You can buy the Battlepass in Helldivers 2 by playing the game. You can earn premium currency by buying it with in game currency or by finding it in missions. You can buy it with real world money, but it is absolutely unnecessary. Unlike most other games with battlespasses.
The gameplay of Helldivers 2 i just found fun in general since it has tons of enemy types. In the lower difficulties you get the same bugs but the better loot you unlock and the better you get allows you to climb the difficulties and fight new enemies in bugs and bot missions compared to suicide squad that has similar enmies all the way through. Another thing is that Helldivers 2 doesn't take itself serious and knows what it wants to do unlike suicide squad. The loot in Helldivers feels unique to use and has a purpose for different missions and situatons and even enemy types. I also feel like unlike other live service games HD2 respects the players time and money. It knows that its asking the player to put trust in the game and wait for more content so they charge less (£35) where i live unlike suicide squad which is asking me to put my trust into the game at full price (£70) from the start. The store prices in HD2 are also reasonable. I can buy a full skin for under £4 unlike most others that charge £8-£16 and then there are idiot companies that wanna charge way more. It also makes sense for the characters in HD2 to use the weapons they do in this world which adds to the immersion. Theres also the grind which live service games seem obsessed with. HD2 gives you the freedom to choose when you want to play and how long unlike other live serivce games that don't trust their game so they rely on timers and numbers going up to keep you grinding in time for the next piece of content. The reason HD2 is blowing up is simply because its doing everything right from the start (other than servers). People have just associated live service as bad because loads of dev studios are releasing their games with intent to fix later and when player see that they decide to wait for the game to either go on sale till it goes for a price they deem worphy for the product the company put out, or don't buy the game at all and in rare cases the game gets fixed and people give it another try like no mans sky. But most of the time companies just won't take the time to fix their mistakes like Anthem which could have had a full on revival if they didn't cancel that huge overhaul and released it with tons of new content and changes to the base game. HD2 also fits perfectly well with content on tiktok letting people share their experinces and there the community feature in game allowing you to see player counts on worlds and sectors and and everyone working together to clear planets creates a sense of community. Friendly fire is also a fun aspect paired with the ragdoll physics.
I saw somewhere the server thing is because they're a smaller dev team so they don't have the infrastructure a corporation like ubisoft would. Which just goes to show that like i always say smaller indie game devs are typically better than corprate game devs simply because like you said they know what they want the game to be and have the freedom to actually make it the way they want. Whereas corporate game devs have the money to do things well but not necessarily the sense of direction and intent that smaller devs do and even if they do they might not have the freedom from corprate to make the game in the way they'd like because corprate wants to milk everything they can outta the game which ultimately leads to a mishapen lump of a game.
I have to confess, I’m usually the one to switch off the moment I hear a game is "live service". BUT (please don’t touch the pitchforks) I do regularly play Fortnite. It just became a handy little habit I developed. Every morning, I’d play up to an hour of Fortnite, focusing mostly on the weekly or seasonal quests. I started this when I started my new job, which required me to be up early and go to work. I found using it as a means to chill and wake myself up did wonders for my productivity throughout the day. It’s a casual time killer, just like my mobile games. Outside of Fortnite, I’ve played Avengers to platinum, I might check out Suicide Squad to play the story down the road. If the game keeps me engaged, I will play until I get bored. (Btw, Fortnite Festival has no right being as fun as it is either. Holy shit.) Live service has been an interesting concept for me and a progressing opinion from game to game. I think now I’ve come to the conclusion, whether game as a service or live service, if I enjoy playing the game, I will keep playing it. If I’m playing for the narrative, I’ll wait until the next story update (it’s how I played Avengers). And if I can exploit or grind my way to unlock the battle passes without spending any money, like I can in Fortnite, if you keep me engaged, I will get maximum value for my Free to Play game! 😅
HellDivers 2 is proof that people don’t hate live service game. I don’t know why everyone was acting like they did a month ago. They must have hated a certain game that was live service but not the live service itself.
The game hasn't even been around a month yet. We will see the complaints roll in as time passes. Though I am in the seeming minority of gamers that do just hate the concept of "a game that never ends". No matter the form.
I think the hate had to do with Suicide Squad Kill the Justice League. The fact that it came from a developer that had a history of stellar single player story based games. Plus the fact that they weren’t forthcoming about it when it was revealed.
@@haruhirogrimgar6047 they technically already started. u can't log in SS KTJL, has the same issue kinda, but yet one is praised and the other is sacrificed....i personally don't get it. the hate feels fabricated at this point
People absolutely hate live service games for a plethora of very valid reasons. It's a blight on the gaming industry and has actually ruined multiple games and gaming companies because they're chasing trends. You're viewing it in a very backwards manner you're assuming most live service games are successful and people just hate the bad ones. No, most live service games suck and games like helldivers 2 are the exception to the rule.
The problem with live service isn't the nature of live service itself or it's content. Well not entirely. It's complicated just as you said. Let's take the two games you listed. Helldivers II is 29.99. SS: KtJL is 69.99 base or 99.99 deluxe. The AAA studio is providing the same experience at a highly inflated cost. It already does not value your time and players know that. The gameplay is a substandard looter shooter for an above standard cost. There's more to the argument. You've put forth a reason based on content being generated but also didn't put any attention on the predatory practice that many games as a service models use to take advantage of that extra content. Helldivers II costs 9.99 for its battle pass. While battle passes are usually structured as FOMO based mentality Helldivers respects your time. Buy the battlepass and it does not expire. Take your time. Or not. Rush it if you want. Binge like a greedy game pig for all I care. SS:KtJL should cost about the same, but once that pass is gone it's gone. FOMO, baby, it's in style! However I haven't played either game. I have no skin in this argument. My issue with games as a service is that stuff above but more to do with what I've written below. The problem that both of them share though as a GaaS/live service game these are games you can pay 30 dollars or a hundred dollars for and can be taken offline. Meaning your play is on a timer the moment that game releases. At any time a studio can shut off a live service game and that's it. You are unable to play what you payed for. Look at the ever growing graveyard of live service games. The mobile market is full of dead games, well, not that you would know as they are not on the stores any more. PC and console games are following suit. You can't, without breaking some anti piracy laws, save a live service game for future play. These companies have no end of life plan for these types of games. No "We'll update it for LAN or private server play" or "We'll provide a balanced offline mode once we take the servers down." As a consumer I hate paying for something that is at the mercy of someone else to mostly take away. If I want to play Russian Roulette with myself don't leave me with the bullets and no gun to use.
