• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Why Single Player Gamers shouldn't fear the GAAS Revolution...

Dear Single Player Gamer, does this make sense to you?

  • No. I am confused.

  • Yes. I still don't like it but I see your point.

  • Yes. I bask in the warm glow of a new perspective surrounding this difficult topic. TY, OP.

  • No, GAAS is dumb.


Results are only viewable after voting.

Bernardougf

Member
Or games like Armored Core VI that gives me everything from get go and I can enjoy playing the game alone and completely offline….it’s currently my personal GOTY.
Get on multiplayer you dinassour freak ... nothing more fun then playing gen z characters with gen z and children populating the online community... isss fuunnnn
 

Danjin44

The nicest person on this forum
Get on multiplayer you dinassour freak
c2f3d0d994d5c358f44e5159e2089e4c4eefef6c.gif
 
Last edited:
Well, I think you're leaving out the fact that 80's arcade cabinets milked 100% of their players. They were designed so everyone that played had to feed the machine.

GAAS is designed in the opposite way. Everyone has full access to the game for free and you only buy cosmetics if you want.

It might be the worst comparison I've ever heard and I believe in that "universe collapses and grows anew an infinite number of times" theory.
Delusional take. You're basically saying GaaS is NOT designed to milk players and publishers because the game is free. Tag definitely checks out.
 
As I remember Stellar Blade and I think Convallaria were announced for 2023, I assume may release in 2024. Helldivers 2, Concord, Rise of the Ronin have been announced for 2024.

Wolverine, Death Stranding 2 and Marathon may be 2024 too. Then there's unannounced games like the next Team Asobi game, Cory's new IP, London's new IP, Firesprite games which could be 2024 titles too. And unannounced 2nd party games who when don't know when can be released like the Ballistic Moon game, or who knows if the Sumo team who did Sackboy Adventures is also making a game.

Sony normally doesn't announce games that are 2 or more years away from release (with Wolverine as exception). So I think most the games announced before 2023 plus some more recent and other ones still unannounced will be released in 2024, and then the other announced ones, plus some unannounced would release in 2025.

Weren't Sumo Digital acquired by another publisher a year or two ago? Sony could still be working with that team at Sumo, sure, but I guess it could also be another Aspyr situation, depends on who owns Sumo Digital these days.

I think the only unannounced games that could release in 2025 would be one or two we already kind of know exist but otherwise don't have any info on them, like ND's new IP or since you brought it up, Cory Balrog's new IP. Hopefully it wouldn't just be PC ports

I think Sony hasn't announced any game planned to be released in 2026 or beyond, because they don't announce games to be released 3+ years in the future, that's Microsoft territory.

FWIW Sony used to do it too, and there was 100% no problem with that because unlike Microsoft, Sony's actually delivered on the vast majority of their games announced many years ahead of release. The only gaffe they had 1P-wise, IMO, was Dreams. Not down to anything quality-wise, but because it took so damn long to actually release; they revealed it in 2013 but it didn't release until 2020. That was ridiculous.

The Last Guardian is another example I suppose, but still, that's only two games out of dozens. Sony earned the right to keep with that strategy, so it's disappointing they have ran away from it. Microsoft tried taking a page from Sony's book with showing a "big picture" roadmap many years ahead but never established a schedule of strong 1P releases prior to earn the benefit of trust.

Since they increased the cadence of PC releases their console hardware and software sales increased, and their console 1st party sales too. The console engagement, ARPU and game subs revenue also are in record levels. Absolutely no signs of negative effects in console, in any case the effect is the opposite.

Like I've said before, there just hasn't been enough time yet to say the current PC porting strategy has, or hasn't, had negative effects on long-term console and console sales/revenue. IMO, even things like putting 1P AAA games into PS+ after only a year of B2P sales (this is what they did with HFW) could have adverse, negative effects long-term if that becomes a regular thing.

I don't think Sony need to do risky ports to PC of new or newish 1P traditional games that could weaken the value proposition of console B2P sales of that software (or console sales themselves), in order to increase profits off software. The GaaS going Day 1 on console & PC should in theory be enough.

The PC releases gave them huge extra revenue and profit and allows them reach many new fans. So they will continue increasing the amount of PC releases per year (if they have enough resources, because I think that at some point won't be able to increase it more), and some GaaS (at least the Bungie ones) will release in PC day one.

