Come on people where are the indie mentions when people namedrop amazing games this year.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Study finds "Games as a Service" has tripled the industry's value
- Thread starter Obliterator
- Start date
Come on people where are the indie mentions when people namedrop amazing games this year.
I think it might rather be tearing out hair and beating breasts, personally.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
Exactly. Games are fanfuckingtasticat the moment. There's so much variety and options that if you can't find something fun maybe the issue is you and not the medium.
I've been pretty lucky so far, in that I've tended to have no interest in games that have used monetary schemes I find noxious.
I've played a couple mobile games and I played TOR after it went FTP and generally, microtransactions and development with them in mind did negatively effect my experience in those cases.
I've played a couple mobile games and I played TOR after it went FTP and generally, microtransactions and development with them in mind did negatively effect my experience in those cases.
wapplew
Member
The problem I have with console game as service is those "service" only last one year.
On PC or mobile, we usually download the game once and last you for good 3-4 years like CS:GO, TF2, LoL, Dota2.
Console GaaS only last one year at best. Please pay $60 again next year to continue enjoy our service like Fifa, CoD, NBA, Madden etc.
If only they let us buy once per generation and keep updating it like those PC GaaS.
On PC or mobile, we usually download the game once and last you for good 3-4 years like CS:GO, TF2, LoL, Dota2.
Console GaaS only last one year at best. Please pay $60 again next year to continue enjoy our service like Fifa, CoD, NBA, Madden etc.
If only they let us buy once per generation and keep updating it like those PC GaaS.
Phoenix RISING
Banned
My favorite genre is RTS.
Imagine how I feel even after playing Homeworld Remastered, Homeworld deserts of kharak, Act of aggression, ashes of singularity, and World of Goo.
I'm glad to see Age of Empires get new content but I am not fan of the trash unit meta.
I have already mourned. RIP C&C and Warcraft...I watch SC2 replays on YouTube to get my fix.
This is also impacted by the way publishers lower the price on their boxed/main content. The premium pricing model change impacts the tail end results for revenues from non-DLC and micro-transactions. Also, the cost associated with developing, promoting and maintaining high-revenue generating micro-transactions is part of the equation.
Also, there will always be games that fail. When you take so few risks and dedicate everything to a small number of games with systems to generate revenues this way, you take less chances on what could be the next great game idea or hook.
Even, if I'm completely wrong. I still feel there is too much sympathy and general apathy for systems that are a detriment to the design of games.
After The Division and SFV at launch, I'm really not into the drip feed model of burning yourself out until worthwhile stuff gets patched in. That and gambling on lootboxes, the industry's milked me for all I'm worth. I like being hooked on a single game, but I love the variety we have these days. Still hate spending an extra $60 past the initial $60 though.
Phrozenflame500
Member
There have definitely been so many legitimately great indie releases this year. Hollow Knight, Pyre, Cuphead, A Hat in Time, Night in the Woods, Divinity OS 2, and probably others I'm forgetting. A fantastic year for indies indeed.
I almost wouldn't mind all the schemes these "games as services" employ to extract money from the masses if game design hadn't taken a turn for the worse (worst) in many high profile releases. The direction of making games as grindy as possible to charge the players extra to skip the grind has made me weary.
Even so, at least this year there were quite a few good games (mainly from Japan) that either didn't employ such tactics or where they were easily ignorable, so for now I'm still happy enough with the offerings of the industry. I mean, most mainstream high profile movies are shit and yet I am drowning in great ones to watch anyway. I'm fine with the fact that I simply won't be playing these games if they aren't free to play. There'll always be indies and niche games that are different from the norm and so I'll always have something to play.
Even so, at least this year there were quite a few good games (mainly from Japan) that either didn't employ such tactics or where they were easily ignorable, so for now I'm still happy enough with the offerings of the industry. I mean, most mainstream high profile movies are shit and yet I am drowning in great ones to watch anyway. I'm fine with the fact that I simply won't be playing these games if they aren't free to play. There'll always be indies and niche games that are different from the norm and so I'll always have something to play.
I can see it now: they won't
Gingerbread Fetus
Neo Member
I'm sure I won't get tired of seeing games with at most 30$ of content getting released for 60$ any time soon.
I won't miss how this will destroy single player and narrative experiences.
I hope every game from now on get's elements that are more and more like slot machines like Shadow of War.
