Support NeoGAF

[StreetsofBeige]

Why did factions have to be a service game. Why not just a normal online game. Why did ND feel it should be gaas or nothing at all.

Because probably every shooter made the past 10 years is GAAS in some sort. Even if it's a mode within a game, a game that has a price tag, or a F2P game. GAAS e-transactions will be there in your face and they'll milk it as long as possible.

Once the industry realized any game or mode (I dont know which game started off nickel and diming mtx, because back then it was $10-20 DLC expansion packs, map packs and bigger content stuff once in a while) can nickel and dime gamers from anything from new 99 cent skins every week to uber rare $99.99 spaceships or uber armour, there's no turning back.

Maybe some indie games who dont have the scale can have a barebones online modes and be happy. But pretty much any decently sized company or game with online modes will go balls deep monetizing as much as possible.

 

[Neolombax]

So who do we hate more today GAF? Bungie or GaaS?

 

[Shits_McGiggles]

it's pretty obvious that The Last of Us Factions development was not going well regardless of Bungie's input.

 

[Fake]

Mix of incompetence and reality check.

Its keep getting better.

 

[N30RYU]

To be honest... a Factions Gaas game had the potencial to be amazing if done like Helldivers 2... just hop in to gather some resources completing missions... play coop against milicia to gather ammo... play coop against infected to gather food... and play competitive defending an hospital to gather medicines... unlocking habilities and weapons just like Helldivers 2 do...

 

[March Climber]

Bungie .... were the good guys?

What a fucken plot twist man. After I spent all this time slagging them off and slating them.

*slowly looking up towards the camera*

I guess we were the villains all along…

FIN.

 

[Generic]

The difference is that Naughty Dog knows how to make good multiplayer.

 

[Roman Empire]

AWhat a fucken plot twist man. After I spent all this time slagging them off and slating them.

*slowly looking up towards the camera*

I guess we were the villains all along…

FIN.

 

[CLW]

So Bungie are now Naughty Dog advisors. When will they make a game themselves.

About the same timeframe that the remaster studio does a new IP

 

[TheDreadLord]

I could have given the same advice for a few bucks.

 

[AmuroChan]

Why couldn't they give the same advice for Concord?

Because Firewalk is a team built to make live service games. Most of their talent come from an online shooter background. ND, on the other hand, is clearly a single player game developer. So it make sense for ND to stick with what they're best at.

 

[FeralEcho]

Naughty dog cant think for themselves?

Anita Sarkeesian wasn't available at the time to fill Neil Cuckman's thoughts with valuable insight like she did for Part2.

 

[Tiago Rodrigues]

Sony bought Bungie for $4b so Bungie could tell Naughty Dog to not make a GaaS?

Worth the price.

 

[BouncyFrag]

Bungie:

 

[Perrott]

The difference is that Naughty Dog knows how to make good multiplayer.

They knew how to make a team deathmatch that met the standards of PS3 era optional multiplayer modes.

That experience is worth nothing when tackling a live-service game, and proof of that is how hard Bungie had it when trying to maintain a steady cadence of content drops for Destiny 1 in spite of coming off the original run of Halo games, which gave birth to console online gaming as we know it today, and having back then double the amount of employees Naughty Dog currently has - not to mention that they were all focused on a single project.

 

[vaibhavpisal]

Naughty Dog would've crashed and burned trying to make a full GAAS title.

I still would've preferred some small title coming out of it.

 

[Barakov]

Sounds like pretty great advice. If they ever make Destiny 3 with a Halo-like campaign and multiplayer I'm sure that more than a few people would okay with it.

Unfortunately, seems like Destiny is stuck with the GAAS model for now.

 

[BlackTron]

Tip for ND employees anytime a Bungie employee butts into your office telling you what to do about GAAS.

Dont listen to them. Your studio makes solid games and Factions 1 was a good mode too. Bungie is a trainwreck, almost in the red (losing money) and had to ditch 375 (about 30%) of workers in layoffs and shifting to Sony studios. Never take advice from losers.

They only egged you on to cancel so Factions 2 wouldnt compete with their GAAS games. If Bungie and the rest of the GAAS overseers really knew what they were doing Concord would be releasing in 3 weeks in its current laughable state.