No, they didn't give them quite the huge revenue & profit you're thinking, because a lot of that came from Destiny 2...a game Sony got through acquiring Bungie. The revenue they brought in FY 2022 was enough for maybe 1 big AAA game, but the actual profit was less, and that's not likely going to be used for 1 big AAA so much as split up funding current games.

Or, that plus some used to cover the Bungie acquisition costs, or pump R&D into PlayStation 6. All necessary things, and good things, but just goes to show the annual PC revenue wouldn't be enough to really fund another big AAA game if it stays at the pace it was FY '22.

Yes, as always Sony also has a gazillion 3P exclusives coming both big and small, from all genres and types. Way more than 1P games.

But this time I only listed two types of Sony published games:
-Sony GaaS greenlighted before the Jimbo+Hermen era
-Sony games greenlighted during the Jimbo+Hermen era

About the 3P exclusives, well that much is always a sure thing. I'm just curious how well that strategy holds going forward in the face of, say, a Nintendo getting a lot more 3P support since they could have a system that's actual viable on a technical level. Or (hopefully not), Microsoft looking to gobble up more 3P publishers to choke them off from working with Sony independently under the ruse of being "competitive".

If PC availability would hurt their main business, which is consoles, then they would stop making PC ports and also would sign again total exclusives instead of timed console exclusives.

If they do PC ports and sign timed console exclusives it's because it works better for them.

Hey, I guess we're going to see if Sony have made a change of exactly that internally, by the time the new SIE CEO is announced. The full/timed console exclusives stuff with 3P is something not fully in their control, it'd depend on goals of the 3P publisher. With devs, it's easier to negotiate.

But with 1P titles? I'm 100% expecting some significant changes to plans with porting the 1P traditional titles over. As in, either that stops or the windows increase significantly between versions. They could still leverage PC for GaaS titles though and remaster compilations of older releases, which would be smart business.
 

Yoboman

Member
Every dev with a successful GAAS had become duller and more derivative because of it. Great producers of single player games like Valve, Bungie, Epic, Rockstar... now stuck in the never ending cycle of producing skins and expansion packs for a decade

It's like getting Spieldberg and Scorcese making reality TV
 

Felessan

Member
The same pivot happened in 2012-2014 already. And there was another attempt 6 years prior that people just don't know about (it was a fun thing - some of the biggest pubs were literally raining money onto GaaS projects in that era too).
Point being - this industry is nothing if not cyclical - and publishers have just as poor of a short-term memory as gamers do.
The bigger threat to SP gaming is GamePass and its ilk really - if that ever took off in a meaningful way well...
And at each iteration gaas got a lot of ground. In previous cycle gaas killed mobile paid games - there was a time when paying for a game on mobile was normal, angry birds was 1$ game. And the one before it - decimated heavily PC market, killed p2p MMO and grabbed 80-90% market share as result. AAA gaming on PC stagnated for a decade and it still somewhat secondary to consoles in terms on developers priorities.

The problem with GaaS games is that they require a constant player base to remain relevant, otherwise they crash and burn (see Hyperscape, Lawbreakers and the many more that lived and died in less than a year).
However, people only have so much time and can only invest in a couple of games at once. All these GasS titles are competing for a very limited number of players and time. They all can't be successful and not everything can be a GaaS title. For this reason, GaaS will never replace the offline single player experience.
But this player base is much bigger - fortnight has more players than all consoles combined. And it's actually growing at the expense of SP, because younger generations are more inclined to start off gaas (mobile) title, which will affect distribution of preferencies in 10 years future.
 

hyperbertha

Member
If we are talking specifically from Playstation, this pivot is worrying because I fear if it's financially successful they might overstep by adding GaaS elements into franchise that have exist without them for years. If they just are broadening their horizons and bringing new franchises in GaaS but still maintain their current focus on singleplayer experiences then I wouldn't mind that.

On Xbox, I feel they are already too deep. Going mobile, buying ABK and Bethesda and their own recent foray into GaaS with Fallout 76 along with attempting to do this in Forza.

I think we're talking about 2 different things here though. Multiplayer and GaaS are not interchangeable. You can have multiplayer without it being GaaS. You can also have singleplayer GaaS games (see Shadow of War).