I really agree with your premise Benny, but I disagree with the reason. When games come out and have micro transactions up the wazoo that don’t allow you to progress into the game as a whole that is when you have people freak out and rightfully so. Some examples being any sports games, the battlefront debacle, COD, any collection based games, etc. I’ll exclude Fortnite because its model is different and in my opinion well done but if you wanna add it that’s fair. The fear of game series as a whole becoming like that is what scares people. I think monster hunter is a great example of that. It’s a live service game series. Always has been, it comes out with its main game followed by free dlc for about a year, then it drops its paid dlc a year later which is followed by another year of free updates. Two years of one game, But in the last two entries they introduced some paid cosmetic dlcs and it has the entire community in arms. They are terrified of it becoming a “live-service” game when it already is. It shows how it’s more the fear of ruining a franchise/game you love because if you look at it realistically it only makes sense for the developers and companies to lean in at least somewhat to what works, but how it is implemented is what actually matters and that is going over the general populations heads. Hope you guys enjoyed my perspective if anyone reads it😂
That sounds like you're just bowing your head and being like yes, company, please bleed me of my money more. Also, you're just wrong. It doesn't work. Most live service games fail. I feel like people look at destiny a struggling franchise and being like it made money for a while. I guess. I don't even actually think it is making money now. Therefore, it's successful. No, it's not this format, doesn't work. It's trash stop making excuses. Especially bad ones that aren't thought out.
@@msbkaioken136 it’s only trash cause you don’t agree. You give one example of a game that wasn’t even bad😂 Your using your opinion as a fact when the fact is the game and all of its expansions sold well. It’s still played by a big enough player base to continue to produce but yea your right it’s trash and the concept is trash😂 it’s not bowing a head to acknowledge the reality of how things work and if we want games that are playable for extended periods then the people who make them are going to want to make money over time and not in one fell swoop. It’s beneficial for not just the companies but the producers and developers who create and continue to develop the games. So how about you stop just going with trash quick opinions and create an independent thought.
@@lewisqb12 Destiny as a franchise is notorious for being mishandled and mismanaged and having awful decisions be made constantly. It is not a profitable game series and has been floundering for a long time. And it's supposed to be the poster child of a successful live service game. Most live service games fall very short of destiny and destiny has been struggling for a very long time. The amount of examples I could give for failed live service games are uncountable. There's just so many it's hilarious. The successes are very rare, and even the successes often don't last longer than a couple of years before they come across problems. Live service games as a concept is an absolute failure. Also, bro I don't want games that I can play for years and years and years. I want a game to have an ending. Because that way, the content can actually be worthwhile instead of meaningless. Mindless trash over and over again like you seem to suck up. It's hilarious to me that you think sucking off. Companies is you having an independent thought and not just the definition of being a sheep.
@@lewisqb12 The reason why I bring up destiny is because it's probably one of the most successful live service games ever and even that game is notorious for having awful decisions made constantly and being a mishandled franchise that is absolutely not profitable so all of the countless failures that have come over the past few years falling so short is laughable. This kind of game is not sustainable. The vast majority. Of them are massive failures that don't even recoup any money at all and end up closing down studios and causing layoffs because of how much of a failure it is. Imagine being this ignorant and blind. And yet trying to act like you know anything it's so laughable.
Felt i should hear your side of it instead of just commenting on your post like a lot of people did. Can't be a conversation if it's one sided. 1:19 that's fair most games i play with people are just an excuse to hangout. Usually they aren't games I'd pick to play if i was playing a game on my own. Typically shooter games, I'm not the biggest fan. 5:48 that kinda gets into my issue with live service games. People seem to be so greedy nowadays wanting content for games released regularly. What happened to games coming out and that's what it is? You get the game and just replay it. No need for new content or anything just enjoying the game as it is. My issue with live service games is it's always changing. Minecraft now keeps adding a ton of stuff that it didn't really need to. Which mostly keeps being dumb stuff for exploration which i don't care for. R6 Siege doesn't even look like the same game as it was 5 years ago. And i find myself wishing it could go back to how it was. And there in is the root of my issue with live service games. They aren't gonna be the same game if you come back years later after a break from playing. My favorite games don't get updates, aren't getting any new content, hell the dev studio that made them isn't even a thing anymore so there's not even a chance of it either and honestly i wouldn't want them to update it anyways. (Fable trilogy incase anyones curious.) 6:39 i don't typically buy dlc unless its included in buying the game. The only exception is i recently bought the dlc for the fable trilogy because i had the money for it and was curious. I'm not the type to spend money in games. At least not irl money. To the point where everyone pesters me about it. It's a funny conversation. "You're not cool because you won't buy a skin in this game" "I'm being financially responsible. Owning a skin that i either wont even be able to see or even if i can see it wont change the gameplay in any significant way to either improve my enjoyment or lessen my enjoyment by not having a skin." "You're lame dude" Essentially it just doesn't move the needle for me. 10:10 this is a fair take. I will say there is likely people that don't enjoy those kinda games regardless because I'm close to being that kinda person because when a game i play like minecraft has updates my first reaction is to groan and go "why? Whats the point?" Not to say i don't enjoy certain things in the updates but half the content i never care that its in the game at all or it's simply a bother because i have to now rearrange my storage system. And with seige i just want to go back and play the game it used to be but i can't and it just feels like a stranger wearing my friends clothes at this point. Like it's kinda familiar but it's not the same experience. Some people enjoy games as a locked thing that never changes. Some for nostalgia reasons others because a familiar game is comforting in a way. Live service games are the antithesis of what i grew up with which was you buy a game and that's all it is. Even if it had updates you couldn't get them because we never had internet. So it functionally (for myself at least) never had updates. I do however agree that it needs a clearer definition as any game that gets updates and live service aren't mutually exclusive nor are they completely separate.
6:12 "Beware of over delivery, you're creating patterns!" -is the most paranoid statement ive ever heard, all this sounds like is... "Beware of success, people expect you to keep succeeding!" Like, yeah? No shit bungie?? That's the point of creating a successful business in a market that hinges EVERYTHING on a IMPACTFUL delivery, this standard of Quality depreciation = Safe business is eroding every aspect of our society
After reading through a bunch of the comments I think the issue lies more with pay to progress kind of games rather than live service. If live service is a game that gets regular updates over time which people seem to be okay with (I'm still not the biggest fan of regular updates to a game but that's besides the point.) It seems to be an issue when people have to pay to progress in the story or in the game or level up their character or whatever and seemingly to a lesser is extent have to pay real money for in-game items. (I know I'm definitely the kind of person that doesn't care to pay real life money for in-game items.) So maybe it's more accurate to say that people hate pay to progress games then people hate live service games, even though they're can of course be people who just want a game to be what it is without getting updates.
I think it’s because companies builds games to just make it a live service and not focus on making a good game. Very much micro transactions first then worry about gameplay second mentality.
The way you expounded on the Live Service issue was very well done, Benny. I enjoy Helldivers 2, but you covered a lot of the nuance to this well. For me, it isn't a live service that bothers me as much as bugs. Helldivers takes issues and role plays them in comedic ways, which I think allows it to slip by. They play it off well.
The difference for me is whether or not the gameplay or monetization comes first. When games release with repetitive modes, full of bugs, but a fully stocked store, it becomes obvious that the sole purpose of the game is to drain as much money from the audience as possible. Gamers will play a game when it is fun, and being prompted at every turn to empty their wallets isnt fun. Games like SSKTJL and Skull and Bones were not made with the consumer in mind and are suffering for it. While cheaper, more enjoyable games like Helldivers and Palworld are succeeding. Gamers are tired of the industry BS. I agree with the Director of Helldivers when they said games have to earn the right to monetize. A game has to be good before it can ask us for more.
