AAA titles gone bad. Bad writing, bad gameplay would attract more attention.
Devs should learn from Larian Studios' advice.
It's really funny that one of the most popular live service game in recent memory comes from a small team (Helldivers 2). I guess that's what happens you make a good game though.
How would one even make a live service game of god of war anyways? Wtf is Sony doing lol
Out of the big three Sony somehow feels like they are the most run by complete out-of-touch corporate charts people nowadays.
This is what happens when your only direct competition shits the bed for 15 years straight so hard that you can get away with incompetence and shitbaggery without it ever meaningfully impacting you.
The real issue is they want to shove every round peg into the square hole of live service to try and get that sweet sweet monetization even when it makes no sense.
I actually genuinely unironically believe that live service is the best option by far for fighting games in the future though. Make it free with a rotating available roster and then charge for a perma unlock and then monetize the hell out of skins/intros/cosmetics. Really excited for 2xko.
I actually genuinely unironically believe that live service is the best option by far for fighting games in the future though. Make it free with a rotating available roster and then charge for a perma unlock and then monetize the hell out of skins/intros/cosmetics.
I'm like 50/50 on this.
One of the 50s I think it's a good way to get more people into fighters without the commitment of cost, just the commitment of time and execution. As I guy who totally understand why most people aren't willing to spend their hard earned money on a fighting game that doesn't even teach you how to play (I genuinely think most fighters have dropped the ball on teaching players and I say this as guy who digs fighters). With a F2P model I can see people getting a decent roaster of characters to play and learn their mechanics and match-ups.
On the other 50s I think F2P model just leaves room for way too much piecemeal gameplay. I think about how Street Fighter V for example had the bare minimum for a good long while. SFV was a pretty mismanaged game for the most part; it didn't even feel good until Champion Edition and that was at the end of the lifecycle. Looking at SF6 by extension the sheer amount of things to buy and stores and gems and currencies get in the way of an otherwise S-tier fighter in my book.
I think F2P fighters may turn into Halo Infinite. Where the core gameplay is really solid and good, but the there is way too much bullshit in-between the player and the game.
Really excited for 2xko.
Same. I played the Beta, it ruled.
Paradox still has the best model in my opinion. The DLC cost is wild if you're buying it outside of a steam sale as a new player, but I bought Victoria 3 as soon as I could at $50. It was a flawed foundation that I saw immense potential in. I've bought all the $20~ major DLCs since while avoiding the cosmetic ones. I know they're going to refine it into a near-perfect grand strategy game for about 10 years if I spend $20-40 per year on those major DLCs. Half-assed weekly updates don't benefit me at all compared to the difference between 1.7-1.8 Victoria 3 happening months apart.
The nice thing about that model is that you can pick and choose which expansions to get. Stellaris is my "gap game" that I play when there's nothing new that I'm interested in, so I return to it every couple of months. There have generally been a few new DLCs released between my runs through it; some of them are interesting to me, and some aren't. I get what's interesting, and even if there's nothing new that I want, I still benefit from new versions and mechanical updates. Making the DLCs a la carte like that means that they have to deliver enough new content to make them look worth it. I can't imagine just paying a flat monthly fee to mostly get cosmetics and dogshit new "missions" or whatever.