You seem like too smart a dude to say all that based on the thread title. Bungie didn't tell them to cancel it, members of Bungie did their job for Sony assessing the game -Sony wanted live service experts remember.

ND made a decision to cancel based on this info, specifically the realization that supporting the game, even post-launch, would consume so much resources they could no longer maintain their SP game development. Thus "going all in". They chose not to do this.

Bungie may be in shambles but they do have live service experience and a still successful title (Destiny). The people who advised the real cost of realizing ND's vision most likely did their job correctly.

 

[Shakka43]

 

[ergem]

The original Factions had some real scummy monetization but it's an amazing experience that lots of people still play today, and it didn't require all of ND's resources. It was included with a long and well received single player game.

They should have retooled it into something more like the original, something that could stand on its own and doesn't need massive resources as a service game like Destiny.

Launch the game, sell some expansions and skins, give out new maps, done. You can still make money doing that.

And The Last of Us Part 3 will have longer legs selling at higher price if it has a fun and active multiplayer built-in. I believe this to be the case with GoT.

Whatever they did with Factions 2 would certainly repurposed for TLoU P3 MP.

 

[ergem]

To be honest... a Factions Gaas game had the potencial to be amazing if done like Helldivers 2... just hop in to gather some resources completing missions... play coop against milicia to gather ammo... play coop against infected to gather food... and play competitive defending an hospital to gather medicines... unlocking habilities and weapons just like Helldivers 2 do...

This sounds awesome. I hope they include an MP mode like this for the Part 3.

They can sell skins and DLC but they shouldn't go all-in on GaaS.

 

[Physiognomonics]

75% of people posting in this forum could have gave them the same advice. You just don't do full GAAS. Just keep doing what you do well.

 

[The_Observer]

How much retardedness this industry and the world generally can take? Who thought that it would be good idea to chase gaas bullshit for the studio that is among if not the best in making story-driven single player games, while seeing that 90% of these gaas shits are flops? I can't even anymore…

 

[M1chl]

Just a tip then

 

[Perrott]

How much retardedness this industry and the world generally can take? Who thought that it would be good idea to chase gaas bullshit for the studio that is among if not the best in making story-driven single player games, while seeing that 90% of these gaas shits are flops? I can't even anymore…

It was no one's "idea".

Some Naughty Dog developers wanted to deliver on their unfulfilled promises of a multiplayer mode for The Last Of Us Part II via a more ambitious, standalone title; and SIE producers in North America said "why not?", as such product was aligned with the company's desire to put together a slate of live-service projects for PS5.

The whole situation emerged naturally from both the creative and business desires of all parties involved...

... but none of them saw it coming how the project would end up growing so dramatically in scale - to the point that Naughty Dog described it as their biggest game ever - and, since Sony had little experience with live-services, no one was able to asses the impact that the studio's growing ambitious would end up having in their ability to even release and then support The Last Of Us Online long-term. And by the time Bungie was brought into the fold and were able to review the project, the game was exiting pre-production and gearing towards full production, so there wasn't the chance to course-correct and adjust the scope of this... gigantic endeavor.

And while you're right in pointing out that the majority of live-service games don't end up sticking to the wall, in this case, and from what we've heard about it, The Last Of Us Online was shaping up to be a tremendous title and, knowing Naughty Dog's pedigree, it may have turned out to be the highest quality multiplayer game to ever come out... but would that have been worth knowing that it had to come at the expense of all other singleplayer titles in development at Naughty Dog? That's the question Sony and the studio ultimately asked themselves, and their answer was no.

 

[Mr Moose]

Look, Dog, we don't need the competition. Stop that shit now.

Good.

 

[kainslayer]

Probably because it's easier to render cause he's drunk and lazy

 

[Radical_3d]

Bungie .... were the good guys?

 

[Mibu no ookami]

And The Last of Us Part 3 will have longer legs selling at higher price if it has a fun and active multiplayer built-in. I believe this to be the case with GoT.

Whatever they did with Factions 2 would certainly repurposed for TLoU P3 MP.

People just assume a canceled game gets thrown in the trash. The belief that those assets won't be used lines up with their agenda so it must be true.

 

[onQ123]

Why couldn't they give the same advice for Concord?

Because Firewalk or whatever their names were was nobodies in the industry.