I guess this means there’s different forms of Live services. First, there’s the blatant ones you associate with the phrase “Live-Service” where it was made shop first, game second. Then there’s the no-charge update ones. What should be the lingo for both of these?
That's because live service is an industry despised term that makes people very angry and not wanna buy your game developers are legitimately scared now to market their games as live service because it's just simply not marketable and I couldn't be more happy about that fact and that developers are scared about it.
People hate what certain Twitch streamers and RUclips content creators hate. Then, they go to Reddit or Facebook groups to add to the flames. The psychological effects people get from the Internet have been a major factor in this and killed a lot of games. There's a reason those types of creators get perks in games or even earlier Beta access because they want to sway those people's opinions.
I don't think helldivers 2 is seens more positively than suicide squad because it's more fun. It's more fun because each game you gain something. Whether it's samples, medals, super credits, guns, new difficulties, contributing to the war effort or knowledge on how to deal with the enemies. In suicide squad even if the gameplay was the most fun gameplay ever (it's not) you would only get an extra 5 hours of enjoyment from it because you essentially gain nothing from continuing playing it. You just grind boring missions so that you can eventually get a boss fight, then do it all again.
This is how I always thought. I like the thought of live service game. More content for a game that I like, free most of the time. But the key is, the game that I like. People don't hate live service games, it is a bad game that has live service.
The main reason i don't like suicide squad is because of the batman stuff i watch my brother play it seems ok but Arkham batman is one of my favorite game franchises of all time i can't believe they did that to my boi all they had to do was make it its own game and like 80% of the hate wouldn't have happened
I think people dont like story driven live service games. The issue is that most live service games, except traditional MMOs, have your basic multiplayer tropes. Ex: defend this, defend this while it moves, kill all the enemies. And this works when the game focuses on it being strictly multiplayer and then MAYBE tacks on a simple story. But as soon as you go the opposite way, story game where the main gameplay is basically just your typical multiplayer it feels cheap because we are used to amazing single player games with great single player gameplay. Ex. God of War, Spider-Man, Batman Arkham. It feels like half of a game or like it doesn't know what its identity is when built this way, and then on top of that you market it like its a story based game when its really not its just a multiplayer game that decided to put a bigger focus on story and it will always suffer because of that. Story based games are good for a single playthrough maybe a second for the people that just love it but once the story is done its done. There is a balance that must be struck, people like the Injustice games because they are good fighting games and never once has it marketed itself as a story game with fighting attached to it, its first and foremost a fighting game that happens to have a story, does it need the story to be a good fighting game? No and thats the point. SQ: KTJL needs the story to have legs and it shouldn't, it should be able to stand on its own without the story ever being played and thats what kills it same as Marvel Avengers.
For me it's the type of live service. If it's a game where I pay $60 at first and I can play as much as I want and have the OPTION to buy skins or whatever, sure, that's fine, totally cool with me. If it's the type where I pay $60 and have to either do a huge unreasonable grind or spend more money to actually play the game then it can fuck off. Some developers feel greedier than others with these practices too, like COD or Red Dead/GTA Online feel super greedy. Deep Rock Galactic doesn't bother me at all
I get what you’re saying but live service games have evolved to where games like Spider-Man SHOULDNT be like service at all because it’s just a story game that can allow you to do side missions after the main story is over, instead games are being pay walled for gameplay that should be part of the main gameplay, the more leeway we give a company the more they’ll take and put content being paywalls
Suicide Squad took almost a decade to make. Skull and Bones also took a decade to make. I feel like neither game is worth 70 dollars and are being completely overshadowed by smaller devs reaching record breaking numbers. If that isn't a sign that the big studios are the issue when it comes to live service games, idk what will
This made me think about it more so, I loved MMOs for a long time which I always considered "Live Service", and people always loved those.. when they are good... If these companies made battle passes that were GOOD, that you could earn halfway decent things free on it, and great things when paid, AND solid things in the game in general I think people would feel differently.. But the companies need ALL the money, and they need it now! And if the game came out successful and was great, it would be different too.. I think LS is under a MUCH higher level of scrutiny, and as such they should never do what normal games do where they release the game 95% working and fix it over the first few months, it should work GREAT,. and the content is the only live service part(and tweaks)
I don't hate "game as service", i just don't like them because they go against the way i consume videogames. Sometimes i play multiple games in parallel, sometimes i don't play videogames for month because i want to do something else. I can't justify to play a game as service, which can die community wise or get its servers closed, any day in these conditions.
Im playing AC6 fires of rubicon and SRW30 and Halo infinite my issue in this whole thing is i dont think SS:KJL is fun i tried it and well it just feels all wrong from the anurism warning explosions to the ugly designs hell divers is just Starship troopers fun and i dig it
You can tell you acrually enjoy playing the games wether good or bad unlike most people i see talk about this topic its like they hate doing it half the time so why do it ! If i had mote money if buy both heck i probably will but thays just cuz i like playing new games and they both look really polished
Take this concept and apply it to Pokemon Scarlet and Violet. Buy the one time purchase DLC and over time DLC gets released and also patch updates. So far 2 DLCs are out and an Epilogue. A main vanilla game with extra content to be released into the future to prolong the longevity of playtime.
A lot of games as service do things to actively feel like they sole function is to get at your wallet which doesn't help and usually that vibe comes from either the design of the game from most AAA studios and publisher edicts and other factors. Helldivers general vibe, pricing model and game design/ gameplay loop clearly worked in a way that Suicide Squad and other games failed or didn't properly get to polish. I will say you're not wrong in that a lot of live service games could be some people's favorites but the design ethos and general vibes that those games put out don't do the game any favors.
I think context really matters. Live service games can be really fun, but the context of rocksteady making one instead of the game people clearly wanted means it didn’t have a shot. Even if it’s fun (I don’t know, I haven’t played it) people don’t want that game. In that case, it feels like company greed took something that we really wanted. Helldivers is fun as hell and is also in a context in which people will accept it
This is more just a critique of people who don't live by the values they preach. Like the people who say AAA sucks, but don't touch the indie scene. I think the idea of an "infinite game" is disgusting, it is saying games aren't interesting as an art-form. So I don't touch rogue-anything, or live-service, or really even games with DLC/expansions. I think PC/Console games in general have an over-reliance on violence, so I specifically seek out more creative projects. So, my recent games have been Coffee Talk 2, The Cosmic Wheel of Sisterhood, Spirited Thief, and about 30 Steam Next Fest Demo's with my main highlight being an immersive-sim gardening game.
Bro don't gaslight me. Id rather pay 40.00 $ than 70 for a game that has far better reviews and reception stretching my dollar and entertainment far more. I'd rather fight space bugs Lost planet style wrapped inside a totalitarian space troopers esk narrative, than play a game where I destroy the superheroes I come to love in a poorly written narrative, that forces boring moment to moment "shoot the purple weak point" style gaming. Also, let it be known I don't believe you have a brother.
