before I embarrass myself with some crazy theory

It did.

 

[BlackTron]

False.

It did.

GAAS games have gotten so popular over the years because only the elite thrive.

Dude you contradict yourself a lot. Can you somehow reconcile this. lol

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Dude you contradict yourself a lot. Can you somehow reconcile this. lol

In the SP market, a great game will release and players will eat it up for a few weeks. Then they move on and start getting hungry for a similar product. They'll eat whatever comes their way as long as it's not fecal matter.

In the GAAS market, you can never hope to release a worse version of Fortnite, Minecraft, CSGO and expect to succeed...because players are naturally pickier. We already have our meal. We'll only reward games that are better than the games we currently play or are substantially different than the games we play.

You can't compete with the better evolutionary process.

 

[BlackTron]

In the SP market, a great game will release and players will eat it up for a few weeks. Then they move on and start getting hungry for a similar product. They'll eat whatever comes their way as long as it's not fecal matter.

In the GAAS market, you can never hope to release a worse version of Fortnite, Minecraft, CSGO and expect to succeed...because players are naturally pickier. We already have our meal. We'll only reward games that are better than the games we currently play or are substantially different than the games we play.

You can't compete with the better evolutionary process.

Oh, ok. I thought you meant the games are successful because, in a BR for example, only the elite players survive and make it to the top.

But you're trying to say that only the elite games make it to the top of the crop of GaaS games.

This is an entirely different conversation but at least it's not a self-contradiction

 

[Angry_Megalodon]

I dunno man, most that list is pretty questionable, and multiplayer focussed, not big world single player narrative stuff,

Asian AAA GaaS developers say hi.

All Mihoyo / Hypergryph / Kuro / Shift-Up games are single-player story-driven adventures with a huge overall narrative arch and a myriad of "in-between" stories with a beginning and an end that interconnects with the main adventure. That's GaaS made right.

In fact, these games have a richer and more thought-out worldbuilding than traditional SP, because that's a key factor for success. People who spend cash in these games demand relatable characters and a big-time fantasy world like Lord of the Rings, something that you don't get in a 70 usd title other than in From Software games.

In cinema, the MCU does exactly the same. And also Assassins Creed, though charging you full price for each update.

 

[The artful mincer]

In the SP market, a great game will release and players will eat it up for a few weeks. Then they move on and start getting hungry for a similar product. They'll eat whatever comes their way as long as it's not fecal matter.

In the GAAS market, you can never hope to release a worse version of Fortnite, Minecraft, CSGO and expect to succeed...because players are naturally pickier. We already have our meal. We'll only reward games that are better than the games we currently play or are substantially different than the games we play.

You can't compete with the better evolutionary process.

HANG ON!!!!

So your admitting the GAAS market is more competitive!?

Isn't that what most of us having being saying all long?

A mega GAAS hit is more lucrative but much harder to pull off. Single player games less lucrative but more stable and don't cannibalise each other as much.

Anything I'am missing?

 

[DenchDeckard]

I really hope Sony had some other shit planned for 2024 and not just Gaas games.

 

[IAmRei]

I forgot to mention the other big issue with live service games and that is once the servers go offline then the game can no longer be played at all.

That is perhaps the thing that most puts me off playing them as I am someone who prefers to play lots of different games over a very long period of time, often revisiting older games for a second or third playthrough. The thought of playing a game then losing access to it, which has happened with many live service games over the years, usually those that flop badly, completely puts me off ever playing them in the first place. That isn't ever an issue with a single player game.

This, i also believe in the same boat. If i want to return, it will be downright impossible unless there are private server for that.

 

[ShadyAcshuns]

Fuck 'em all.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

HANG ON!!!!

So your admitting the GAAS market is more competitive!?

Isn't that what most of us having being saying all long?

People here have been overstating how difficult it is to break into the GAAS market - saying things like "ItS sAtUrAtEd" when it's clearly not.

People here don't understand that GAAS is the smarter strategic play.

A mega GAAS hit is more lucrative but much harder to pull off. Single player games less lucrative but more stable and don't cannibalise each other as much.

Anything I'am missing?

You're missing the rising costs of AAA SP games which makes selling 15 million copies look less and less lucrative as each year passed.

 

[Bernardougf]

But they're not saving costs, that's the whole point. I don't think you properly read my post.
Spider-Man 2 cost 3 times as much as Spider-Man 1 despite the latter being essentially a new IP for Insomniac, and taking just as much if not more time.

Yeah its a fair point... but SPIDERMAN was an 2018 pre pandemic game ... dont know if we can quite compare this two games this way.. maybe if spider man 1 was made today it would cost even more than SM2. The pos-pandemic skyrocketed prices for everything.

 

[thief183]

I honestly feel that the hate is undeserved, there are a lot of games I would like to keep playing but I run out of content or "rewards" a gaas game in that case would be perfect.

 

[ProtoByte]

Yeah its a fair point... but SPIDERMAN was an 2018 pre pandemic game ... dont know if we can quite compare this two games this way.. maybe if spider man 1 was made today it would cost even more than SM2. The pos-pandemic skyrocketed prices for everything.

Well that's a whole other large discussion about how stupid the lockdowns were for the economy as a whole.

But you're probably right, and that's a problem that requires investigation and resolution. If you listened to developers on social media, there's no reason why lockdowns and subsequent WFH practices should've increased development costs, because "it's more productive".

How a workforce can be more productive and manage to spend triple on a project that is a third iteration compared to the original is beyond me. Sounds like people need to get back into the office as a first order of business.

