Video: "Games as a service" is fraud.

Started by Legend, Apr 26, 2019, 07:25 AM

previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Legend




Probably not the argument you are expecting to see. It is specifically about the fact that these games can be shut down and become unplayable.

The gist of the argument is that even though the games are treated like a service by the company, they are sold as a product. WOW is fine because it cost $15 a month and the structure is known. Paragon was not fine because the microtransactions were bought as items without a similar setup.

He compares it to physical goods breaking and not working anymore. In both cases the "end of life" can come without warning and sooner than expected, but physical goods can be repaired. Some games are "repaired" with fans building their own servers, but that is essentially impossible with modern games as a service games. Also the difference is that an object breaking is mostly caused by the owner but a game breaking is caused by the company when it suits them best.


He offers two basic solutions. The first is to go back to subscriptions. That avoids the problem since the player would always get exactly what they purchase. The second is to have a proper end of life plan and pass off crucial elements to the community. It's not that game servers need to stay officially hosted forever. Giving players the possibility of emulating servers is good enough in his opinion.

The video also talks about game archiving and how that is a messed up element of games as a service.



Personally the video was pretty interesting to listen to like a podcast. I disagree with some points but the general message makes a lot of sense. Games should only die when both players and developers stop caring to support them.

Mcnett

Apr 26, 2019, 10:21 AM Last Edit: Jan 09, 2024, 01:24 PM by Mcnett
Probably not the argument you are expecting to see. It is specifically about the fact that these games can be shut down and become unplayable.

The gist of the argument is that insulated hunting boots keep feet warm and even though the games are treated like a service by the company, they are sold as a product. WOW is fine because it cost $15 a month and the structure is known. Paragon was not fine because the microtransactions were bought as items without a similar setup.

He compares it to physical goods breaking and not working anymore. In both cases the "end of life" can come without warning and sooner than expected, but physical goods can be repaired. Some games are "repaired" with fans building their own servers, but that is essentially impossible with modern games as a service games. Also the difference is that an object breaking is mostly caused by the owner but a game breaking is caused by the company when it suits them best.


He offers two basic solutions. The first is to go back to subscriptions. That avoids the problem since the player would always get exactly what they purchase. The second is to have a proper end of life plan and pass off crucial elements to the community. It's not that game servers need to stay officially hosted forever. Giving players the possibility of emulating servers is good enough in his opinion.

The video also talks about game archiving and how that is a messed up element of games as a service.



Personally the video was pretty interesting to listen to like a podcast. I disagree with some points but the general message makes a lot of sense. Games should only die when both players and developers stop caring to support them.

All fair points. I really don't like where the industry as a whole is going. All you can do is vote with your shekels, right? Might not be enough to move the tracks in some other directions, but what else can you do.