I don't mind live service games as long as there's plenty of things to do. However I do wish more live service games adopt what SSKTJL and Halo do with their Battlepasses which is "Grind it out as long as you want, it won't go away any time soon and you can grind all our BPs whenever you want. Hell even COD Mobile has something called a BP Vault where if you may have missed out on a previous BP, you can buy it again with each new season. Just get rid of the FOMO aspect of it.
I agree, please SSKTJL is also doing something that more games should be doing, making the next missions free. Like the games of the past that when you buy the game you got the game no DLC story, and now it’s like every game needs DLC stuff, SSKTJL knows what games want free dlc missions.
I disagree. The difference is that live service games are always online. So, yes. We have been playing live service games for years. Your example of WoW is a prone example. Spiderman is not an example of this. Another example is multi-player in CoD. Just having patches and dlc doesn't make it a live service game. Live service games have to be logged in to servers. You can have a game that is live and can also be played offline. The online part would be the live service aspect. That is like saying the Lego games are live service games because they have patches and dlc. This is not true. Battle passes are rewards to log into their servers. There is a huge difference.
as a comic book fan how can you like the Suicide Squad game when it's incredibly disrespectful to every comic book character it includes and is filled with so many plot holes in it's own universe (the whole changing Deadshot's race was so obviously an awful retcon)
@@raytheswift422 The difference is the comics actually respect the characters unlike the game, for example the comics doesn’t have King Shark pick up a green lantern ring after killing Green Lantern and immediately being able to use it despite that not being how it works, or having the Suicide Squad being able to kill Superman with bullets even after he recharged his powers after being weakened by golden Kryptonite
I think Live service games are ok. There are a lot of MMOs out there like FF14. I know a friend who doesnt like playing games that require you to do dailies but she likes that game because of other friends and what the games about and such. So yeah a lot of live service games have the things people enjoy and dont mind grinding things out here or there. However I think a lot of live service games however limit the players progress and they are forced to grind for an extended period of time where the tasks are so repetitive that it takes what ever fun a person could have and turn it into a chore. Which is a case in a lot of games when they update with newer content and say newer players can get to it but are more for anyone whose already been playing for a while. Then there are the micro transactions or the big content updates locked behind a paywall. Usually stuff that would enhance the players experience than the game itself. Like if you buy a battle pass you _could_ get an emote or whatever. And people do buy whatever they are willing to and get to use the extra aesthetic fluff they want and invest their time just for the reward and grind it out just because they spent extra money on it. The fun factors gone, at some point. Its not a game its a thing you must do now thinking it will be worth it and then the next update happens that has something you have to buy. People generally think thats what live service games mean, that they will keep updating with things that youd have to spend real money on to get the things you want to play with. The next thing is story or level design or what have you. Usually live service games have a great start when it comes to story and a cool premise to work with. But as the updates continue the quality can just take a nose dive because the devs dont want to give everything away in one go or just havent even made it that far to begin with. People who play for the content end up dont having fun with the casual experience. I know a streamer who got so bored of genshin impacts last story update that he just stopped streaming it cause it was boring. And the thought that live service games with plot will never get to the end of it also deters a lot of players. Lastly i think people misinterpret all the things that are a part of a live service. Big games that have a story or a gameplay loop that gets either free dlc or payed aesthetics or even payed content are also live service cause they are actively updating the games or patching it if they are planning for big content releases in the future. If you play a game in early access youre playing a live service game. Like look at palworld now. In a couple of months we might see new content than whats already in the game as of yet. It will get major updates live as we go until its a full game. Maybe they will even have dlc. In the end people dislike different things about the concept of live service games but play it if its their cup of tea. So yeah people wont play a game they dont like and will play a game they like even if they dislike certain live service elements.
All right MR benny I am ready to be call out but do I dislike live service games no. But I had a good talk with my friend about live service and we were talking about Genshin. So my friend has 800 hrs on genshin he decided to stop playing the game because he didn't find the game fun anymore. But he told me the reason he kept playing was because he was scared to miss out on the new characters or events. I think people don't like live service games because of that same reason. I am playing right now Persona 3 reloaded ( tell me how it live service game), Honkai star rail ( Benny what your team and why kafka is the best), and Xenoblade Chronicle x ( Tell me how it a live service game the Will U die this is a joke by the way)
But I will say in the future games should do what halo does with it battle pass once you buy it, it will not go away that a great system but they should also make it easier to level up in some of these battle pass come to point why do good in game when your going to get the same amount EXP as the other guy. It similar talk what happen to the MCC when halo reach came out they had a battle pass and people were mad because we had to regain are armor through a battle pass that toke too long so grifball had people bolstering there EXP to make it faster ( I did do this because I wanted my Noble 6 to look nice in the story again)
I agree with overall points, and I just want to bring in another explanation from the same camp as your brother. I think it boils down to *vibes, man*. A game that (at some point in its marketing) proudly wears its Live Service moniker just… I don't know, it just ruins the vibes. It messes up the game design in a way that doesn't happen with "sneaky Live Service" like the AC Layla Trilogy, and even then the sneakiness of the Live Service part was wearing thin in Valhalla. And the most frustrating part is that those Live Service games, i.e. Avengers, could have been what I wanted if we just look at the elevator pitch without what "Live Service" brings to the table. And that's where games like Helldivers 2 work despite being a Live Service and people not seeing it: the game being a Live Service doesn't change the game design (or at least it doesn't feel like it does) In terms of core design, it could have come out during the PS360 era with little change needed. Whereas a game like Avengers couldn't have hid behind an "our game is forever" smokescreen for their "the first 2 hours are fun" gameplay loop, and in doing so it "robs us" of the actual Avengers game we want. I know I'm terrible at expressing my thoughts, I hope I managed to make some sense while also helping with the 𝓐𝓵𝓰𝓸𝓻𝓲𝓽𝓱𝓶 with some engagement!
Live service absolutely changes the game design. What are you talking about? This is just obviously true kill the justice league's a great example of this fact.
For me how i see it is, multiplayer games or games as a service, the first one would be like hell divers 2 or the new subnautica, you get it yo ucan play it with frens, you dont need to put more coins into it, in the future there is an expansion? oke you can have it if you want not mandatory at all; then you get to the games as a service, like wow, ffxiv or destiny, where you have 2 options, or you get the expansions or you miss out on the core gameplay, just look at what you can do in destiny without any expansion, where is the main campaing? nah vaulted, fuk you, pay me the expansions, -insert Jojos never forgive the japanesse meme, but change japanesse with bungie-, wow or fxiv, yo uget to play certain stuff, granted ffxiv does let you do a lot more than wow, but at some point its pay or you dont have full features. Of course there is games like warframe, where imo its way way way better done you can hop on and not put a dime into it. Thats what people is hating, not only i need to put so much of my time in this game, BUT i need to pay soooo much for it (again, just look at the prices for destinys expansions + the focus on pay the bp and pay cosmetics meanwhile you pray to have another campaing like forsaken or witch queen and not like the last one). So for me i dont mind a multiplayer game with some mild things in their store, but you can tell when a game has its focus on getting your money rather than showing off amazing and fun gameplay.