I'm not inherently against GaaS. I love Warframe, for example. I love Valorant, I like League of Legends and Smite. All these are GaaS and multiplayer. I also like singleplayer games. I don't really understand why there's a fear that one or the other will take over in a general sense. I worry about Playstation a bit only because it's a new proposition and I just don't know how it's gonna go. If they put Naughtydog on GaaS stuff instead of bringing out Last of Us Part 3...then I'm upset. I hope this makes sense.
You really don't understand? After stellar singleplayer studios like rocksteady, eidos montreal and arkane wasted so many years on trash gaas?
 

Jigsaah

Member
You really don't understand? After stellar singleplayer studios like rocksteady, eidos montreal and arkane wasted so many years on trash gaas?
You really don't understand. Just because you think all GaaS games are trash doesn't mean everyone does. There can be good GaaS games if done right. Destiny was that, at first. Activision devolved it into trash, then Bungie doubled down on it after they bought themselves out. Regardless, it didn't begin that way. Warframe was GaaS from it's launch, I've never had a problem with it because you can earn everything in game except for the cosmetic stuff. Even some of that stuff is eventually given away for free. The best part about it is with enough effort, you can earn items in game that others will buy for premium currency. So there's options other than paying out of your own pocket even for the MTX.

Smite is GaaS through and through, but it's all cosmetic. Path of Exile is GaaS as fuck, all cosmetic MTX. Just because a few studios can't seem to get the formula right, doesn't mean GaaS as a whole is bad.
 

Soodanim

Gold Member
When the the apocalypse has come and all that is left is GAAS, there will be a need to simply offer a product instead of a subscription in order to stand out from the mindless masses of subscription models.

And on that day, single player will be born again.

But I'll still be working through my backlog so the apocalypse won't affect me.
 

IDKFA

I am Become Bilbo Baggins
But this player base is much bigger - fortnight has more players than all consoles combined. And it's actually growing at the expense of SP, because younger generations are more inclined to start off gaas (mobile) title, which will affect distribution of preferencies in 10 years future.

That's my point. Fortnite is a huge hit and has a loyal player base. As a GaaS title it works perfectly. However, all of those Fortnite players dedicate their free time to Fortnite and that is what other GaaS titles have to compete with.

Not every game can be a live service smash hit like Fortnite. A vast majority will be lost to the void because they can't pull in the same numbers. A lot of players will stick to what they know or what they're friends are playing.

That's why GaaS will never replace single player games. They'll both continue to coexist.
 
Eh; the investment bump into non-GaaS wasn't THAT large TBH; percentage-wise it's just a tad bit more than what it was in 2020 IIRC.

Though, in absolute amounts, it could be significantly more. As in, the amount allocated for FY '25 would be measured percentage-wise against what was allocated for FY '23 or FY '20. But if FY '21 is getting $1 billion more in software funding than FY '20, even if the games cost more on average per AAA to make, that would signify a decent number of more such games coming from 1P.

The problem is we don't know the specific amounts. We also don't know how many such games were initialized funding and started dev in 2018 or 2019, because if they're AAA, we could expect to see them released next year and in 2025 (or 2026 at latest). Aside from Wolverine, I can't think of any Sony 1P AAA traditional titles that'd be coming between Spiderman 2 and 2026, based on what's known.

But maybe I've missed some information somewhere, and I know with many of Sony's studios they have multiple large teams within them working on multiple titles simultaneously. We know many have a traditional and GaaS title in dev, but how many have, say, 2 trad. AAA in dev right now, and how long have those games already been in development? Do any have AA games in development? How long have those been in development?

It's a lot of questions, with few answers it seems.

Knowing the amounts is irrelevant.

The fact that the SP proportion hasn't increased much from 2019 compared to GaaS is not the full picture. You have to take into account that some of Sony's major SP studios are also working on GaaS games alongside their next SP projects, ND + GG. So if those big AAA SP studios have full teams also working on GaaS games, and yet Sony's SP investment total still increased from 2019, it shows there's a significant increase in traditional SP game investment.

Regardless, SP investment doesn't even need to grow. It just shouldn't shrink. And all this is not even counting Sony's investment in 3rd party exclusives (which would not have been covered by the graph) as well as future acquisitions.
 

YeulEmeralda

Linux User
You really don't understand. Just because you think all GaaS games are trash doesn't mean everyone does. There can be good GaaS games if done right. Destiny was that, at first. Activision devolved it into trash, then Bungie doubled down on it after they bought themselves out. Regardless, it didn't begin that way. Warframe was GaaS from it's launch, I've never had a problem with it because you can earn everything in game except for the cosmetic stuff. Even some of that stuff is eventually given away for free. The best part about it is with enough effort, you can earn items in game that others will buy for premium currency. So there's options other than paying out of your own pocket even for the MTX.

