Cute way of trying to walk away with some sort of victory. If you feel so confident that you are right feel free to alter the Wikipedia articles:
We weren't allowed to site wikipidia as a source in my middle school. That's 6th, 7th, and 8th grade because it's comprised of user (not expert) content.Cute way of trying to walk away with some sort of victory. If you feel so confident that you are right feel free to alter the Wikipedia articles:
Live service game - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
as a service - Wikipedia
Once you edits have been accepted do let me know, I'd be happy to use you definition for the GaaS business model.
Gaas and Live Service is the same as far as I'm concerned.
They made a lot of money upfront when NMS released I believe and have something like >£140mil in cash. In 2021/2022 respectively they made £18mil and £32mil in profit. They're a small, efficient studio (about 45 employees last I checked) and seem to have it figured out without any need for monetisation. Constant big updates, constant sales and being available across many platforms probably helps too.
There's nothing saying updates have to be free (plenty of games in this bucket monetized those too*).
I definitely have games like that and it seems a lot of people have that opinion with this game, which is great.
I personally don't want multiplayer. Unless its so sparsely populated that it wouldn't matter, but then they do that and they make it mandatory or not fun for single player. Nah keep it the way it is. That is the last thing I want. To be hounded by some douche blasting shitty rap music in the game with a ship decked in weed logos. Nah I don't want this turning into cod or fortnite.
There's so many unexplored shades of PvP that grafting on "Fortnite or CoD" to NMS doesn't make sense. You could discourage PvP with reputation / bounty system so that participating in it is only encouraged in specific scenarios. You could limit it to certain classifications of planets. The canvas is waiting to be explored there and I doubt Hello Games would just turn it into a Fortnite or CoD. Multiplayer is the next frontier of this medium and No Man's Sky looks brilliant to work from.
I would say the LIVE part of Live Service points to an ever evolving game where the developers don't leave the player after launch. To me, that's the entire brilliance of the concept.
But it is - monetising the service doesn't have to be done through microtransactions. Micros are popular because they happen to be the most profitable (usually), not because they define GaaS. The defining characteristic of a service is they live and die on having active and engaged userbase, not how much money they extract from it.
Which can also be a path to success in of itself - Minecraft followed the exact same model (while it was independent), and that became the best selling game of its time as result.
There is a small point A to B to C type of main quest with some story and there is some story bits for your base workers. But it's not a RPG and the exploration is very limited unless you mean checking out different planets. The main gameplay is crafting and building and finding resources, upgrading your suit and tools and ship is a big focus too.
I wasn't aware this forum was an academic institution. But anyway:
www.helpshift.com
www.keywordsstudios.com
People are playing it on PC on Twitch. Not sure if consoles have been updated yet.
The word service already had a definition for decades, maybe centuries.I wasn't aware this forum was an academic institution. But anyway:
Games as a Service (GaaS): What is it and Its Examples
Explore the world of Games as a Service (GaaS) game and how it revolutionizes gaming. Discover basics of what it is and how it works in our latest blog.
The Future of Live Service Games: Games as a Service - Keywords Studios Limited
Mark Sorrell, Studio Design Director at Lively, a Keywords Studio, discusses the future of the Games as a Service (GaaS) model and its potential transition into a service model of its own.
In the IT and gaming sector it is well known what 'as a service' business model refers to. Trying to change the definition of it to somehow sound more palatable is not going to work.
By your definition any game that gets updates/patches is a GaaS. Just on top of my head, Portal 2 is sill getting patches after 10+ years. Does that make Portal 2 a GaaS? Is Elden Ring a GaaS? It did receive an expansion and currently it's getting gameplay changing balance updates and fixes.
There's obviously a grey area as we enter into this new era of gaming. You found it here. On the flip side, was Fortnite Battle Royale NOT a Live Service before adding their shop despite getting content updates for the first couple of months?
I think the general accepted consensus seems to be a regular cadence of content updates makes the game GAAS.
Once a lion dies, does it make it not a lion? I don't really understand your question. Knockout City was obviously a GAAS. Now that it's not recieving content updates or selling anything in its store...it just makes it a dead GAAS title.
