Heaven Angel
Member
It's too much GaaS filled in the industry!
-
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.
This video game trend is killing Single Player games
- Thread starter Heaven Angel
- Start date
- Opinion
Laptop1991
Member
Yep, i completely agree
Topher
Identifies as young
Correct. Bottom line is some studios like Arrowhead are great at making live service games and that's what they should do. That doesn't necessarily apply to traditional single player studios. Bioware, Rockstead, Arkane and Crystal Dynamics should stick to what they are good at: kickass single player games. Same is try for Sony's single player studios. Naughty Dog realized that and noped out of Factions, thankfully. There is still plenty of money to be made in single player as much as some want to pretend otherwise. Hogwart's Legacy proved that. Now Warner Brothers is going to try to ruin that studio just like they did Rocksteady. It is just stupid.
Last edited:
It's tough. Game development hasn't gotten cheaper or easier. Controversial take, but maybe prices should go up if it means premium products are not hinging on 'quantity sold + recurring spending to break even'. Otherwise you get this shit storm we're in right now.
I always felt that mechanics and systemic innovation are more underappreciated then a bolt setting and a promise of infinite content. I wish more value was placed on that.
I always felt that mechanics and systemic innovation are more underappreciated then a bolt setting and a promise of infinite content. I wish more value was placed on that.
Last edited:
Portugeezer
Member
lh032
I cry about Xbox and hate PlayStation.
i think another problem here is the game price, which i understand due to game dev cost.
But still if you are a gamer especially the young adults, 60-70 dollar game is really steep in this current economy
Combine with lack of time, its understandable why people go for mobile or free to play games.
But still if you are a gamer especially the young adults, 60-70 dollar game is really steep in this current economy
Combine with lack of time, its understandable why people go for mobile or free to play games.
Last edited:
Moriarty1889
Member
Single player games are still imo the staple of the industry. We need them even if they do become a minority. Not everyone wants to always be online and engaging with others. That can become tiresome and frustrating at times. Nothing like losing yourself in immersive single player game with worlds and characters that pull you in. Just you and the game building your own unique experience and adventure. Just my two cents worth. Good day all.
Skifi28
Member
He really did say that, I was there.
T4keD0wN
Member
Which is funny since many of those mobile and f2p games demand even more time with busywork daily quests and stuff like that, not to mention grindy progression systems.
In the end such games demand even more time, but conveniently they sell the solution to that problem for money. Given how much they make i guess youre right.
Last edited:
BbMajor7th
Member
"Ultimately, the mindless pursuit of profit over rational business planning is the real problem."
Pancakes and Sausage
Member
Make games that people want to play is the problem, not GAAS.
Very few people want a gorgeous walking simulator. So why is it a surprise that people don’t buy it? Is it because the game is single player instead of GAAS?
No! It’s because nobody wants that shit.
Game developers can make games to express their artistic flair or game developers can make games that people want to play.
A very small amount of people want a walking simulator!
Very few people want a gorgeous walking simulator. So why is it a surprise that people don’t buy it? Is it because the game is single player instead of GAAS?
No! It’s because nobody wants that shit.
Game developers can make games to express their artistic flair or game developers can make games that people want to play.
A very small amount of people want a walking simulator!
digoutyoursoul
Member
Once models like FIFA Ultimate Team and season passes became accepted it was only going to go one way.
You only have to look at social media apps and YouTube, basic features withdrawn to entice subscriptions. And the more it’s accepted, defended and normalised the worse it will get. It was inevitable Twitter was going to turn into a service and in turn a lesser experience for the non subscribers.
It’s the same problem with games. The service model has people sucked in, so they invest their time and money into a particular game and it results in less purchases of other games. Look at the buying habits, I’m sure there are a substantial amount of people who only buy Call of Duty for the year.
The publishers want the money but players time and investment can only spread so far. Service games and their model, which is basically to draw out the experience , takes up a considerable amount of player investment so if you are going to flood the market with that kind of model there are bound to be flops.