Smite is GaaS through and through, but it's all cosmetic. Path of Exile is GaaS as fuck, all cosmetic MTX. Just because a few studios can't seem to get the formula right, doesn't mean GaaS as a whole is bad.
Wait when was Destiny a single player game?
 

FunkMiller

Member
Nobody hates multiplayer. That’s been around for many years.

GaaS, on the other hand, is greed fuelled, predatory shit that only exists to fleece gamers.

People have Stockholm syndromed their way into just accepting that the two are the same thing by the gaming companies.
 
Last edited:

STARSBarry

Gold Member
All I have seen is GaaS is destroy beloved franchises and provide nothing of value for the consumer in return.

People will say "constant updates" but as a PC Gamer we used to get those anyway long before GaaS. Its only console gamers who think paying for "map packs" was normal who think this is new and an improvement. And this only applies to a handful of titles that make it, the rest that don't are quickly abandoned and that's the overwhelming majority of GaaS games.

Games that could have been good if they where not weighed down by being GaaS, but we will never know because their dead and not worth playing chasing that 1% chance they make it big.

Fuck GaaS it ruined Halo.
 
Last edited:

Felessan

Member
That's my point. Fortnite is a huge hit and has a loyal player base. As a GaaS title it works perfectly. However, all of those Fortnite players dedicate their free time to Fortnite and that is what other GaaS titles have to compete with.

Not every game can be a live service smash hit like Fortnite. A vast majority will be lost to the void because they can't pull in the same numbers. A lot of players will stick to what they know or what they're friends are playing.

That's why GaaS will never replace single player games. They'll both continue to coexist.
They all compete for the same ultimate resource - time. And competition for it always will be a thing - be it gaas, MP or even SP.
If you play CoD, you don't play BF or Destiny (you can, but you'll need to commit extra time to gaming, like some people play several gaas at once). If you have 100 hours a year of available "playtime" you can squeeze 2 or 3 games in it, this means that every game will be a competitor for a slot.
Time always will be an issue - if you play heavy MP like CoD or FIFA, you have less time for SP. If you play gaas - you have less time for MP and SP games. Less time - less incentive to buy - less incentive to make games. This is how non-gaas games were culled on PC and died on mobile.

Not every game will be Fortnite as this market is much more competitive than traditional SP and MP as it has much more money and profit margins. But as it gets more attention it gets more developers, genre diversification, novel ideas etc. As market matures it becomes less and less king of the hill situation. 10 years ago top 10 gaas earned 90% of revenue, now it's top 100. There are already quite a lot of games that earns 300-500 mil a year, that is seems small compared to Fortnite or Genshin, but compared to traditional gaming market they are very successful games.

I agree that no matter what SP, MP and gaas will still be there, but the actual landscape might be fundamentally different. Who would thought in the late 90's that PC would have close to zero PC exclusive AAA games. And would turn out to be platform for indies and secondary platform for console releases.
 

Bernardougf

Member
In some years when the reality sets in ... lets all remember that sony and Jim were very clear about what they are doing. You are just choosing to ignore it. ..

Or maybe not... maybe Jimbo is gone for some reason we dont know and things are gonna change again.

-------

But if sony is chasing GaaS I can see why.. I grew up playing atari and then Mario and Sonic ... my son and his friends play only gaas/mp and nothing else... eventually he will pick up something easy to play on switch or something but is very rarely. But he dosent have any patience to learn to play SP less brain dead games. Gaas/MP are easy to play. And the competitive nature of gaas also fuels them.
 

MrPaul

Neo Member
You will still be able to play the first 10 fps games in 30 years thanks to the magic of emulation, but the future of many GaaS titles is uncertain. Also, while a human player may provide a better experience than an NPC, in terms of interaction, it can just as easily be game breaking or annoying. There are many players who's interactions I could have done without in my experience. A particularly obnoxious crew in Sea of Thieves comes to mind; rather than deal with random kids joining my crew only to set my boat aflame, or have to join multiple games in order to find a workable crew, I end up solo-slooping that multiplayer game for the most part.

While Call of Duty Black Ops 2 is still functional; finding a group to play with that are able to communicate is difficult, and being the only one able to relay information verbally in the game is quite limiting. Many times I just have to accept we are playing without any strategy whatsoever and it's every player for themselves. My point is that playing with human players is not always a better experience.

