Why I'm worried about games as a service

A Metro reader reacts to the rise of titles like Destiny and FIFA Ultimate Team, and worries they’re too demanding on a player’s time.

[freshslicepizza]

They won't be going away. This is where they can make a lot of money and keep players engaged for longer. There are so many games out thre that it's not really a huge issue but as I said for years the AAA market was already in trouble and this is where I can see more and more games becoming GaaS titles.

[UCForce]

It will kill off Single Player Games. It's the balance between SP and MP that I afraid the most. When developers and publishers focus way too much on GaaS, there will be unbalanced. Eventually it will destroy traditional gaming and the culture of it. Video Game is getting expensive of course, but there must be a better way than this.

[freshslicepizza]

There is a better way, support smaller studios more.

[UCForce]

@moldybread I think we need to support big and small. Because it need to be more connected for consumers and developers. Get rid off MT in AAA game, listening more consumers feedback and more passion about making game, not greed.

[agent4532]

I agree but gamers are way too divided and are too loyal to corporations/major franchises.

[rainslacker]

I doubt it's going to kill off SP games. Remember last gen MP was going to kill SP? Yeah....didn't happen. They'll continue to coexist, and publishers will dabble in blending the two and trying to optimize their revenue streams. If they are overly annoying about it, and if they don't make enough money, people will complain, and eventually, they'll revert back to more traditional modes of game delivery.....not unlike we saw already happen with the MP/MT trend of last gen.

It's not that GaaS type games won't continue to exist, it's just that everything will evolve to where it works. I don't fault publishers for wanting to maximize their revenues, but I will criticize them for business practices which do that at the expense of delivering a solid game, or those that use nickel and diming tactics to gain more revenue off the 10-15% of people who buy them, and leave the other 85-90% of their customers annoyed.

[Zjet]

I do not and will not ever buy an online only game.

You are giving the game a expiry date. If i can't play it OFFLINE in 20 years time i don't want to own it ever.

[FPS_D3TH]

That's fine but honestly how many games are you going back to years later? Is there not room for some that should be experienced now if the gameplay and type of game that is, asks for it? Vs something that's played by yourself and can be played whenever but is limited in its potential because it must be experienced solo. I think there's plenty room for both kinds of games.

[Blank]

Seriously?! Have you seen the retro game market blow up?! For your casual self look at the NES and SNES minis! 20 year old games will stand the test of time! People will always go back to older games! I usually stay out of these things but what you said struck a cord. I think your too new to gaming to even see the bigger picture and BS going on.

[arkard]

That's doesn't answer his question. Yes retro gaming (as of right now) is "in". But for how long? How many games do you constantly go back and play vs playing something current? And even if you don't play many current games does that mean you can only enjoy a game 2, 3, 5, 10 years after it came out? Is it really a big deal to have a few games that should be experienced now?

[ApocalypseShadow]

I'm more worried about gamers who buy into the idea that single player games have no merit. Or that retro gaming is not worth anyone's time when there are plenty of fun games from the past that are worth jumping back into just like listening to old music or watching previously seen movies and TV shows.

There's nothing wrong with online only games. I don't buy them myself. But if it's going to be that, with micro transactions, dlc , loot boxes, season passes and such, then make the game FREE. If they want you to spend all this extra money, make access to the game free. Not $60 or more with nickel and diming.

I guess, as a person who likes single player games, I don't see the buying a game that I can't play at any time. Including 5-10 years from now with no internet connection. When I buy a game, I like OWNING IT. Not buying access to it for a limited time. I've never bought an online only title just like Zjet. If games end up that way only, I see that as the end of my purchasing of future new games.

[FPS_D3TH]

I still buy single player games. Wolfenstein, metro 2034, Witcher 3, Doom, tell tales games, old retro games... But I also really enjoy Destiny as well. I don't think there's enough room in the marketplace for too many of these games anyways either and I think devs know this so I'm not worried. And yes I've seen the retro market blow up again. That's all cool, does that mean we should only be playing retro games then? No I don't thinks so. I guess all movies should be in black and white too. Like there's room for exploring new types of gaming and I seriously doubt GaaS is here to take over everything. That's ridiculous.

[rainslacker]

Me personally....I probably play about 10-15 games I've played before every year.

But I'm a pretty big retro gamer.

As far as those talking about retro gaming. It has always been in. There are a lot of people who play their games again. For them, the notion that some others don't is little solace to compel one to go out and buy a MP only game. Just because many may not revisit them, doesn't mean that those who do like the idea of a game with an expiration date.

Anyhow, there is a place for the GaaS market(a fancy way to say DLC/MT riddled). We complained about this stuff all last gen. But put a pretty bow on it, and now it's considered more cultured and more forward thinking, when it fact, it puts complete control into the hands of the publisher, and takes away most of the control from the customer.

[aaronaton]

Apart from Warhawk and MAG, online only but done right.

[Bismarn]

Worrying about the rise of games as a service is like worrying about the rise of extremism. It's already here, it's already ruined everything, we're already living in the games apocalypse. Micro-transactions, always-online requirements, lack of single player in AAA titles, pay-to-win, the list goes on and on. What is there left to fear?

[Eonjay]

Gaming isn't ruined yet and as you even proved, there is still a huge market for more quality Single player, offline games without microtransactions. It has to be voiced, because the truth is someone is always listening and our voices do get through.