The single player experience is my favourite and I hope it sustains but as each year passes it’s going to be more difficult. For all the technology we have I feel in some aspects the industry has regressed.
You only have to look at social media apps and YouTube, basic features withdrawn to entice subscriptions. And the more it’s accepted, defended and normalised the worse it will get. It was inevitable Twitter was going to turn into a service and in turn a lesser experience for the non subscribers.
It’s the same problem with games. The service model has people sucked in, so they invest their time and money into a particular game and it results in less purchases of other games. Look at the buying habits, I’m sure there are a substantial amount of people who only buy Call of Duty for the year.
The publishers want the money but players time and investment can only spread so far. Service games and their model, which is basically to draw out the experience , takes up a considerable amount of player investment so if you are going to flood the market with that kind of model there are bound to be flops.
The single player experience is my favourite and I hope it sustains but as each year passes it’s going to be more difficult. For all the technology we have I feel in some aspects the industry has regressed.
Last edited:
Unrivaledx88
Member
I think gamers are just selfish and haters , this is in any business . Ppl take what works and try to make it better on there own sometimes it works sometimes it don’t .
Like sports , teams copy tactics that work , football teams take successful plays from other teams. I know sports is different then gaming. But Still .
Like sports , teams copy tactics that work , football teams take successful plays from other teams. I know sports is different then gaming. But Still .
digital_ghost
Gold Member
A rushed live service game is forever shit.
A delayed live service game is still shit.
- Yukon Cornelius
Men_in_Boxes
Banned
The age of single player is over. The time of the Live Service has come.
Humdinger
Gold Member
Very true, although as someone noted in a recent thread, about 90% of most-played games are GaaS games, so you can't blame companies for wanting to chase the cash. He implies in the video that only 3 or 4 GaaS games dominate the market, and while 3 or 4 may be top-earners, if you look at the market itself (at least judging by most-played), it's not just 3 or 4 Live Service games that dominate -- it's a whole load of them. You have some SP games among them, but they are the minority. So if you are a corporate type who wants profit, you'll chase the Live Service games.
I don't like it, but I understand it. The main issue (as far as profitability goes) is what he points out in the video - using SP teams to develop GaaS titles, when their expertise lies elsewhere. Square peg in a round hole = bad results. But they will keep trying.
I play only SP games, so this is a drag to me. But I don't expect it to go away.
I don't like it, but I understand it. The main issue (as far as profitability goes) is what he points out in the video - using SP teams to develop GaaS titles, when their expertise lies elsewhere. Square peg in a round hole = bad results. But they will keep trying.
I play only SP games, so this is a drag to me. But I don't expect it to go away.
MrRenegade
Banned
Which gaas game should be a singleplayer?
diffusionx
Gold Member
Is anyone running out of singleplayer games to play?
There are still plenty of single player games. Just not so many in the press as the live service user bubble is bigger.
Also it is way more complicated to make a great looking game now. From art to animation, to the voice cast, everything has much bigger budgets now.
So maybe we must accept, that the next single player title, has its weaknesses in those regards. You can't have everything while the costs rise and inflation is almost not a thing with game prices. A long time inflation was captured by bigger audiences, but at some point the peak is reached and something has to be sacrificed.
Also it is way more complicated to make a great looking game now. From art to animation, to the voice cast, everything has much bigger budgets now.
So maybe we must accept, that the next single player title, has its weaknesses in those regards. You can't have everything while the costs rise and inflation is almost not a thing with game prices. A long time inflation was captured by bigger audiences, but at some point the peak is reached and something has to be sacrificed.
Pimpollo818
Member
this reminds me of a set up, where someone else would say
NOT THAT THERE'S ANYTHING WRONG WITH THAT
anyone remember? perhaps a sketch comedy...or maybe even a stand up bit
Last edited:
Jaybe
Member
Saw Gameranx and was hoping it would be Jake B. doing the opinion piece. Seems like some new kid. Could only get about a minute in. He seemed to miss the publisher pressure acting like it was the studios themselves that came up with these concepts and pushed to do these lover service games themselves.