I really like how Hitman did live service. They release the full main game up front, start to finish. Then as it goes on they release more challenges and weapons and all that. A few new maps. I really prefer that method over how they tried to do their first game in the new trilogy, and how a lot of games do it now, where the story doesn't end in the main game, it keeps continuing through updates throughout a number of years.
No, I’m dead set on disliking any and _all_ live services. They are the sole reason why the industry is in such a terrible place. Had GTAO never existed, this never would have happen.
You lost my viewership when you said suicide squad was good. It goes against what every gamer and fan of dc stands for and is defined by woke ideology. You lost credibility
As much as I dislike “woke” ideology, the game barely has it. Also the hate the game gets is just cuz it’s forcibly tied with Arkham. The game is a 5/10 at its state right now, but can reach a strong 8/10 if the level design is improved along with variation in levels and gunplay. It’s a big missed opportunity with a lot of undeserved hate
You can buy the Battlepass in Helldivers 2 by playing the game. You can earn premium currency by buying it with in game currency or by finding it in missions. You can buy it with real world money, but it is absolutely unnecessary. Unlike most other games with battlespasses.
The gameplay of Helldivers 2 i just found fun in general since it has tons of enemy types. In the lower difficulties you get the same bugs but the better loot you unlock and the better you get allows you to climb the difficulties and fight new enemies in bugs and bot missions compared to suicide squad that has similar enmies all the way through.
Another thing is that Helldivers 2 doesn't take itself serious and knows what it wants to do unlike suicide squad.
The loot in Helldivers feels unique to use and has a purpose for different missions and situatons and even enemy types.
I also feel like unlike other live service games HD2 respects the players time and money. It knows that its asking the player to put trust in the game and wait for more content so they charge less (£35) where i live unlike suicide squad which is asking me to put my trust into the game at full price (£70) from the start.
The store prices in HD2 are also reasonable. I can buy a full skin for under £4 unlike most others that charge £8-£16 and then there are idiot companies that wanna charge way more.
It also makes sense for the characters in HD2 to use the weapons they do in this world which adds to the immersion.
Theres also the grind which live service games seem obsessed with. HD2 gives you the freedom to choose when you want to play and how long unlike other live serivce games that don't trust their game so they rely on timers and numbers going up to keep you grinding in time for the next piece of content.
The reason HD2 is blowing up is simply because its doing everything right from the start (other than servers). People have just associated live service as bad because loads of dev studios are releasing their games with intent to fix later and when player see that they decide to wait for the game to either go on sale till it goes for a price they deem worphy for the product the company put out, or don't buy the game at all and in rare cases the game gets fixed and people give it another try like no mans sky.
But most of the time companies just won't take the time to fix their mistakes like Anthem which could have had a full on revival if they didn't cancel that huge overhaul and released it with tons of new content and changes to the base game.
HD2 also fits perfectly well with content on tiktok letting people share their experinces and there the community feature in game allowing you to see player counts on worlds and sectors and and everyone working together to clear planets creates a sense of community. Friendly fire is also a fun aspect paired with the ragdoll physics.
I saw somewhere the server thing is because they're a smaller dev team so they don't have the infrastructure a corporation like ubisoft would.
Which just goes to show that like i always say smaller indie game devs are typically better than corprate game devs simply because like you said they know what they want the game to be and have the freedom to actually make it the way they want.
Whereas corporate game devs have the money to do things well but not necessarily the sense of direction and intent that smaller devs do and even if they do they might not have the freedom from corprate to make the game in the way they'd like because corprate wants to milk everything they can outta the game which ultimately leads to a mishapen lump of a game.
I have to confess, I’m usually the one to switch off the moment I hear a game is "live service".
BUT (please don’t touch the pitchforks) I do regularly play Fortnite.
It just became a handy little habit I developed. Every morning, I’d play up to an hour of Fortnite, focusing mostly on the weekly or seasonal quests. I started this when I started my new job, which required me to be up early and go to work. I found using it as a means to chill and wake myself up did wonders for my productivity throughout the day. It’s a casual time killer, just like my mobile games.
Outside of Fortnite, I’ve played Avengers to platinum, I might check out Suicide Squad to play the story down the road. If the game keeps me engaged, I will play until I get bored.
(Btw, Fortnite Festival has no right being as fun as it is either. Holy shit.)
Live service has been an interesting concept for me and a progressing opinion from game to game. I think now I’ve come to the conclusion, whether game as a service or live service, if I enjoy playing the game, I will keep playing it. If I’m playing for the narrative, I’ll wait until the next story update (it’s how I played Avengers).
And if I can exploit or grind my way to unlock the battle passes without spending any money, like I can in Fortnite, if you keep me engaged, I will get maximum value for my Free to Play game! 😅
HellDivers 2 is proof that people don’t hate live service game. I don’t know why everyone was acting like they did a month ago. They must have hated a certain game that was live service but not the live service itself.
The game hasn't even been around a month yet. We will see the complaints roll in as time passes.
Though I am in the seeming minority of gamers that do just hate the concept of "a game that never ends". No matter the form.
I think the hate had to do with Suicide Squad Kill the Justice League. The fact that it came from a developer that had a history of stellar single player story based games. Plus the fact that they weren’t forthcoming about it when it was revealed.
I hate live service games.
@@haruhirogrimgar6047 they technically already started. u can't log in
SS KTJL, has the same issue kinda, but yet one is praised and the other is sacrificed....i personally don't get it.
the hate feels fabricated at this point
People absolutely hate live service games for a plethora of very valid reasons. It's a blight on the gaming industry and has actually ruined multiple games and gaming companies because they're chasing trends. You're viewing it in a very backwards manner you're assuming most live service games are successful and people just hate the bad ones. No, most live service games suck and games like helldivers 2 are the exception to the rule.
I hate what live service games did to my friends. We use to play and rent different games. Now all they play is fornite
Fortnite is fun especially fortnite festival.
I skipped a console gen and just got a PS5. Bought a couple PS4 games. Popped in Injustice 2. See the lootboxes and just roll my eyes
The problem with live service isn't the nature of live service itself or it's content. Well not entirely. It's complicated just as you said.
Let's take the two games you listed.
Helldivers II is 29.99.
SS: KtJL is 69.99 base or 99.99 deluxe.
The AAA studio is providing the same experience at a highly inflated cost. It already does not value your time and players know that. The gameplay is a substandard looter shooter for an above standard cost.
There's more to the argument. You've put forth a reason based on content being generated but also didn't put any attention on the predatory practice that many games as a service models use to take advantage of that extra content.
Helldivers II costs 9.99 for its battle pass. While battle passes are usually structured as FOMO based mentality Helldivers respects your time. Buy the battlepass and it does not expire. Take your time. Or not. Rush it if you want. Binge like a greedy game pig for all I care. SS:KtJL should cost about the same, but once that pass is gone it's gone. FOMO, baby, it's in style!
