Andrew from Xbox Enthusiast takes a look at "Games As A Service" and discusses why they're popular and how unless there are some changes to the format, "Games As A Service" can have a terrible effect on the future of video games as a whole.
I worry that "Games As A Service" is just code for publishers trying to screw gamers out of as much money as possible. Until I find one that really interests me and doesn't try to rob me at every opportunity, I'm giving them a wide berth. I really want Anthem to be great but I have zero faith/trust in EA.
Destroy the future of videogames though? Hyperbole
I am not optimistic about GaaS. It promotes releasing games in piecemeal fashion riddled with bugs. There is no incentive for the publishers to have their dev teams release quality on a release day anymore. If you're already paying for a subscription or you have to purchase MT's to have a complete game then this is a major step back. GaaS also means that publishers can 'tweak' the balance of the game continuously to incent players to purchase even more MT's. There is no definitive line in the sand for game balance as the publisher can make changes to suit their needs not the players. It's an environment ripe for abuse. Which "...May Destroy The Future Of Video Games".
As long as there are alternatives, GaaS (aka "Live Services" now) won't destroy all of gaming, but it might raze the AAA landscape, leaving no traditional SP games done up on a grand scale.
@Septic "Destroy the future of videogames though? Hyperbole" Totally agree. Everybody which disagrees with you comment will soon turn a blind eye to MTs and GaaS the minute the next Halo or The last of Us be released! They will buy those games Day One showing their support to the so called GaaS Industry Business. Pure Hypocrisy.
“Everybody which disagrees with you comment will soon turn a blind eye to MTs and GaaS...” Everybody? Talk about hyperbole! lol
Very much so. For all the shifts and slippery slopes which would destroy gaming we've seen since last gen, we still see plenty of games that fall into more traditional style releases. I don't think we see as many big hyped AAA non-GaaS style games as we did last gen, but they're still around, and quite a few of them have been doing pretty well this gen.
It is hyperbolic, but in this day and age people tend to only start caring about something until it reaches dire levels of value. I'm not sure how we get people interested in this stuff as a mass market element other than continuing to rely on people calling out every instance of it, which currently doesn't happen right now (FIFA is fine, but SWBF2 is not?).
I like "Games as a Product", make it good, support it for a year or so and move on to the next one.
GaaS is a way of combatting the rising costs of developing games with cutting edge graphics. It's evolved because games like COD and GTA online are successful. If it's done right, like Halo 5 and SoT, then it makes the game better for all players and not just the ones that buy stuff. P2W games otoh, can just crawl in a hole and die. Really though, it's a fine line devs have to walk in order to keep GaaS from being something that takes advantage of consumers.
Stop buying all the stupid arguments EA makes. If games were so expensive to make how did they survive before MTs and GaaS? Besides, we still see great games like last year's Horizon: Zero Dawn, and Guerrilla never went on record to complain that they can't make up development costs without trying to screw over their audience. This argument that games are getting too expensive to make has only been made by a select few AAA devs and publishers, and only in the last year. That has to tell you something. Aside from the Switch, devs are working with existing hardware. Sure, they have a couple mid-gen upgrades to play with but it would take nowhere near the resources it would to invest in a dev kit for a brand new system. If I had to hazard a guess, if EA truly believes what they're saying they most likely have some extraneous costs they can cut. They're either lying to us, or they don't realize they're actually bad with budgeting. I have a hard time believing that even the top AAA devs and publishers are using absolutely every penny effectively, so there's always room for improvement. In EA's case they probably don't see things that way, but it doesn't make it any less probable.
GaaS is a consumer friendly term for what we've had since last gen with MT riddled games that get support after release. Not all GaaS games are bad....for instance many MMO's do well, or F2P games that get copious support through MT, and things of that nature. Unfortunately though, GaaS models are being applied to full priced games, and there is really no standard on what kind of service you'll get out of the game over the long term.
I prefer Games as a Game.
You want to play a game? You madman! There’s no sense of pride and accomplishment with playing Game as a Game.
Not me I prefer to pay for things in some games and complain about it in others.
I pay for the microtractions in The Crew and also back in Forza 6.
That doesn't make sense.
You're right, it doesn't.
The only way it can change is when people stop dumping all that money into digital goods.. I dont see it ever happening but one can hope
I think that games as a service is okay as long as the content is their. Not just some new maps but adding depth. to many games throw out to little and it feels like a rip. it's a nickel and dime operation were they throw out just enough scraps, but never a steak. Vote with your money.
GaaS is such an all encompassing term, that the idea of it has become bastardized so a lot of people just see it as MT riddled filth. But GaaS also includes MMO's, F2P games, regular games that just get support after release to varying degrees, etc. For the most part GaaS can be applied to any game that gets support, features, or content added over time. Sometimes those things are funded by secondary, or primary revenue streams like MT, other times they're just there because that's what the developer does. The latter is less common nowadays.
Thanks Microsoft, for the player... Ohhhh wait.
GAAS has been a thing on PC for decades
Really? So this is why companies like EA, Ubisoft, and Activision are well-loved because they wouldn’t dare to do what MS does. ...oh wait.
MS = free BC Sony = PS Now or re-release Your games, that you owned last generation, just got served... ...because Sony sells Consoles as a Service.