Topher
Identifies as young
Yeah, but if you look at the most played games it is the same shit all the time. Call of Duty, Fortnite, Pubg: Battlegrounds, Apex Legends, Destiny 2, etc. Helldivers 2 and Palworld, two of the big hits this year, haven't been able to sustain their popularity. So just breaking into that group is difficult enough, but maintaining that success is even harder. Sooner or late, for a lot of these games, there will be no game once the servers are shut down. For studios like Bioware, they would have been better off just sticking to what they are good at......if the damn publishers would just let them.
Bumblebeetuna
Member
GaaS being stuffed into games where they don’t belong is just a symptom of the profit chasing disease.
DryvBy
Member
I have a friend who thinks this is "leaving money on the table" by not going GaaS and then at the same time complains gaming sucks now.
You're leaving money on the table by not focusing on single player games if you're a single player company. Like this video points out, there's a small piece of the pie to grab. Something like GTA Online isn't going to hit twice. Even Rockstar saw this with RDR2, but at least they were smart enough to include a terrific single player with it.
We saw all of this during the MMO craze. They saw WoW and thought every game should be an MMO. Guaranteed money, right?
It's amazing that companies pay the top brass anything. Every company seems to be ultimate ran by overpaid morons.
You're leaving money on the table by not focusing on single player games if you're a single player company. Like this video points out, there's a small piece of the pie to grab. Something like GTA Online isn't going to hit twice. Even Rockstar saw this with RDR2, but at least they were smart enough to include a terrific single player with it.
We saw all of this during the MMO craze. They saw WoW and thought every game should be an MMO. Guaranteed money, right?
It's amazing that companies pay the top brass anything. Every company seems to be ultimate ran by overpaid morons.
Men_in_Boxes
Banned
Anyone else find it fascinating that these types of videos always cherry pick and NEVER bring up the larger long term trend?
It's almost as if the people running these hyper successful companies know what they're doing.
It's almost as if the people running these hyper successful companies know what they're doing.
Guilty_AI
Member
Last edited:
GymWolf
Member
ProtoByte
Weeb Underling
That piece is extremely lucrative.
Not everyone is R*.
They're not stupid, they're working within their incentive structure.
Helldivers 2 and Palworld weren't on that list until they were, and they were very recent. Yes, they haven't sustained their popularity to the same degree, but they've made a shit ton of money and the former is still doing very, very well for itself.
Unfortunately, it doesn't matter. As long as the possibility of getting some live servive is reasonably perceived, there is going to be someone at these publishers and studios who uses those prospects to get a project going and boost their profile/career. And the companies are going to take the risk because this is a high-risk business anyway, and for a lot of the decision makers, being big and daring is better than being restrained and consistent. Especially when you start taking stock price incentives into account.
Gamers are at primary fault for creating this environment. They wouldn't do this if there wasn't an insane amount of money in it.
Kerotan
Member
That thumbnail is a good choice. Do we just stay in bliss imaginary land addicted to our favourite GAAS or do we wake up and save single player!
Men_in_Boxes
Banned
In the same way Ford, Toyota, and Mercedes don't know cars.
Havoc2049
Member
I agree. The video was crap and he ignored a bunch of recent single player games that have been successfull and other recent live service games that have been successfull. But you need outrage in order to manipulate people and get clicks.
I also like how this Falcon dude tried to shoehorn a recent high profile flop like Redfall into the live service category. Redfall was a single player campaign with a co-op option, nothing more. Redfall had no live service.
What is really killing the industry is inflation, the large number of people it takes to create a game and dev cycles that last like 4-6 years. Making a game, whether it's single player or live service is one big massive money pit.
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
I see one vote for GAAS and imagine my disappointment to see that it's not
Men_in_Boxes
Men_in_Boxes
Last edited:
TintoConCasera
I bought a sex doll, but I keep it inflated 100% of the time and use it like a regular wife
Your favorite Gaas game might be unplayable in a few years once they pull the plug on the server.