When I launch a single player title, I am more likely to have the experience I anticipate. I have more control over that experience. There is value to both the single and multiplayer developments; but the games as a service model seems more likely to become unplayable in future, where as before this, many titles would allow servers to be hosted by the players themselves. So since they will probably become unplayable at some point, it is just a hopefully long term rental of the content.
 

StueyDuck

Member
i'd rather not pay money for Nicki Minaj or Lebron James in my Single player games and watch them do silly dances for the GenZ's
 

Portugeezer

Member
I ain't worried, if the AAA industry wants to implode on itself then so be it. There's only a finite amount of time a person can invest in online shit.
 

deriks

4-Time GIF/Meme God
We don't fear GaaS itself, but the fact that a single player campaign can be turned into as GaaS

Remember Arkham games? Those are great. Then came Gothan Knights, they announce as a GaaS and everything turned into shit and the game was dead at launch. Avengers was maybe even worse, but I guess that was more of a game that was released too late for the Marvel guys
 

Kokoloko85

Member
Why I fear the GAAS pivot is it LOOKS like its coming at the expense of those AAA single player games from Sony with how the last 12 months have gone and how the next 12 months look

Heres to hoping we get another Showcase and revealing some more games soon though
Last 12 months? Roughly: God of War Ragnarok, TLOU1 Remake and soon Spiderman 2…

Where are all these Gaas games Sony is releasing? HellDivers 2?

Theres also Wolverine, Rise of Ronin, Death Stranding 2 coming. And we know Ghost of Tsushima 2 will eventually come
 

Killjoy-NL

Gold Member
I don't get the hate for GaaS like Fortnite.
It's a great and fun game (even though BR becomes stales rather fast imo), it's free and microtransactions are optional.
If they rip you off, nobody but you is to blame.

They can be great entertainment in between major releases, because SP-games can only entertain you so much. (talking about Sony's 1st party output primarily)

That's the whole approach that's being taken.
The uproar seems so petty, especially since it's just a vocal minority that doesn't even get their toys taken away.
They lose nothing, others get more options to play, so what exactly is the issue?
 
Last edited:

StueyDuck

Member
He'll be more at home on 4chan where all the sickos hang out. The guy is clearly not lekker in the head
Imagine that guy thinking South Africans don't know nature 🤣. Hy is 'n bietjie verlore in sy kop

Only on gaf.

Some okes need a Moerse poesklap 🤣
 
Last edited:

Metnut

Member
Plenty of things im interested in and can do with my increased rare free time. I’ve always loved gaming but have zero interest in gaas. If that’s the way things go, I’ll simply take my money/time elsewhere. No sweat off my back.

Given the success of TotK, BG3, Elden Ring and Cyberpunk, I’m not too worried though.
 

Jigsaah

Member
Wait when was Destiny a single player game?
ok you apparently did not follow the logic of the first post of mine you responded to. I'm talking about both single player and multiplayer games. Let's just table this until you've actually understood what I'm arguing.
 

Fafalada

Fafracer forever
And at each iteration gaas got a lot of ground. In previous cycle gaas killed mobile paid games - there was a time when paying for a game on mobile was normal, angry birds was 1$ game. And the one before it - decimated heavily PC market, killed p2p MMO and grabbed 80-90% market share as result. AAA gaming on PC stagnated for a decade and it still somewhat secondary to consoles in terms on developers priorities.
I'd actually disagree. GaaS is massively more popular than any other model - yes, but not necessarily at expense of any of them.
Paid mobile games still exist, and are bigger than they were in 2010 - they just grew a lot slower than F2P did.

I also don't really buy the PC market thing - it's bigger now than it ever was, even for non service games, though just like mobile - the segment grew more slowly than GaaS did, but that's a given. AAA gaming on PC was never about exclusives - by the time the AAA model actually became a thing, there was like a handful of studios even capable of attempting an AAA PC exclusive (and even fewer of them did). Consoles dominated that space basically the entire time.
 

PeteBull

Member
Why I fear the GAAS pivot is it LOOKS like its coming at the expense of those AAA single player games from Sony with how the last 12 months have gone and how the next 12 months look

Heres to hoping we get another Showcase and revealing some more games soon though
Thats exactly how it is, sony has tons of studios/talent and actually puts a lot of care into managing them, but something gotta give, its either vr games, AAA singleplayer games, or GAAS, cant have focus on all 3, till now it was singleplayer games, but who knows how it will look in the future, hopefully GAAS shit keeps on bombing hard so devs and especially pubs will stop looking at it like at mithical cash cow, like back in WoWs prime they looked at mmo genre in the same way, w/o realising its not the genre that makes money, but actual high quality of a game.

