Over the years, there’ve been various red flags in gaming, for me at least. Multi-media. Full-Motion Video. Day-One DLC. Microtransactions. The latest one is Live Service Game. I find the idea repulsive because it immediately tells me this is an online-required affair, even if it doesn’t warrant it. There’s no reason for some games to require an internet connection when the vast majority of activities they provide can be done in a single-player fashion. So I suspect Live Service Game to be less of a commitment to truly providing updated worthwhile content and more about DRM. Instead of imposing Denuvo or some other loathed 3rd party layer on your software, why not just require internet regardless of whether it brings value to customer?

What do you think about Live Service Games? Do you prefer them to traditional games that ship finished, with potential expansions and DLC to follow later?

-1 points
*

Not at all a problem for me. I pretty much only play competitive shooters/racing games, so live service is a pretty important part to both genres.

Much prefer it to the older DLC models where DLC content would be dead half the time because nobody would buy it.

Edit: Love that the Lemmy hivemind is as bad as Reddit. Can’t have anyone disagreeing with you

permalink
report
reply
1 point

It used to not be. FPS games were run by players, not corporations. The ability to run your own dedicated server was baked into the game. Today you can still setup a Quake 2 server without having to rely on the publisher or a 3rd party. It doesn’t have to be that way today, but people accept it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I absolutely will accept it because it brings better gameplay. FPS games are more fun when there’s constant balancing changes and new content on a schedule. It’s infinitely better than older game models where if one thing is broken you’re stuck with it for the entire lifetime of the game.

Being able to run my own dedicated server isn’t even something I’d want to do, nor would I want to play on player hosted servers.

When games go EoL, sure, require them to open source the multiplayer engine. But really, it’s not a big deal that an individual can’t host a Battle Royale server.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I absolutely will accept it because it brings better gameplay. FPS games are more fun when there’s constant balancing changes and new content on a schedule. It’s infinitely better than older game models where if one thing is broken you’re stuck with it for the entire lifetime of the game.

How is this different than Valve continuing to patch Team Fortress 2 decades after its release? There’s no Live Service model here.

Being able to run my own dedicated server isn’t even something I’d want to do, nor would I want to play on player hosted servers.

I think that’s true for most people, but a small number of a community can support the vast majority. It would ensure a game isn’t dependent on a company to exist, either.

When games go EoL, sure, require them to open source the multiplayer engine. But really, it’s not a big deal that an individual can’t host a Battle Royale server.

If that was an actual practice that’d be great. There’s no incentive for the publisher to do this, however, and they’re profit driven.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

Op, I think you’re a little confused. I can’t think of a live service game that isn’t a multiplayer game in some form. the required online is because that’s literally what the game is.

Be mad about the scummy lootbox practices that prop it up, don’t be mad that other people like online games.

permalink
report
reply
1 point

“in some form,” being the key part of that. Someone mentioned Diablo 4. It doesn’t have to be always online. Gran Turismo 7 is another example. It’s a trend.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I mean, there are examples where the multiplayer should be optional and thus force the game to be live service. For instance, Diablo 4 should be perfectly playable single player, offline, yet it’s live service and to my understanding requires an Internet connection

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

You really missed out not playing Command and Conquer

permalink
report
reply
0 points

I played C&C, Red Alert 1, 2 and 3. Tiberian Sun was bad.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Just closed your eyes during the FMVs?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I love Red Alert’s, they’re still funny. :D

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Eh, no big deal. The only one I don’t care for on your list is day one DLC. That always seems sketchy. plenty of game I’ve gotten into had day one for me DLC, but that’s cause I joined late, like rimworld. That was a hard DLC package to swallow. If I lived somewhere that I didn’t have good internet I could see caring more, but that’s rare enough to be written off by developers.

permalink
report
reply
1 point

At least with Rimworld you can pirate the dlcs and add them to the Steam copy with no issues.

That’s what I ended up doing since I’m poor. I saw a comment from the devs on the torrent thread basically saying they’re just glad you’re playing it and to consider buying it if you’re able to in the future. Seeing that pretty much solidified them as great devs to me, and when I actually have some disposable income I’ll end up buying them just because of that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points
*

Butnot a problem in free to play games, not in full price games

permalink
report
reply

Games

!games@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

Community stats

  • 8.1K

    Monthly active users

  • 4.4K

    Posts

  • 91K

    Comments