However I haven't played either game. I have no skin in this argument. My issue with games as a service is that stuff above but more to do with what I've written below.
The problem that both of them share though as a GaaS/live service game these are games you can pay 30 dollars or a hundred dollars for and can be taken offline. Meaning your play is on a timer the moment that game releases. At any time a studio can shut off a live service game and that's it. You are unable to play what you payed for. Look at the ever growing graveyard of live service games. The mobile market is full of dead games, well, not that you would know as they are not on the stores any more. PC and console games are following suit. You can't, without breaking some anti piracy laws, save a live service game for future play.
These companies have no end of life plan for these types of games. No "We'll update it for LAN or private server play" or "We'll provide a balanced offline mode once we take the servers down." As a consumer I hate paying for something that is at the mercy of someone else to mostly take away. If I want to play Russian Roulette with myself don't leave me with the bullets and no gun to use.
I really agree with your premise Benny, but I disagree with the reason. When games come out and have micro transactions up the wazoo that don’t allow you to progress into the game as a whole that is when you have people freak out and rightfully so. Some examples being any sports games, the battlefront debacle, COD, any collection based games, etc. I’ll exclude Fortnite because its model is different and in my opinion well done but if you wanna add it that’s fair. The fear of game series as a whole becoming like that is what scares people. I think monster hunter is a great example of that. It’s a live service game series. Always has been, it comes out with its main game followed by free dlc for about a year, then it drops its paid dlc a year later which is followed by another year of free updates. Two years of one game, But in the last two entries they introduced some paid cosmetic dlcs and it has the entire community in arms. They are terrified of it becoming a “live-service” game when it already is. It shows how it’s more the fear of ruining a franchise/game you love because if you look at it realistically it only makes sense for the developers and companies to lean in at least somewhat to what works, but how it is implemented is what actually matters and that is going over the general populations heads. Hope you guys enjoyed my perspective if anyone reads it😂
That sounds like you're just bowing your head and being like yes, company, please bleed me of my money more. Also, you're just wrong. It doesn't work. Most live service games fail. I feel like people look at destiny a struggling franchise and being like it made money for a while. I guess. I don't even actually think it is making money now. Therefore, it's successful. No, it's not this format, doesn't work. It's trash stop making excuses. Especially bad ones that aren't thought out.
@@msbkaioken136 it’s only trash cause you don’t agree. You give one example of a game that wasn’t even bad😂 Your using your opinion as a fact when the fact is the game and all of its expansions sold well. It’s still played by a big enough player base to continue to produce but yea your right it’s trash and the concept is trash😂 it’s not bowing a head to acknowledge the reality of how things work and if we want games that are playable for extended periods then the people who make them are going to want to make money over time and not in one fell swoop. It’s beneficial for not just the companies but the producers and developers who create and continue to develop the games. So how about you stop just going with trash quick opinions and create an independent thought.
@@lewisqb12 Destiny as a franchise is notorious for being mishandled and mismanaged and having awful decisions be made constantly. It is not a profitable game series and has been floundering for a long time. And it's supposed to be the poster child of a successful live service game. Most live service games fall very short of destiny and destiny has been struggling for a very long time. The amount of examples I could give for failed live service games are uncountable. There's just so many it's hilarious. The successes are very rare, and even the successes often don't last longer than a couple of years before they come across problems. Live service games as a concept is an absolute failure. Also, bro I don't want games that I can play for years and years and years. I want a game to have an ending. Because that way, the content can actually be worthwhile instead of meaningless. Mindless trash over and over again like you seem to suck up. It's hilarious to me that you think sucking off. Companies is you having an independent thought and not just the definition of being a sheep.
@@lewisqb12 The reason why I bring up destiny is because it's probably one of the most successful live service games ever and even that game is notorious for having awful decisions made constantly and being a mishandled franchise that is absolutely not profitable so all of the countless failures that have come over the past few years falling so short is laughable. This kind of game is not sustainable. The vast majority. Of them are massive failures that don't even recoup any money at all and end up closing down studios and causing layoffs because of how much of a failure it is. Imagine being this ignorant and blind. And yet trying to act like you know anything it's so laughable.
Felt i should hear your side of it instead of just commenting on your post like a lot of people did.
Can't be a conversation if it's one sided.
1:19 that's fair most games i play with people are just an excuse to hangout. Usually they aren't games I'd pick to play if i was playing a game on my own.
Typically shooter games, I'm not the biggest fan.
5:48 that kinda gets into my issue with live service games. People seem to be so greedy nowadays wanting content for games released regularly. What happened to games coming out and that's what it is? You get the game and just replay it. No need for new content or anything just enjoying the game as it is.
My issue with live service games is it's always changing.
Minecraft now keeps adding a ton of stuff that it didn't really need to. Which mostly keeps being dumb stuff for exploration which i don't care for.
R6 Siege doesn't even look like the same game as it was 5 years ago. And i find myself wishing it could go back to how it was.
And there in is the root of my issue with live service games.
They aren't gonna be the same game if you come back years later after a break from playing.
My favorite games don't get updates, aren't getting any new content, hell the dev studio that made them isn't even a thing anymore so there's not even a chance of it either and honestly i wouldn't want them to update it anyways.
(Fable trilogy incase anyones curious.)
6:39 i don't typically buy dlc unless its included in buying the game. The only exception is i recently bought the dlc for the fable trilogy because i had the money for it and was curious.
I'm not the type to spend money in games. At least not irl money. To the point where everyone pesters me about it. It's a funny conversation. "You're not cool because you won't buy a skin in this game" "I'm being financially responsible. Owning a skin that i either wont even be able to see or even if i can see it wont change the gameplay in any significant way to either improve my enjoyment or lessen my enjoyment by not having a skin." "You're lame dude" Essentially it just doesn't move the needle for me.
10:10 this is a fair take. I will say there is likely people that don't enjoy those kinda games regardless because I'm close to being that kinda person because when a game i play like minecraft has updates my first reaction is to groan and go "why? Whats the point?" Not to say i don't enjoy certain things in the updates but half the content i never care that its in the game at all or it's simply a bother because i have to now rearrange my storage system.
And with seige i just want to go back and play the game it used to be but i can't and it just feels like a stranger wearing my friends clothes at this point. Like it's kinda familiar but it's not the same experience.
Some people enjoy games as a locked thing that never changes. Some for nostalgia reasons others because a familiar game is comforting in a way.
Live service games are the antithesis of what i grew up with which was you buy a game and that's all it is.
Even if it had updates you couldn't get them because we never had internet. So it functionally (for myself at least) never had updates.
I do however agree that it needs a clearer definition as any game that gets updates and live service aren't mutually exclusive nor are they completely separate.
6:12 "Beware of over delivery, you're creating patterns!" -is the most paranoid statement ive ever heard, all this sounds like is...
