@Zhipp
Yep. People don't want devs to use the terms "live service" or "games as a service," but as soon as a dev announces that they will not be adding anymore new content to a multiplayer game and will only be updating it keep it stable, the community declares the game dead and attacks the devs for abandoning the game.
Unfortunately the era where a player base played a game because it's fun and not to "earn" things s...
It's kind of crazy that, in a world where every time a 360/PS3 game from 2007 gets delisted people lose their minds about game preservation, Bungie routinely removes massive chunks of content from their active game and everyone is just fine with it.
What is the most recent successful multiplayer shooter that actually kept a player base that was not a live service?
Well, in terms of absolute performance, yes. They are still useful in terms of relative performance among other titles launching around the same time. What I mean is that it is silly to get hung up on a game launching in 2023 selling a much smaller number of physical copies than a prior game in the series sold 5-15 years ago, but they can still be useful to compare two games launching at or around the same time, unless there is some specific reason to think one of those games will sell a much...
It's definitely getting lost in the shuffle, but it's kind of crazy to see Xbox abandon the "Live" branding completely. I suppose it really hasn't been as important in the last few years where everyone is now used to playing online and takes it for granted, but it was a pretty powerful piece of marketing in the early to mid-2000s when a lot of people were playing console games online for the first time. I had friends who didn't say "I like playing online," ...
Lol remember how the new PS Plus system was "so confusing" because there were three tiers?
It is crazy how people constantly complain about how games were better and less rushed 10-20 years ago, ignoring the fact that we often used to get sequels to games every two years or so. Now you get a sequel 4-7 years after a game launched and people start screaming about franchise fatigue and how the devs are driving the series into the ground.
So you hate live service games, but your profile pic is from Diablo 4?
How did that work out for Outriders?
Serious question for everyone persuaded by this quote's logic: do you think that every musician with music on Spotify/other streaming services likes streaming services and sees them as the best way for artists to distribute music?
Lol you say that like there aren't going to be a bunch more of these. We all saw MS's list of potential acquisition targets, and that's not to mention whatever purchases Sony makes.
So the takeaway is that Bloomberg is always wrong?
Yep, if you make a certain type of game, GP is the only way you'll make any money on Xbox. If you criticize, you might find yourself without the offer to put your next game on GP, and you'll be stuck launching a game a la carte to an audience conditioned to expect to get your games as part of their subscription.
Can someone use AI to make a video of Phil Spencer singing "Blame Canada" from the South Park movie?
The next time you are complaining about free-to-play, drm, always online games, microtransactions, unnecessary multiplayer in games that should be singleplayer, live service/Games as a service, and games being broken at launch, just remember that you also think this.
What? No voice actors?
Lol you have to love how quickly fanboys pivot from "MS isn't paying to exclude games from other platforms/services, that's something only Sony does," to "Well of course MS pays for exclusive deals, everyone does and it's a standard practice, they are running a business."
Too bad there isn't enough power left in your brain for a joke that isn't 3 years old.
Lol this makes all those "well Sony is terrible because they might buy Square Enix in the future" arguments look pretty silly.
Someone should tell them about scalability.