Just need fortnite to die down and hopefully no more GAAS games are big comercial cussess so that forbidden poisonous fruit doesnt tempt devs/pubs anymore.
 
Last edited:

Danjin44

The nicest person on this forum
If you enjoy GAAS crap then more power you, I hope you enjoy it but also accept the fact me and majority of people dont want that piece of shit in our games....its that simple.

 

leonardo23

Neo Member
When i see what GAAS is, I immediately thought about Tree of Savior. Or any mmo, basically. Its like they created another word for a almost 3 decades concept.
 

hyperbertha

Member
You really don't understand. Just because you think all GaaS games are trash doesn't mean everyone does. There can be good GaaS games if done right. Destiny was that, at first. Activision devolved it into trash, then Bungie doubled down on it after they bought themselves out. Regardless, it didn't begin that way. Warframe was GaaS from it's launch, I've never had a problem with it because you can earn everything in game except for the cosmetic stuff. Even some of that stuff is eventually given away for free. The best part about it is with enough effort, you can earn items in game that others will buy for premium currency. So there's options other than paying out of your own pocket even for the MTX.

Smite is GaaS through and through, but it's all cosmetic. Path of Exile is GaaS as fuck, all cosmetic MTX. Just because a few studios can't seem to get the formula right, doesn't mean GaaS as a whole is bad.
Do you have reading comprehension issues? Gaas = trash wasn't the point I was addressing. You said there is no reason to fear gaas taking over the industry, when I illustrated some pretty good reasons. Want more examples? Konami, bungie, rocktar, epic games, valve. All single player catering studios that have divested resources mostly to gaas.
 

Killjoy-NL

Gold Member
Do you have reading comprehension issues? Gaas = trash wasn't the point I was addressing. You said there is no reason to fear gaas taking over the industry, when I illustrated some pretty good reasons. Want more examples? Konami, bungie, rocktar, epic games, valve. All single player catering studios that have divested resources mostly to gaas.
That's because most GaaS games are catered towards social gaming.
Games like Fortnite, Destiny and GTAV are immensely popular due to their social aspects.

It's basically the modern version of couch co-op, except you're not physically together.

It almost seems like the biggest difference between those who like GaaS (or don't mind it) and those who don't is their stance on social gaming.
But it's the progression of gaming due to the internet.
 
Last edited:

Guilty_AI

Member

First of all, why should i care about the opinion of that guy?

What's bad about fortnite as a game?
Most of the skill required for competition comes from the building mechanics, and no, how fast you can build an eiffel tower when you meet another player does not constitute as fun. Thats without mentioning the jarring style of the game where you can suddenly have Master Chief riding a truck with Thanos. Maybe 12 yo will find that cool but for me it just takes me out of the game.
 

Killjoy-NL

Gold Member
First of all, why should i care about the opinion of that guy?


Most of the skill required for competition comes from the building mechanics, and no, how fast you can build an eiffel tower when you meet another player does not constitute as fun. Thats without mentioning the jarring style of the game where you can suddenly have Master Chief riding a truck with Thanos. Maybe 12 yo will find that cool but for me it just takes me out of the game.
Play Zero Build.

Bolded doesn't even have anything to do with the quality of the game.

And while Fortnite gets boring real fast (as does any BR-game), it isn't a bad game in any way.
 

Guilty_AI

Member

Killjoy-NL

Gold Member
So it can go from a BR with annoying mechanics to a boring one? No thanks.
The game just isn't for you.
Its an important element for many people.
Yes, but I was talking about the quality of the game.
A MP game that gets boring fast is not a good MP game.
This is highly subjective.

And for the record, I don't play BR games and think they're all boring. No exceptions.

I just think a certain group of gamers have an irrational disliking towards GaaS.
 

Guilty_AI

Member
I just think a certain group of gamers have an irrational disliking towards GaaS.
I have no problem with GaaS, i do have a problem with how some (most really) are executed. Fortnite in particular is a bad game whose main appeal comes from social elements, and whose whole monetization is based around dark design and fomo. Its not the worst offender but its certainly still an offender.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom