• Angry_Autist (he/him)
    link
    English
    65 months ago

    the live service model will literally never leave gaming no matter how much people hate and avoid products because of it.

    Mainly due to the fact that MBA’s response to consumer rejection is to go twice as hard.

    This is why we are in the golden age of the indie game

    • @Telodzrum
      link
      English
      15 months ago

      Why should it leave? The most successful games are all live service. No matter how many people buy a single-player game, the total lifetime revenue of love service dwarfs other models in comparison.

      • Angry_Autist (he/him)
        link
        English
        05 months ago

        If by ‘successful’ you mean ‘makes as much money as possible for its shareholders’ sure.

        That’s not how I measure success.

        • @Telodzrum
          link
          English
          05 months ago

          I mean most installed, most played hours, highest grossing. You lnow, all the ways success is measured in games.

          • Angry_Autist (he/him)
            link
            English
            -15 months ago

            There is a direct conflict of interests between gamers and producers. Producers want as much sales for as little time and money and they will damage games if it feels it makes them more money.

            There are a ton of gacha games if released as a standard 1 time pay model would have been very profitable, but ‘very’ isn’t profitable enough. Some of those games are ridiculously high grossing, have a shitton of played hours, yet STILL would be better games without predatory monetization.

            I measure the success of a game by how respectful they are to their customers. Anti-consumer behavior is rotting AAA game houses from within.