[AspiringProGenji]

Granted I don't buy Loot boxes in Overwatch nor I get tempted for them to get limited/seasonal cosmetics. I love the damn game and that may be as far as I'll go with GaSS. Everything else is a No! I'll stick with SP games with MP as secondary or without them for the most part. MS is becoming the big offender w\of this practice downplaying Zelda and Horizon and saying GaSS generates more revenue, and proceed to add MTs to everything. No thanks!

[UltraNova]

Yes, MS is spearheading this 'games as a service' thing. Its basically 2013 all over again but in desguise for MS.

I can only hope our fellow xbox gamers open then eyes sooner rather than later and voice their objection, just like most of them did back in 2013.

This needs to stop before other companies pick up on it, or we will all pay the price, and my what a price it will be this time around...

[FinalFantasyFanatic]

We've had some great single player games in the last couple of years, it's more the "we can finish it later" attitude that worries me (see games like FFXV), I think alot of game developers want the successor of Overwatch's service model and are just falling flat (although I can see why that model is appealing to developers). Personally I purchase very few multiplayer games, some of them like Star Wars Battle Front and Destiny (the first games of both) seem a bit half-baked and unfinished to me.

[rainslacker]

We've been complaining about it since last gen. GaaS is just a fancy way to say MT/DLC/possibly P2W/F2P etc.

It's not a new concept by any means. It's just a new way to try and market the idea. Some of the early games being pegged with the moniker have overdone it with these concepts, and that's why it's not going over so well. Some are doing well, some aren't. But ultimately, what we have with GaaS is no different than the crap we complained about since the first horse armor showed up, and the same thing we use to discredit mobile gaming on a constant basis.

[ThinkThink]

You guys make it sound like games as a service is a bad thing. Times are changing and the youngsters these days love their GaaS. I can't get my kids to play a singer player game for the life of me. GaaS keeps them engaged in a game for longer periods of time and I don't see anything wrong with spending money on a microtransaction or piece of DLC if it makes you happy and keeps you enjoying your game. The other great thing about GaaS is that it's mostly Microsoft pushing this so if you're not a fan of GaaS, you have options! Sony or Nintendo (both great options). Complaining about it, if you're not interested in it, seems kind of silly no? Just don't play those games and let those that do enjoy them, have their fun. I don't play many single player only games but I would never complain that we need less of them.

[rainslacker]

Its not that they're bad principal, just often in practice. When the publishers abuse it or go overboard, that's what people have a problem with, and it's those practices which sour the whole idea

[knickstr]

Get used to it. With gamers paying for this stuff and publishers and developers making a lot of money it's only going to get worse and it's not going away anytime soon until gamers put their foot down.

[Blank]

I wouldn't say "get used to it" consumers in the US crashed the gaming market it can do so again! I am doing my part sure I'm one person but as others get outraged the numbers will add up.

[Krysis]

I play destiny 2 with friends, we enjoy the game. What gets me is when your in the tower and on the bottom left it it tells you the name of a player that gets an exotic or legendary and I can't believe how many people you see buying bride and Gramps from the eververse store I mean I don't get it why you earn plenty of them in the game and you can tell when they buy them cuz they get three to 5 bride and groom notifications pop up on your screen it baffles me cuz there is no point in buying them but yet they do, it doesn't speed your game up anymore the only thing it gives you is shaders and some armor from the store and some weapon skins there's one item that boosts the amount of drops you get and it's not very much of a boost. I have 3000 of the currency used to purchase these items, which is a lot, just from playing.

[senorfartcushion]

I'm not scared of the games, I'm scared of the idiots who buy the games and the publishers who masturbate afterwards

[OB1Biker]

'games as a service'
That smells so much no need to explain.

[spartan112g]

I think he misses, at least in Destiny's case, how you're supposed to be leaving after doing everything and coming back during content drops. That's why they're spaced out like so, I mean, besides development time.

[Realms]

I don't support these games haven't bought Star Wars, Destiny, FiFA, Madden, NBA 2K in years. People say it doesn't affect single player games then why is Shadow of War using these BS mechanics to gauche the consumer it's a choice an unnecessary choice by publishers to make more money. IMO EA, Activision, Ubisoft are all going down this path and MS seems to be following as well look at Forza 7 and the micro transactions in that game. Some people justify it by saying it doesn't affect the game but it does because inevitably developers will have to take time away from the game to implement these BS practices and build them into the game because some people buy these games no matter what.

[MunchMiller00]

Judging by the cosmic explosion of retro-style games, and the tidal wave of hd-remasters out there? I'd say the demand is more in favour of traditional gaming more now, than anytime over the last decade. Wouldn't worry all too much.

Let the people with s**t between their ears get siphoned by companies with yearly drivel, while the rest of us carry on as we usually do.

Both of these markets can co-exist, and really, I'm rather happy this garbage is around. Keeps the morons out of our hair and lets them rot in their own cesspool. Really, this should have happened long ago. These two markets needed to be separated.

Still typhoons of money to be made off conventional games, and while there's money to be made, there will always be people there to make those types of games.

[RedDeadLB]

Because we will never get anything special ever again?

[Atticus_finch]

I'm glad that at least Sony 1st party is respecting their fans and continuing to provide quality and quantity without nickel and diming me

[agent4532]

No they are not going away but we can still demand for options like lan support, offline multiplayer, mod support, a single player campaign (if the game needs it or makes the gaming experience better), etc. The problem with gamers is we are not a demanding consumer base nor we stand up against anti-consumer practices as much as we should. If we keep letting slide every single anti-consumer practice is only going to get worse for gaming.