I won't miss how this will destroy single player and narrative experiences.
I hope every game from now on get's elements that are more and more like slot machines like Shadow of War.
Laughing Banana
Weeping Pickle
Can someone educate me as to how this is actually a bad thing? I mean it seems like many are saying that they're "hating" this direction, so it must be something bad, but what I see is that a practice where one game will have its lifespan extended by immeasurable amount of time with devs continually releasing content updates and such.
How is that bad?
How is that bad?
momshotdad
Member
When publishers skew their systems in the game to encourage people to buy lootboxes instead of being able to earn the in game content by playing the game. It hasn't happened yet in any substantial way, but the paranoia and possibility is strong. Personally, I would rather have LB than higher game prices, but I also will never buy a loot box of any sort.
UnemployedVillain
Member
Half the people in here seem to think GaaS mean loot boxes for some reason, so that's probably why
SolicitorPirate
Member
You know how like half of America hates Obamacare despite benefitting from it?
Aressa
You can't die before your death
You can buy this house but keep in mind we will provide the doors in a later date.
Laughing Banana
Weeping Pickle
Okay, this is maybe just me only having a very limited study case, but I play the Division--not just play it, I really really love it. In it, the only "lootbox" that you can purchase with in-game money involves cosmetics like gestures and skins and clothings and such. Sure there are DLCs that add more gameplay modes like Underground or Last Stand, but that's no different than say, single player games getting DLC content, is it?
And the devs have said that they will continue on with year 2 with more additional content and story updates, so I guess this is an example of "Games as a Service", but I don't see what's so bad about it?
I guess so. Does GaaS is exclusively intertwined with predatory lootbox practices or something? Maybe it's just me being naive and have not yet played that many games using this model then except for Division and I guess, Destiny 2 (which I am personally okay with in how they handle the "lootbox" aka bright engrams thing), but I don't see how "a game getting continuous content update to keep players playing it" is a nefarious concept.
But the real question is whether the average game player will now spend twice as much as before
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
I'll take false equivalences for 500 Alex!
Exploratory
Banned
PUBG?
Compsiox
Banned
You won't be able to purchase games, in fact, every publisher will have a lootbox website where you can attempt to obtain the game you want.
The only real GaaS type game I put any real time into was The Division and up until I hit the endgame content wall, I had a blast with it. Everything afterward that went wrong with that game IMO was not inherent to it being a GaaS, although I suppose there's an argument to be made either way with the shenanigans they pulled with the economy and drop rates. Still, I can't say I didn't get my money's worth. IIRC I have damn near 200hrs in that game and almost all of that was before they even dropped the first worthless raid. My only regret is buying the season pass in advance on that one.
I could see myself playing one of those types of games once every year or two, but that's pretty much it. I'd much rather dip into a different world every few weeks/months than play the same game for years. MMOs never appealed to me for the exact same reason.
I could see myself playing one of those types of games once every year or two, but that's pretty much it. I'd much rather dip into a different world every few weeks/months than play the same game for years. MMOs never appealed to me for the exact same reason.
Absoludacrous
Member
Works for GoG!
Compsiox
Banned
Well there you go.
Gingerbread Fetus
Neo Member
There are two big ones for me. Many GaaS 'features' prey on the basest instincts of psychology. And many of them seemed to have trapped once promising franchises into profit optimizing machines. I think it is disturbing given a number of factors.
Many service features in games are designed as Skinner boxes and deliver right on the rewards pipeline. Given the addictive nature of gambling, it bothers me to see a Lord of the Rings property capitalizing on human psychology. It is gambling, if it requires you to put up money without a guarantee of what you are purchasing.
It doesn't disturb me that developers are releasing new content for their games and getting paid for it. I love Paradox games, but they are usually looking for something new that they can do with every property expansion. Adding the ability to play as a hivemind being added to Stellaris for example. (I have my problems with this too, since it makes multiplayer harder and I know that my friends are now less likely to see some really interesting content. And at some point it becomes a barrier for new players. CK2 is like 130$ ffs)
What does worry me, is that that's hard work, and you aren't likely going to see EA pushing for something interesting and new in every drip-fed part of Battlefront 2's pipeline. I'm being presumptuous here and assuming EA will pull the same stunt for the umpteenth time. I need no more evidence than how they ruined SimCity and The Sims, the same content as previous games, drip fed down a pipeline. By definition. Battlefront 2 at launch will be a less valuable game than Battlefront. The Sims 4, is a worse value than The Sims 3. (Sims 3 had very similar EP to Sims 2 btw. So it was arguably less valuable as well.) There are many examples of this. Why would you want to pay for that? One game is more complete than the other. Why buy it even when it's finished? Since as we saw with Battlefront, the game was finished with the Death Star DLC (December 6, 2016) and the sequel was announced THREE MONTHS LATER.