"Beware of success, people expect you to keep succeeding!" Like, yeah? No shit bungie?? That's the point of creating a successful business in a market that hinges EVERYTHING on a IMPACTFUL delivery, this standard of Quality depreciation = Safe business is eroding every aspect of our society
After reading through a bunch of the comments I think the issue lies more with pay to progress kind of games rather than live service.
If live service is a game that gets regular updates over time which people seem to be okay with (I'm still not the biggest fan of regular updates to a game but that's besides the point.)
It seems to be an issue when people have to pay to progress in the story or in the game or level up their character or whatever and seemingly to a lesser is extent have to pay real money for in-game items.
(I know I'm definitely the kind of person that doesn't care to pay real life money for in-game items.)
So maybe it's more accurate to say that people hate pay to progress games then people hate live service games, even though they're can of course be people who just want a game to be what it is without getting updates.
I think it’s because companies builds games to just make it a live service and not focus on making a good game. Very much micro transactions first then worry about gameplay second mentality.
No Benny I don't like live service. I don't like dailies, I hate grinding, I hate battle passes
The way you expounded on the Live Service issue was very well done, Benny. I enjoy Helldivers 2, but you covered a lot of the nuance to this well. For me, it isn't a live service that bothers me as much as bugs. Helldivers takes issues and role plays them in comedic ways, which I think allows it to slip by. They play it off well.
The difference for me is whether or not the gameplay or monetization comes first. When games release with repetitive modes, full of bugs, but a fully stocked store, it becomes obvious that the sole purpose of the game is to drain as much money from the audience as possible. Gamers will play a game when it is fun, and being prompted at every turn to empty their wallets isnt fun. Games like SSKTJL and Skull and Bones were not made with the consumer in mind and are suffering for it. While cheaper, more enjoyable games like Helldivers and Palworld are succeeding. Gamers are tired of the industry BS. I agree with the Director of Helldivers when they said games have to earn the right to monetize. A game has to be good before it can ask us for more.
I guess this means there’s different forms of Live services.
First, there’s the blatant ones you associate with the phrase “Live-Service” where it was made shop first, game second.
Then there’s the no-charge update ones.
What should be the lingo for both of these?
The story of Helldivers 2 is us the players winning and losing planets.
You can’t get more live service than that
4:45 i had this exact experience with the new subnautica game when i found out that it is going to be a live service
Oh shit i shouldve waited and finished the video😅
It just hit me watching this why Cygames is staying away from calling Relink a Live Service.
That's because live service is an industry despised term that makes people very angry and not wanna buy your game developers are legitimately scared now to market their games as live service because it's just simply not marketable and I couldn't be more happy about that fact and that developers are scared about it.
People hate what certain Twitch streamers and RUclips content creators hate. Then, they go to Reddit or Facebook groups to add to the flames. The psychological effects people get from the Internet have been a major factor in this and killed a lot of games. There's a reason those types of creators get perks in games or even earlier Beta access because they want to sway those people's opinions.
where can i get that Bulma shirt?
I don't think helldivers 2 is seens more positively than suicide squad because it's more fun. It's more fun because each game you gain something. Whether it's samples, medals, super credits, guns, new difficulties, contributing to the war effort or knowledge on how to deal with the enemies. In suicide squad even if the gameplay was the most fun gameplay ever (it's not) you would only get an extra 5 hours of enjoyment from it because you essentially gain nothing from continuing playing it. You just grind boring missions so that you can eventually get a boss fight, then do it all again.
This is how I always thought. I like the thought of live service game. More content for a game that I like, free most of the time. But the key is, the game that I like. People don't hate live service games, it is a bad game that has live service.
The main reason i don't like suicide squad is because of the batman stuff i watch my brother play it seems ok but Arkham batman is one of my favorite game franchises of all time i can't believe they did that to my boi all they had to do was make it its own game and like 80% of the hate wouldn't have happened
I think people dont like story driven live service games. The issue is that most live service games, except traditional MMOs, have your basic multiplayer tropes. Ex: defend this, defend this while it moves, kill all the enemies. And this works when the game focuses on it being strictly multiplayer and then MAYBE tacks on a simple story. But as soon as you go the opposite way, story game where the main gameplay is basically just your typical multiplayer it feels cheap because we are used to amazing single player games with great single player gameplay. Ex. God of War, Spider-Man, Batman Arkham. It feels like half of a game or like it doesn't know what its identity is when built this way, and then on top of that you market it like its a story based game when its really not its just a multiplayer game that decided to put a bigger focus on story and it will always suffer because of that. Story based games are good for a single playthrough maybe a second for the people that just love it but once the story is done its done. There is a balance that must be struck, people like the Injustice games because they are good fighting games and never once has it marketed itself as a story game with fighting attached to it, its first and foremost a fighting game that happens to have a story, does it need the story to be a good fighting game? No and thats the point. SQ: KTJL needs the story to have legs and it shouldn't, it should be able to stand on its own without the story ever being played and thats what kills it same as Marvel Avengers.
For me it's the type of live service. If it's a game where I pay $60 at first and I can play as much as I want and have the OPTION to buy skins or whatever, sure, that's fine, totally cool with me. If it's the type where I pay $60 and have to either do a huge unreasonable grind or spend more money to actually play the game then it can fuck off. Some developers feel greedier than others with these practices too, like COD or Red Dead/GTA Online feel super greedy. Deep Rock Galactic doesn't bother me at all
Street Fighter 2 felt like a live service before the internet lol
minor correction, Fortnite didn't invent the concept of battlepasses, they were introduced in DOTA 2 by Valve.
In my opinion I think that the live service on ss makes it better a little bonus so u won’t always have to play it by yourself
I get what you’re saying but live service games have evolved to where games like Spider-Man SHOULDNT be like service at all because it’s just a story game that can allow you to do side missions after the main story is over, instead games are being pay walled for gameplay that should be part of the main gameplay, the more leeway we give a company the more they’ll take and put content being paywalls
Suicide Squad took almost a decade to make. Skull and Bones also took a decade to make. I feel like neither game is worth 70 dollars and are being completely overshadowed by smaller devs reaching record breaking numbers. If that isn't a sign that the big studios are the issue when it comes to live service games, idk what will
This made me think about it more so, I loved MMOs for a long time which I always considered "Live Service", and people always loved those.. when they are good... If these companies made battle passes that were GOOD, that you could earn halfway decent things free on it, and great things when paid, AND solid things in the game in general I think people would feel differently.. But the companies need ALL the money, and they need it now! And if the game came out successful and was great, it would be different too.. I think LS is under a MUCH higher level of scrutiny, and as such they should never do what normal games do where they release the game 95% working and fix it over the first few months, it should work GREAT,. and the content is the only live service part(and tweaks)
I don't hate "game as service", i just don't like them because they go against the way i consume videogames. Sometimes i play multiple games in parallel, sometimes i don't play videogames for month because i want to do something else. I can't justify to play a game as service, which can die community wise or get its servers closed, any day in these conditions.
I’m loving your problems channel. This one hits the sweet spot.