 

[mdkirby]

Asian AAA GaaS developers say hi.

All Mihoyo / Hypergryph / Kuro / Shift-Up games are single-player story-driven adventures with a huge overall narrative arch and a myriad of "in-between" stories with a beginning and an end that interconnects with the main adventure. That's GaaS made right.

In fact, these games have a richer and more thought-out worldbuilding than traditional SP, because that's a key factor for success. People who spend cash in these games demand relatable characters and a big-time fantasy world like Lord of the Rings, something that you don't get in a 70 usd title other than in From Software games.

In cinema, the MCU does exactly the same. And also Assassins Creed, though charging you full price for each update.

Damn, shame, and kinda strange it’s not moved over to western dev.

 

[Generic]

You can also play it with others, set up a LAN or your own server and play amongst your friends, no reliance on company servers or login accounts.

Of course they would? A person who doesn't like fighting games won't play Street Fighter, a person who doesn't like difficult games won't be playing shmups, and a person who doesn't like playing with other real people won't play with other real people. I don't know whats so hard to understand about that

But you still need internet to play with your friends. Also I find weird the idea of people who don't like to play with other people, but ok.

 

[Guilty_AI]

But you still need internet to play with your friends.

LAN

And simply not being dependent on official servers is already a huge plus, as those close down eventually, which is the main issue.

 

[Rhazer Fusion]

I wish, but unfortunately I doubt live service games are going anywhere anytime soon because creators are on a never ending quest to find the next Fortnite or Apex at the expense of a game’s quality.

Even though I really don’t like GAAS, I don’t really mind that they exist on the market. My main problem with live service is I don’t want it infesting all franchises because live service/GAAS ruined the entire gaming industry where predatory practices, microtransactions, incomplete, never-ending games are becoming more common.

Look how the live service model ruined fighting games for example with overpriced DLC, mandatory Season passes and cosmetics.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

LAN

And simply not being dependent on official servers is already a huge plus, as those close down eventually, which is the main issue.

"The main issue" doesn't effect 99.9% of players. Devs close servers when players are done playing the game.

No one cares.

 

[YeulEmeralda]

Comic book movies and live service games dying would make for a great 2024 but it's not gonna happen.

 

[Guilty_AI]

"The main issue" doesn't effect 99.9% of players. Devs close servers when players are done playing the game.

No one cares.

they close the servers when the game doesn't make money anymore, regardless of how many people are playing the game.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

they close the servers when the game doesn't make money anymore, regardless of how many people are playing the game.

That's when no one's playing. They're one in the same.

There's soooooo many games with minuscule player bases with servers left on.

 

[Guilty_AI]

That's when no one's playing. They're one in the same.

Nope, poor business decision and management are just as likely to put them in the red. Reminds me of NFS world, even had an "end of world" event and everything. Then recently got multiple fans working on it to make it playable again. The interest is clearly there as you can see.

Touhou Danmaku Kagura is another example. The game was incredible beloved, but they had to close it down because their monetization scheme wasn't good and brought no money. Thankfully it'll be re-released, as premium pay-once to play type of game that is.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Nope, poor business decision and management are just as likely to put them in the red. Reminds me of NFS world, even had an "end of world" event and everything. Then recently got multiple fans working on it to make it playable again. The interest is clearly there as you can see.

Touhou Danmaku Kagura is another example. The game was incredible beloved, but they had to close it down because their monetization scheme wasn't good and brought no money. Thankfully it'll be re-released, as premium pay-once to play type of game that is.

11 people a year get hit by lightning.

Even then, I'm skeptical of your claim considering how every Need for Speed player base drops off a cliff. I'm not sure World was as healthy as you were led to believe.

 

[MrTroubleMaker]

 

[Guilty_AI]

11 people a year get hit by lightning.

Even then, I'm skeptical of your claim considering how every Need for Speed player base drops off a cliff. I'm not sure World was as healthy as you were led to believe.

Thats still 11 people with families and friends who loved them.

NFS World wasn't healthy, because despite being technically a good game, the monetization was agressive and ruined it. But many people still liked World, enough to go out of their way to revive it (without the horrible MTX).

 

[Ozzy Onya A2Z]

Nah, we are going to see more of it. There are other GaaS avenues too e.g. solo/coop over PvP.

 

[Majima Everywhere System]

I think it’s will go away because both audiences and developers find battle pass content lame. Both will ask why we only get the pass, when meaningful world building content could be paid for.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Thats still 11 people with families and friends who loved them.

NFS World wasn't healthy, because despite being technically a good game, the monetization was agressive and ruined it. But many people still liked World, enough to go out of their way to revive it (without the horrible MTX).

More people are affected by lightning strikes than by GAAS games shutting down.

 

[The artful mincer]

Fair enough.

People here have been overstating how difficult it is to break into the GAAS market - saying things like "ItS sAtUrAtEd" when it's clearly not.

Data please!

This article seems to back that up. Top 15 games occupying 60% of the time top 33 occupying 75% of player time.

People here don't understand that GAAS is the smarter strategic play.

Only if you get a hit. If you don't...Well naughty Dog have already made there choice!

You're missing the rising costs of AAA SP games which makes selling 15 million copies look less and less lucrative as each year passed.

Meh this is so overblown if gaming is the biggest entrainment industry then it makes sense to have the biggest budgets. Budgets will rise for as long as they can until they can't then they will stabilise like the film Industry.

Due to Digital libraries Single player games are selling more and longer than ever before.