Support NeoGAF

[King Dazzar]

An echochamber doesn't mean consensus. It just means it's not representative of reality.

An echo chamber is "an environment where a person only encounters information or opinions that reflect and reinforce their own." Hence my points around a wide variety of takes here.

 

[SportsFan581]

We'll get the single player games we've been getting with a now added extra focus on multiplayer games. If the latter really wasn't what the players wanted, they wouldn't be as successful as they are.

That's true to a point. On the flip side you could say that the multiplayer games of today are as financially successful as they are in large part because of the coercion techniques they employ and the addictive nature of the monitization strategy included.

It will be interesting to see what the kids growing up on these games think of gaming in 20 years. Are they building a lasting connection to the medium or do they view gaming as something easily thrown away?

I have no problem with GaaS games being out there, the problem is more about how the corporations are swiftly dropping everything else but these initiatives. They don't give a passing thought to whether or not they destroy themselves down the road if they can make a buck in the here and now.

 

[Miyazaki’s Slave]

The Switch is a handheld and no serious player in the home console market. Just look at its 3rd party support… or lack thereof.

 

[RickMasters]

Switch and PlayStation are two very different things (I honestly dont see Switch as a 'home' console, we have three of the things and we never use them on the TV, yes, I know other people will do that but its a 'handheld' that you can plug into the TV), they arent fighting for the same market (maybe Switch 2 will, but I doubt it)

But I do agree that the likes of Switch existing and even PC that it should keep Sony in check as there are other options out there if they mess up.

I think this is what some people forget. Switch 2 will be yet another Nintendo console that technology wise a gen behind. The PS will be the only high end console. It will be interesting to see how that dynamic plays out. Neither compete directly so I guess there will be some sort of duopoly where neither has to push eachother. Because they are not directly competing with other or aiming for the same demographics.

 

[Glass Prison]

That's true to a point. On the flip side you could say that the multiplayer games of today are as financially successful as they are in large part because of the coercion techniques they employ and the addictive nature of the monitization strategy included.

It will be interesting to see what the kids growing up on these games think of gaming in 20 years. Are they building a lasting connection to the medium or do they view gaming as something easily thrown away?

I have no problem with GaaS games being out there, the problem is more about how the corporations are swiftly dropping everything else but these initiatives. They don't give a passing thought to whether or not they destroy themselves down the road if they can make a buck in the here and now.

This is the exact same concern I have on this whole subject as well.
Companies are banking on gambling addiction to make money these days, instead of providing great and memorable experiences. It's not sustainable.

 

[mayham2199]

instead of providing great and memorable experiences. It's not sustainable.

We've literally had tons of top AAA SP titles released. So many that I can't possibly keep up. I think plenty of companies are providing great memorable experiences.

 

[clarky]

I understand that "hitting the jackpot" and having one game making billions a year is every company's wet dream. However, it's very clear that consumers just don't want that.

Sony wasted their entire PS4 success and complete hype for the PS5 due to them trying to make a live service game happen. The reason the PS4 succeeded, was not because the Xbox One failed, of course that gave them a huge advantage, but it was because Sony created a constant flow of great games, accompanied by a constant flow of third party games. Which in turned continued their PS3 success at creating several new and successful IPs.

This time, Sony's PS Studios is practically dried out. No announcements, no events, no games. You might say that they have released amazing games like Spiderman 2, Ratchet and Clank, etc. but by this time on PS3 and PS4 lifespan, they already had much more games and new IPs. Where are the new IPs this generation from Sony?

I believe it was in 2022 that Sony announced several games, and what did all have in common? There all were Live Service: Helldivers 2, Concord, Fairgames. It's like Sony is trying to become Ubisoft.

Xbox also is trying to make Gamepass work. While it's understandable that they focus on a way to make money since their consoles have failed to sell, their first intention is so that the consumer doesn't have any control of whatever they purchase. Sony, Microsoft, Ubisoft, EA, etc. want to make the cake and eat it, too.

Nintendo's huge success should be their wake up call to notice that traditional way of gaming is what people want. Why else would the Switch sell more than 120 million consoles? Everyone is complaining that games have become so expensive, but do you think that Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, which is the best selling game on Switch, or BOTW were $300 million budget games? Of course not! Nintendo is spending a much less than every other company, and selling 10 times more.

While it would be so awesome that a company has a billion dollar game, they haven't realized that GaaS games are the exact same thing as Netflix in the following regard: Netflix was successful because it had practically EVERYTHING. Once everyone wanted a piece and removed content to make their own service, it fragemented the market and it didn't work. ONE live service game works, having 30 live service games doesn't. People can't play all of them, and if one guy spends $500 on one game, he won't spend $500 in each of the 30 games that exist. But somehow those companies believe he will!

They also tried to make gaming become like mobile when mobile was so successful, and what happened? It wasn't possible! The same is going to happen to live service games. All of this is affecting their financials, it's affecting employees and consumers, but they are unwilling to back out.

Gaming needs to retract a lot. It need to become smaller again. They all started making open world games like if every game had to be a GTA, and that's why it has become so expensive. They believe that games now need to be AAA Hollywood productions, when Nintendo is proving them wrong since 2017, and I bet the Nintendo Switch 2 will be as successful for this same reason. Other company that has proved them wrong this gen is Capcom.

I remember that many players started complaining about 8 hour games during the PS3/360 gen. Maybe this is why companies started to make open world games. But right now, is not about making games shorter, but they need to be more compact. Not every world needs to be 3,000 miles wide.

Stealth Helldivers 2 marketing?

 

[semiconscious]

I understand that "hitting the jackpot" and having one game making billions a year is every company's wet dream. However, it's very clear that consumers just don't want that...

the idea that game publishers are fundamentally behaving just like people who spend the family's grocery money on lottery tickets is pretty damn disturbing, eh? as is the fact that, once started down this path, it becomes harder to quit every day (as in, 'all this money already spent, it can't all be for nothing!'). it's all very miserable, desperate, & sad...

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

This thread is wild.

 

[Glass Prison]

We've literally had tons of top AAA SP titles released. So many that I can't possibly keep up. I think plenty of companies are providing great memorable experiences.

I never mentioned anything about Triple A single player games.

What I'm saying is that those companies seeking the GaaS model are mostly banking on gambling addiction to retain its players, instead of memorable experiences. Time and time again we're seeing these half-assed releases purely designed to make money through battlepasses and whatnot.

 

[cash_longfellow]

I wish all that is holy that Battlefield goes back to the premium pass with like 16 maps over time for like $50 extra on top of the game. I would even be okay with live service and battle passes after that. I’m fully on board with GAAS, if it’s done as an add on to extension styles of the past. I think every gamer here on Gaf would be okay with dropping $50 on map packs again….them GAAS add ons like battle passes and time limited game modes, etc, would be so much more accepted in the community. The thing we hate is that the content drops all but disappeared. Dropping one new map per season is a terrible business plan. Give us season passes with guaranteed additions especially maps, and you would be incredibly surprised about how many players would drop money on the battle passes and other dlcs. As it stands, GAAS is trash because the value is bullshit. Bring all this back and adjust the GAAS portion of things and everyone wins.

 

[RCU005]

No one has said their new strategy is GaaS instead of single player games. It's additive.

That is not true. During PS4, budget for single player games was about 80%, while other games was 20%. Right now, live service game is about 70% and single player games 30%.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

That is not true. During PS4, budget for single player games was about 80%, while other games was 20%. Right now, live service game is about 70% and single player games 30%.

 

[Loomy]

That is not true. During PS4, budget for single player games was about 80%, while other games was 20%. Right now, live service game is about 70% and single player games 30%.

That is simply not true. Not even remotely close to being true. As you can see, the budget for traditional content is not going down. It is actually going up. The budget for live service games is higher because this is, essentially, seed investment. They're pumping a lot of money into it to get it started.

 

[RCU005]

That is simply not true. Not even remotely close to being true. As you can see, the budget for traditional content is not going down. It is actually going up. The budget for live service games is higher because this is, essentially, seed investment. They're pumping a lot of money into it to get it started.

How is it not true? Did you see your own attached graph? Investment for traditional games in 2019 was 88%, it's now 45% (it's now down 43%)! Live service was 12%, it's now 55% ( now more than traditional games). I was wrong in it being 70%, but it's clear that they have full intention to invest more into live service games, and you can bet this will keep increasing.

 

[Loomy]

How is it not true? Did you see your own attached graph? Investment for traditional games in 2019 was 88%, it's now 45% (it's now down 43%)! Live service was 12%, it's now 55% ( now more than traditional games). I was wrong in it being 70%, but it's clear that they have full intention to invest more into live service games, and you can bet this will keep increasing.

That is because in 2019 the only Live Service game Playstation was publishing was MLB The Show. So of course most of their money would be going to single player experiences. But as you can see on the graph, the dark blue portion in FY25 is bigger than the dark blue portion in FY19. More money is being spent on traditional games today than it was in 2019.

 

[Felessan]

The fact of the matter is that the industry can only support a few GaaS games at a time. Yes, a small amount are hugely successful, but it’s always a small amount.

We already have mobile space, crowded with gaas, to evaluate. Small amount that self-sustainable is around.... one hundred I think? One hundred is already a lot. And number actually growing over time as gaas goes through genre diversification and niche games appear.

How is it not true? Did you see your own attached graph? Investment for traditional games in 2019 was 88%, it's now 45% (it's now down 43%)! Live service was 12%, it's now 55% ( now more than traditional games). I was wrong in it being 70%, but it's clear that they have full intention to invest more into live service games, and you can bet this will keep increasing.

It is additive as was stated above. Not "instead".
The share changed but not because AAA was replaced by GAAS, but because a huge money were added to GAAS. AAA share in absolute terms (money) remained the same.

 

[yurinka]

I understand that "hitting the jackpot" and having one game making billions a year is every company's wet dream. However, it's very clear that consumers just don't want that.

Sony wasted their entire PS4 success and complete hype for the PS5 due to them trying to make a live service game happen. The reason the PS4 succeeded, was not because the Xbox One failed, of course that gave them a huge advantage, but it was because Sony created a constant flow of great games, accompanied by a constant flow of third party games. Which in turned continued their PS3 success at creating several new and successful IPs.

This time, Sony's PS Studios is practically dried out. No announcements, no events, no games. You might say that they have released amazing games like Spiderman 2, Ratchet and Clank, etc. but by this time on PS3 and PS4 lifespan, they already had much more games and new IPs. Where are the new IPs this generation from Sony?

I believe it was in 2022 that Sony announced several games, and what did all have in common? There all were Live Service: Helldivers 2, Concord, Fairgames. It's like Sony is trying to become Ubisoft.

Xbox also is trying to make Gamepass work. While it's understandable that they focus on a way to make money since their consoles have failed to sell, their first intention is so that the consumer doesn't have any control of whatever they purchase. Sony, Microsoft, Ubisoft, EA, etc. want to make the cake and eat it, too.

Nintendo's huge success should be their wake up call to notice that traditional way of gaming is what people want. Why else would the Switch sell more than 120 million consoles? Everyone is complaining that games have become so expensive, but do you think that Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, which is the best selling game on Switch, or BOTW were $300 million budget games? Of course not! Nintendo is spending a much less than every other company, and selling 10 times more.

While it would be so awesome that a company has a billion dollar game, they haven't realized that GaaS games are the exact same thing as Netflix in the following regard: Netflix was successful because it had practically EVERYTHING. Once everyone wanted a piece and removed content to make their own service, it fragemented the market and it didn't work. ONE live service game works, having 30 live service games doesn't. People can't play all of them, and if one guy spends $500 on one game, he won't spend $500 in each of the 30 games that exist. But somehow those companies believe he will!

They also tried to make gaming become like mobile when mobile was so successful, and what happened? It wasn't possible! The same is going to happen to live service games. All of this is affecting their financials, it's affecting employees and consumers, but they are unwilling to back out.

Gaming needs to retract a lot. It need to become smaller again. They all started making open world games like if every game had to be a GTA, and that's why it has become so expensive. They believe that games now need to be AAA Hollywood productions, when Nintendo is proving them wrong since 2017, and I bet the Nintendo Switch 2 will be as successful for this same reason. Other company that has proved them wrong this gen is Capcom.

I remember that many players started complaining about 8 hour games during the PS3/360 gen. Maybe this is why companies started to make open world games. But right now, is not about making games shorter, but they need to be more compact. Not every world needs to be 3,000 miles wide.

You are totally disconected from the gaming market and have no idea how it works. The majority of the game revenue, more than the half, comes from mobile. Mobile also has the majority of the playerbase. Basically all mobile gaming is live services. Out of top 25-50 most played and top grossing games on PC, Xbox and PS, most of them are GaaS.

It's what it works, what the majority players prefer to play. This is the reason of why companies chase this. It people would prefer to play Tetris-like puzzle games, companies would chase this instead.

 

[Heaven Angel]

SINGLE PLAYER games FTW.
Without it there's nothing to like about console/pc gaming.

 

[MatrixReloaded101]

I understand that "hitting the jackpot" and having one game making billions a year is every company's wet dream. However, it's very clear that consumers just don't want that.