@TheCommentator While BC is a nice feature, definitely, shouldn't the focus be on making the current iteration of games better rather than relying on dated games to sell a console? I'm not big on rebuying content I already own, but its hardly an issue now that we are 4 1/2 years into this generation and I don't have as much of a need for my older games. I'd also point out that due to the fact that Sony has done well with releasing Games as Games; e.g. NieR, Persona, HZD, Infamous, Bloodborne, and many others, I haven't felt much of a desire to return to the older games in my library. I'm aware not all agree with that sentiment, but I have been fairly happy with this generation of games.
Shouldn't the games you own be able to come with you when a new generation starts? When you get a new iPhone, do you have to buy all your iTunes over again? Would you defend that too? Maybe I should have called Sony's approach Games as a Disservice instead, because it's not benefitting any gamer when Sony rereleases the popular old games because yours simply can't play on a PS4. It'll be rinse-repeat come PS5 too, where you can buy the re-rereleases, lol. But hey, if you really don't care about playing older games, then you can always subscribe to Game Pass!
Yeah, cause Microsoft invented the MMO genre, the granddaddy of ‘games as a service’, right?
People will play it if they have fun. If they have fun with Games as a Service the future of games is changed and not destroyed. What is destroyed is your exspectation of the future. If anyone does not have fun, dont play and dont pay. If publishers cant make profit with service games. They will not produce them anymore.
Netflix hasn't entirely ended Physical movies, so from my viewpoint I don't think digitalvideo games will replace the physical market anytime soon.
Heck, they still sell music CDs
Yeah but even that medium is going exstinct... bestbuy for the first time announced that they would no longer be selling cds anymore. I assume others will follow suit eventually as more and more consumers prefer to stream or dl their material rather than buy it physically. https://www.google.com/amp/...
Same will happen to games. Kids grow up with ipads etc, they dont care about bluray. Digital only will be the future
Music is limited to 12 to 20 tracks of music while games have virtual worlds within. Games hold more value than music CDs imo.
But music doesn't have that many generations. Games went to Blu Ray only pretty fast.
Two different mediums
The games I love the most are GAAS, nothing wrong with it when its done good. World of Warcraft, Guild Wars, Counter Strike GO, PUBG and rust are perfect examples
Them don't buy those games. I don't and look at meee!
Sensationalist garbage. Care to guess how many “death of gaming” scenarios there have been?
Yep it’s what I’m worried about too
absolutely it will evolve into what they want to make instead of what we want to buy. But it could turn out to be good if there is a ton of competition or even publishers leave the big streaming services like Microsoft and Sony .
The thing about gaas, most companies will likely offer some netflix like subscription while offering a digital and physical format. Until these companies get gaas figured out where mass market is using it only then will they drop everything else... Its def not something that will happen overnight. Even if sony, ms, and nintendo started supporting gaas today it wouldnt be until next next gen where it might be widespread... and thats still a huge maybe. It needs to work better than the current methods and it needs to be cheap like most services. Prob south of 20$ a month.
What you're saying is they intend to destroy it eventually, but they haven't completely figured out how to do it yet. That's not very reassuring.
Destroy what? Movies, and music have already adopted this method. Best buy has started the dissapearance of a music section all together. Its only a matter of time before theres a service where you sign in and download a service and or a game and then play it. Esp as internet speeds become fast enough to support such a service in a timely matter.
All games seem unfinished when shipped these days. Releasing a game seems fluid nowadays. Games as a service also ties into this unfinished model of development. It gives developers a window to keep updating, adding, creating.
Bs...there is always push back + supply and demand. If they keep offering that....there will be no demand for it, thus they can't charge as much. We have the power.....buy the games that support gamers....don't buy the ones that are super greedy. You think Disney & EA didn't get the message about SW:BF2 ?
Only if we let it. We didn't let EA walk all over us with MTs, and did not buy any of the BS arguments they made defending them. GaaS could be a tool to accomplish a similar end of screwing over the consumer. The fact that we're even talking about this rather than just going with the flow shows that we as gamers know what's going on. There's nothing wrong with having games tied to a service, but we will be the judge of whether it's being used in a pro-consumer manner. My money won't be used to sign up for a service I don't deem worthy, and I would hope that others think similarly.
Depends. If it's something like EA Access, Game Pass, episodic games like Hitman or Telltale games or cloud streaming services done right and at a good price then I am all for it. If it is cosmetic MT's I don't care, if it is MT's that change gameplay, random lootboxes or MMO's that gouge I hate them. To blindly say you hate games as a service doesn't help, I try to look at it objectively not emotionally..
This is true.. Microsoft doing this game pass thing is going to shift the industry for sure.. It sounds all consumer friendly but i fear it will have dire consequences. Not only do they have a thin library of exclusive software but they've been wanting a digital only game market for years.. Mark my words.. They will be start skimping on games if they only charge $10/mo. Other devs will too.. Bare bones base software with tons of in game purchases to make them complete.. Sony will have to answer with a deal using PS NOW somehow and the physical market will die.. Of course its inevitable but so many people will never actually own their games and finding people who do for trades or to borrow something, will be a pain.. Next gen will be the last gen with physical games for sure.. At least for the big 2.. Nintendo might if they keep the hybrid thing going and market in areas with poor internet...
Like movies for a service ruined movies? Oh wait... it didn't it is better than ever.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.