So by your definition, No Man's Sky is also "old style"
Grey area but I feel the valuable aspect of No Mans Sky isn't the "play forever" aspect, which doesn't really benefit the player, but the steady stream of content updates that improve on the game.So by your definition, No Man's Sky is also "old style"
Your definition is too broad. Literally any modern game fits.
In what way being able to play a game forever isn't "beneficial for the player"? Owning something forever and having full control over it after you buy it is one of the biggest benefits of that transaction. It's the one thing they are trying to take away from the consumer when they force online DRM to games and it's the main reason they want the future of gaming to be subscription/streaming only.
I don't think so. It's relatively easy to distinguish between old style games and GAAS as many games do not have ongoing developer support. No one considers Elden Ring or Spiderman 2 to be GAAS despite a few spotty patches or one or two DLCs planned post launch. A regular cadence is key.
Agreed.
So most of the console multiplayer games that were prevalent from 2002 to 2012 were GAAS / Live Service to you? Despite the lack of regular content updates in most of them? That seems strange.
I feel like we already have classifications for those types of games. "Online only DRM single player".
I know nobody considers Elden Ring as GaaS but you do, by your own definition. I'm just explaining how your broad reasoning is wrong, since it includes Elden Ring.
Content updates is irrelevant. All games (GaaS or not) can get those. Like Portal 2 or Elden Ring. What matters is whether or not the games are still functional once the service has stopped.
Not as strange as considering Portal 2 and Elden Ring being GaaS.
No publisher has ever given this classification to their games. It's just an observation made by the consumers and it 100% damning.
I already said, the games are functional only as long as the service is live. That's what "live service" means. You are getting served something until you don't. Once the service stops because the game is not profitable anymore or because the publisher closes shop or whatever, the game is not functional anymore, the service ended, you can't play it anymore because they are not serving the game to you. That's one of the key characteristics of GaaS.
No I don't. There isn't a steady cadence of content updates from those games. My definition addresses that.
The single greatest aspect of GAAS can not be considered irrelevant.
I suspect you can trace the origins to both terms to come from publishers / developers and not gamers.
But nobody considers the multiplayer games from the PS2 and PS3 generations to be Live Service/GAAS. Those terms became popular in the last 5 - 10 years as developers started planning regular content updates for their titles.
The single key characteristic of GAAS, and why they're superior to the multiplayer games from earlier generations, is the fact that developers stick with them rather than bouncing once they launch. To deny as much is to fabricate your own reality. Isn't that boring?
Why should he stop? I get free content and updates for a game released forever ago.
I know, last time I've played it was in 2020, I enjoyed it a lot but I am waiting for a definitive version.
Define "steady cadence of content updates" because Elden Ring is definitely getting those right now.
Yes, it's 100% irrelevant in this discussion because it does not define GaaS, since non-GaaS games also get updates and support. You need to find something unique to GaaS to characterize them as such.
You said it yourself. It's a newer characterization. Nobody was saying SOTN is a "Metroidvania" until many years later.
Devs stick with their games as long as they are profitable to them. Is there a certain time frame where a game becomes GaaS? Because plenty of older games were supported for long enough for you to consider them as GaaS. If Fantasy Star online on the DC was released today, you would say it's GaaS since you wouldn't know how long it would last.
So games only receive the "GaaS" title only after a certain amount of years? That means no game can be GaaS initially but only after some time down the road? You can't predict the future after all.
I can't respond to the rest of your post when it starts out this silly.
Ah, gotcha. No arguments then?
But it does. Version 1.12.3 was just 2 weeks ago. And that's a 2 year old game.
No but you seem to do.
Why not? Didn't they use to "receive a steady cadence of content updates" when they were live?
Don't be angry whenever someone corners you.
The new player experience was overhauled a long time ago, it now has a full multiplayer hub where you can pick up missions and complete them with other people, as well as about 3 main storylines, the building storyline where you slowly unlock more and more items to build with, a whole bunch of additions for ships, faction missions, it's got a ton of content now
It has a free upgrade to the PS5 version on the PS Store, you just need to have your PS4 disc in the drive when you play it