Sony wasted their entire PS4 success and complete hype for the PS5 due to them trying to make a live service game happen. The reason the PS4 succeeded, was not because the Xbox One failed, of course that gave them a huge advantage, but it was because Sony created a constant flow of great games, accompanied by a constant flow of third party games. Which in turned continued their PS3 success at creating several new and successful IPs.

This time, Sony's PS Studios is practically dried out. No announcements, no events, no games. You might say that they have released amazing games like Spiderman 2, Ratchet and Clank, etc. but by this time on PS3 and PS4 lifespan, they already had much more games and new IPs. Where are the new IPs this generation from Sony?

I believe it was in 2022 that Sony announced several games, and what did all have in common? There all were Live Service: Helldivers 2, Concord, Fairgames. It's like Sony is trying to become Ubisoft.

Xbox also is trying to make Gamepass work. While it's understandable that they focus on a way to make money since their consoles have failed to sell, their first intention is so that the consumer doesn't have any control of whatever they purchase. Sony, Microsoft, Ubisoft, EA, etc. want to make the cake and eat it, too.

Nintendo's huge success should be their wake up call to notice that traditional way of gaming is what people want. Why else would the Switch sell more than 120 million consoles? Everyone is complaining that games have become so expensive, but do you think that Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, which is the best selling game on Switch, or BOTW were $300 million budget games? Of course not! Nintendo is spending a much less than every other company, and selling 10 times more.

While it would be so awesome that a company has a billion dollar game, they haven't realized that GaaS games are the exact same thing as Netflix in the following regard: Netflix was successful because it had practically EVERYTHING. Once everyone wanted a piece and removed content to make their own service, it fragemented the market and it didn't work. ONE live service game works, having 30 live service games doesn't. People can't play all of them, and if one guy spends $500 on one game, he won't spend $500 in each of the 30 games that exist. But somehow those companies believe he will!

They also tried to make gaming become like mobile when mobile was so successful, and what happened? It wasn't possible! The same is going to happen to live service games. All of this is affecting their financials, it's affecting employees and consumers, but they are unwilling to back out.

Gaming needs to retract a lot. It need to become smaller again. They all started making open world games like if every game had to be a GTA, and that's why it has become so expensive. They believe that games now need to be AAA Hollywood productions, when Nintendo is proving them wrong since 2017, and I bet the Nintendo Switch 2 will be as successful for this same reason. Other company that has proved them wrong this gen is Capcom.

I remember that many players started complaining about 8 hour games during the PS3/360 gen. Maybe this is why companies started to make open world games. But right now, is not about making games shorter, but they need to be more compact. Not every world needs to be 3,000 miles wide.

I agree that it does make sense to make shorter games because that would cut budgets and we would get more games faster. However, this won’t happen because these publishers know most people will not spend $70 for 6-15 hour single player games. There is also a major lack of support for most single player games nowadays, just look at the new Dead Space for example. Great game but it didn’t sell well. Recently, people went nuts about Tango Games being closed but when you look at the numbers, their games just didn’t sell well. Hi Fi Rush did not sell well even when they put it on PlayStation recently.

A lot of the reason games got bigger was to justify the $60 price which is now $70. Also you have to look at the younger audience, they love GaaS games, we don’t want to admit it but it’s the truth. Just look at the revenue for games like Fortnite, Roblox, etc. Gaming has become a major social hobby for kids today which is one of the main reasons these GaaS games make so much money.

Lastly, stop comparing everything to Nintendo. IMO Nintendo has a market that no one else can tap into, they have legacy IP like Mario, they are a no brainer platform for parents looking to buy consoles/games for kids, the tech is so outdated that they can pump out games cheaper and faster compared to the other platforms and their audience doesn’t care. This is a huge advantage that people miss for some reason. For example, for PS5/Series X games players want 60FPS and multiple graphic options day one plus all the other stuff. God of War Ragnarok for example is a great looking game but people complain about it “not looking next gen enough”.

The bar is just higher in terms of tech for every other platform holder except Nintendo IMO so it makes no sense to compare them to anyone else.

 

[SportsFan581]

I never mentioned anything about Triple A single player games.

What I'm saying is that those companies seeking the GaaS model are mostly banking on gambling addiction to retain its players, instead of memorable experiences. Time and time again we're seeing these half-assed releases purely designed to make money through battlepasses and whatnot.

If they are determined to go this way, all we can hope for is that they find a way to fleece players from within more traditional games. At least that would preserve all the genres.