If the future is Gaas, it sucks.
If the future is Gaas, it sucks.
Men_in_Boxes
Banned
I'm protesting this poll via non participation as it was not created in good faith. I am the Ghandi of GAAS.I see one vote for GAAS and imagine my disappointment to see that it's not
KyoZz
Tag, you're it.
GAAS are nothing new. I mean technically, Counter Strike is a GAAS, same for Anno 1800 (best game in the series) or many other popular and great games that have been supported for years. So I have nothing against a good GAAS if it means good support.
Problem is studios/editors chasing trends and not knowing what to do with an IP (see Suicide Squad for example) and destroying an universe people loved for years (again, Suicide Squad is a good example with how it shitted on the Arkham Verse).
So no, GAAS are not bad.
Problem is studios/editors chasing trends and not knowing what to do with an IP (see Suicide Squad for example) and destroying an universe people loved for years (again, Suicide Squad is a good example with how it shitted on the Arkham Verse).
So no, GAAS are not bad.
Buggy Loop
Member
GAAS existed before GAAS term was coined
World of Warcraft
Eve online
Counter-Strike
Team Fortress 2
DOTA 2
League of Legends
Final Fantasy XIV
Arma 3
GTA 5 online
Rocket League
Rainbow Six Siege
More recently
Overwatch
Fortnite
Destiny 1 & 2
It's nice that a term exist now for your punching bag stress relief but it's too general to hate. There's bad GAAS for sure, there's also good ones.
World of Warcraft
Eve online
Counter-Strike
Team Fortress 2
DOTA 2
League of Legends
Final Fantasy XIV
Arma 3
GTA 5 online
Rocket League
Rainbow Six Siege
More recently
Overwatch
Fortnite
Destiny 1 & 2
It's nice that a term exist now for your punching bag stress relief but it's too general to hate. There's bad GAAS for sure, there's also good ones.
That doesn't solve the problem of inflated costs. This is the main problem.
As long as players want to play the same thing over and over again, meaning open world action/adventure that has to fill all the boxes (action, RPG, stealth, exploration with beautiful and vast environments, 30 hours long story with a lot of cutscenes), thinking we're going to reach the objective ultimate video game experience with 200 hours of meaningful content, single player games are dead.
Funny to make it look like publishers are for the first time in history pushing studios to do something they rather not do. Every studio started to make shooters during the 7th gen, then open world bloated crap during 8th gen, because more money was involved and players (for the most part) made it absolutely clear they didn't want to buy different things.
As long as players want to play the same thing over and over again, meaning open world action/adventure that has to fill all the boxes (action, RPG, stealth, exploration with beautiful and vast environments, 30 hours long story with a lot of cutscenes), thinking we're going to reach the objective ultimate video game experience with 200 hours of meaningful content, single player games are dead.
Funny to make it look like publishers are for the first time in history pushing studios to do something they rather not do. Every studio started to make shooters during the 7th gen, then open world bloated crap during 8th gen, because more money was involved and players (for the most part) made it absolutely clear they didn't want to buy different things.
Guilty_AI
Member
Try Plymouth, Hummer, Oldsmobile and Pontiac
TGO
Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
I prefer a Single Player game that will leave an impression on me for years to come and be fondly remembered and loved 20 years later and even remade and outshine newer GaaS games because it was that damn good.
Rather then a shitty GaaS game I will forget about in a month
Rather then a shitty GaaS game I will forget about in a month
Heaven Angel
Member
The chances of atleast recoup a decent amount is becoming negligible each day for many other gaas titles. Now these titles have to keep up with the other gaas games to compete and maintain a selective player base which is the real struggle. Both genre makes shit ton of money if the game's hit but devs who pursue SP titles will move on to making a better and trending titles, while the gaas one will HAVE to stay and keep on catering the old and dated one.
Similar threads
- Poll