I can't prove that this is a bubble.(The most I know about bubbles is that in The Big Short, someone tells Christian Bale that you can't see a bubble before it pops.) But at what point do people stop buying the games in a series because they simply are not doing anything new? How does this encourage designers to do anything new? Because so far all I've seen is them rip off Assassins Creed, or LoL, or Counter-Strike. Then Casino the hell out of it. While they whittle down the content that you see in a series until they can sell the shavings back to you piece by piece.
Same
wapplew
Member
Revenue and MAU will concentrate on a few mega titles.
Most of our gaming budget and time spend on those mega titles and leaving small amount for the rest of the industry.
Big titles sold more and earn a lot more. Publisher have to go big or go home or they have to be extremely lucky to catch a phenomenon like Minecraft, Dota or PUBG.
It's not something new, PC and mobile already GaaS focus since forever. People mostly play one game or two for long long time.
dear video game industry,
yeah, MP GaaS game. There's no difference - indie or AAA. It's all the same now.
^ all those games are "so-so" even compared to what we had in 90s from big publishers.
yeah, MP GaaS game. There's no difference - indie or AAA. It's all the same now.
^ all those games are "so-so" even compared to what we had in 90s from big publishers.
Generalpsyduck
Banned
AAA sucks! Indies are where it's at.
Nintendo is still great thought bullshit amiibo aside.
ButteryPie
Member
This is not a bad thing. But in the same way that the mere concept of paid mods makes people think developers and publishers are oppressive overlords, games as a service stuff has been demonized now that we have a name for it, despite most major successes in gaming already being a GAaS in some way or another.
I need to get off of GAF and get some sleep for the night, so I might come back to this post later and expand upon it some more, but I think you could make a strong argument that Street Fighter II and its variations made for an early GAaS model, and that stuff like Halo or COD are also good examples of this since like 2007.
I need to get off of GAF and get some sleep for the night, so I might come back to this post later and expand upon it some more, but I think you could make a strong argument that Street Fighter II and its variations made for an early GAaS model, and that stuff like Halo or COD are also good examples of this since like 2007.
Giraffe Keighley
Member
GET THAT MONEY FAM
Depends on the game / IP for me. Something like FFXV I'm happy with the season pass and then will move on after that.
I pay to play FFXIV already and somehow try to balance that with PUBG, Battle Chasers Nightwar and soon, Super Mario Odyssey and Xenoblade Chronicles 2.
Come January? RIP me. Ni no Kuni 2, Monster Hunter World, Yakuza 6 just to name a few. We don't even know when Nintendo has their 2018 big games and I have Granblue Fantasy Re Link too... DQXI God only know what else I'm missing for 2018 and my tastes. Also have to balance that with shows/anime I watch + trying to stay active and work. My backlog will be real.
All that said, Xenoblade, Granblue, Mon Hun even Mario Odyssey... Would love to see these become games as a service. Include new worlds, bosses, music etc. I would spend all depending on the franchise.
I pay to play FFXIV already and somehow try to balance that with PUBG, Battle Chasers Nightwar and soon, Super Mario Odyssey and Xenoblade Chronicles 2.
Come January? RIP me. Ni no Kuni 2, Monster Hunter World, Yakuza 6 just to name a few. We don't even know when Nintendo has their 2018 big games and I have Granblue Fantasy Re Link too... DQXI God only know what else I'm missing for 2018 and my tastes. Also have to balance that with shows/anime I watch + trying to stay active and work. My backlog will be real.
All that said, Xenoblade, Granblue, Mon Hun even Mario Odyssey... Would love to see these become games as a service. Include new worlds, bosses, music etc. I would spend all depending on the franchise.
peanutbutterlatte
Member
Do not go quietly into that goodnight!
But seriously, theyre not getting money from me this way. Im not even angry about it, its just a bizarre notion to pay into games in this way. Outside of the occasionally appealing story expansion DLC, I just have no interest.
I dont play online multiplayer. I dont have any interest in playing most games past their initial completion. Im too old for that shit.
But seriously, theyre not getting money from me this way. Im not even angry about it, its just a bizarre notion to pay into games in this way. Outside of the occasionally appealing story expansion DLC, I just have no interest.
I dont play online multiplayer. I dont have any interest in playing most games past their initial completion. Im too old for that shit.
StereoVsn
Gold Member
Divinity Original Sin 2 is at 95 or 96 metacritic, sold more then 800K copies, its 2nd highest reviewed game this year (after Zelda BotW), and it is one of the best RPGs ever produced (top 10 PC RPGs ever reviewed). If that's "so-so" then your standards are incredibly high.dear video game industry,
yeah, MP GaaS game. There's no difference - indie or AAA. It's all the same now.
^ all those games are "so-so" even compared to what we had in 90s from big publishers.
For GaaS it depends on implementation, for all the teeth gnashing I think Ubisoft and Blizzard generally do an ok job where 2K, EA, Activision, and WB like to rip people off and even there there are differences (NBA Live 18 is surprisingly alright in the single player offering for example).
GeorgioCostanzaX
Member
Given the positive response here why is Capcom getting so much hate for adopting the GaaS model with SFV and Marvel v Capcom Infinite? Personally I find that DLC characters, costumes and stages are worth it and keep my interest over time ...DOA5 has taken it to another level though.
Destiny Taken King and pretty much every Mass Effect story arc DLC were great too.
Destiny Taken King and pretty much every Mass Effect story arc DLC were great too.
Yeah, it's been pretty legit. Sonic Mania, Cuphead, Splatoon 2, etc.
And we're not even done
No, it's not. Yes, Divinity Original Sin 2 is a good game, but that's it. The main issue for me (with indies) – I don't see any originality in them. Some people are saying – "don't like AAA MP/GAAS, buy indies". But most indies games just use the same old ideas with new skins (like Stardew Valley, for example, or Shovel Knight, or Cities: Skylines, etc.).
I'm still waiting to see from indie devs games like System Shock 2, Thief, Metal Gear Solid, RE, Heroes of MM, Jagged Alliance, Silent Hill, Half-Life, Oddworld, etc. - i.e. games with fresh ideas + high production value. And all I got from indies now - just "copy-cats" mostly.
And don't get me wrong - I love indie games, I buy a lot of them. But they're not a replacement.
Phrozenflame500
Member
Bullshit, Hollow Knight is legitimately one of the best Metroidvanias of all time up there with the classics, and games like Pyre and Night in the Woods are wholey unique experiences.
Only if you didn't play old games.
Phrozenflame500
Member
well shit dude you really convinced me with that great work
Lately GAF feels like a club of old people who are only happy if video games are exactly what they remember them to be and who'll get super aggressive if the business model is not exactly what they grew up with, which for them is the only correct way to monetise video games.
GAF has turned into the old men yells at cloud meme.
GAF has turned into the old men yells at cloud meme.
This is almost as bad a prediction as me predicting the Switch to bomb in its first year.
Bonus prediction: Xenoblade chronicles 2 will review substantially worse than 1.
epeternally
Member
These types of games won't be viable until people are willing to pay $60 (or more) for them to offset being a niche product with high production costs. Consumer perceptions of 'value' have the games industry in a stranglehold, especially indies. You're never going to get the Hellblade $30 for a half length AAA quality game model to be viable, the economics just don't work out for most projects. Indies are already failing by the dozens, you can't expect creators to invest more in their projects when those projects are already losing money.
CarbonatedFalcon
Member
...
Im really not sure what youre expecting, as you seem to have standards in the stratosphere.
As a rule, youre not going to find many, if any, indie games (though this sentence could really apply to most games) with high production values AND significant innovation. Its not practical (or in most cases possible) from a business standpoint. Both of those characteristics require significant time and/or money to pull off, which indie developers are going to have a lot less of.
Its great that youre idealistic, but youre setting yourself up to be disappointed.
Games as with all designed things are iterative anyway, even the most breakout products build upon what has come before. I think youre being overly harsh with your assessment.
nopenopenope
Member
.
Last edited:
If this is the foundation of your "if we shout loudly enough the companies will change" beliefs, then boy oh boy do I have bad news for you.