Never played ss kills the jl but he'll divers have different enemy variety but I still see your point
Im playing AC6 fires of rubicon and SRW30 and Halo infinite my issue in this whole thing is i dont think SS:KJL is fun i tried it and well it just feels all wrong from the anurism warning explosions to the ugly designs hell divers is just Starship troopers fun and i dig it
I love the looter shooters and live service games, its just I love GOOD ones. Too many sucky ones or broken unfinished ones
You can tell you acrually enjoy playing the games wether good or bad unlike most people i see talk about this topic its like they hate doing it half the time so why do it ! If i had mote money if buy both heck i probably will but thays just cuz i like playing new games and they both look really polished
Take this concept and apply it to Pokemon Scarlet and Violet. Buy the one time purchase DLC and over time DLC gets released and also patch updates. So far 2 DLCs are out and an Epilogue. A main vanilla game with extra content to be released into the future to prolong the longevity of playtime.
great job man
A lot of games as service do things to actively feel like they sole function is to get at your wallet which doesn't help and usually that vibe comes from either the design of the game from most AAA studios and publisher edicts and other factors. Helldivers general vibe, pricing model and game design/ gameplay loop clearly worked in a way that Suicide Squad and other games failed or didn't properly get to polish. I will say you're not wrong in that a lot of live service games could be some people's favorites but the design ethos and general vibes that those games put out don't do the game any favors.
I think context really matters. Live service games can be really fun, but the context of rocksteady making one instead of the game people clearly wanted means it didn’t have a shot. Even if it’s fun (I don’t know, I haven’t played it) people don’t want that game. In that case, it feels like company greed took something that we really wanted. Helldivers is fun as hell and is also in a context in which people will accept it
My buddies and I pretty much only play smite lol
This is more just a critique of people who don't live by the values they preach. Like the people who say AAA sucks, but don't touch the indie scene.
I think the idea of an "infinite game" is disgusting, it is saying games aren't interesting as an art-form. So I don't touch rogue-anything, or live-service, or really even games with DLC/expansions. I think PC/Console games in general have an over-reliance on violence, so I specifically seek out more creative projects.
So, my recent games have been Coffee Talk 2, The Cosmic Wheel of Sisterhood, Spirited Thief, and about 30 Steam Next Fest Demo's with my main highlight being an immersive-sim gardening game.
Bro don't gaslight me. Id rather pay 40.00 $ than 70 for a game that has far better reviews and reception stretching my dollar and entertainment far more. I'd rather fight space bugs Lost planet style wrapped inside a totalitarian space troopers esk narrative, than play a game where I destroy the superheroes I come to love in a poorly written narrative, that forces boring moment to moment "shoot the purple weak point" style gaming. Also, let it be known I don't believe you have a brother.
Right now I’m playing the finals. I kind of dig that game.
I don't mind live service games as long as there's plenty of things to do. However I do wish more live service games adopt what SSKTJL and Halo do with their Battlepasses which is "Grind it out as long as you want, it won't go away any time soon and you can grind all our BPs whenever you want. Hell even COD Mobile has something called a BP Vault where if you may have missed out on a previous BP, you can buy it again with each new season. Just get rid of the FOMO aspect of it.
I agree, please SSKTJL is also doing something that more games should be doing, making the next missions free. Like the games of the past that when you buy the game you got the game no DLC story, and now it’s like every game needs DLC stuff, SSKTJL knows what games want free dlc missions.
I disagree. The difference is that live service games are always online. So, yes. We have been playing live service games for years. Your example of WoW is a prone example. Spiderman is not an example of this. Another example is multi-player in CoD. Just having patches and dlc doesn't make it a live service game. Live service games have to be logged in to servers. You can have a game that is live and can also be played offline. The online part would be the live service aspect. That is like saying the Lego games are live service games because they have patches and dlc. This is not true. Battle passes are rewards to log into their servers. There is a huge difference.
We are the batmen!!
No one mentioning Timmy Turner yapping non stop makes anyone with a functioning brain wan tot turn the game off
as a comic book fan how can you like the Suicide Squad game when it's incredibly disrespectful to every comic book character it includes and is filled with so many plot holes in it's own universe (the whole changing Deadshot's race was so obviously an awful retcon)
So suicide squad don't have comics of their own?🤨
@@raytheswift422 The difference is the comics actually respect the characters unlike the game, for example the comics doesn’t have King Shark pick up a green lantern ring after killing Green Lantern and immediately being able to use it despite that not being how it works, or having the Suicide Squad being able to kill Superman with bullets even after he recharged his powers after being weakened by golden Kryptonite
I think Live service games are ok. There are a lot of MMOs out there like FF14. I know a friend who doesnt like playing games that require you to do dailies but she likes that game because of other friends and what the games about and such. So yeah a lot of live service games have the things people enjoy and dont mind grinding things out here or there. However I think a lot of live service games however limit the players progress and they are forced to grind for an extended period of time where the tasks are so repetitive that it takes what ever fun a person could have and turn it into a chore. Which is a case in a lot of games when they update with newer content and say newer players can get to it but are more for anyone whose already been playing for a while.
Then there are the micro transactions or the big content updates locked behind a paywall. Usually stuff that would enhance the players experience than the game itself. Like if you buy a battle pass you _could_ get an emote or whatever. And people do buy whatever they are willing to and get to use the extra aesthetic fluff they want and invest their time just for the reward and grind it out just because they spent extra money on it.
The fun factors gone, at some point. Its not a game its a thing you must do now thinking it will be worth it and then the next update happens that has something you have to buy. People generally think thats what live service games mean, that they will keep updating with things that youd have to spend real money on to get the things you want to play with. The next thing is story or level design or what have you. Usually live service games have a great start when it comes to story and a cool premise to work with. But as the updates continue the quality can just take a nose dive because the devs dont want to give everything away in one go or just havent even made it that far to begin with. People who play for the content end up dont having fun with the casual experience. I know a streamer who got so bored of genshin impacts last story update that he just stopped streaming it cause it was boring. And the thought that live service games with plot will never get to the end of it also deters a lot of players.
Lastly i think people misinterpret all the things that are a part of a live service. Big games that have a story or a gameplay loop that gets either free dlc or payed aesthetics or even payed content are also live service cause they are actively updating the games or patching it if they are planning for big content releases in the future. If you play a game in early access youre playing a live service game. Like look at palworld now. In a couple of months we might see new content than whats already in the game as of yet. It will get major updates live as we go until its a full game. Maybe they will even have dlc.
In the end people dislike different things about the concept of live service games but play it if its their cup of tea. So yeah people wont play a game they dont like and will play a game they like even if they dislike certain live service elements.
I didn’t buy skull and bones because it’s live service…I didn’t buy it because it looked like shit.and more money wouldnt have changed that decision.
I like games like these A LOT. If you get bored of the game, just go farm better gear!
All right MR benny I am ready to be call out but do I dislike live service games no. But I had a good talk with my friend about live service and we were talking about Genshin. So my friend has 800 hrs on genshin he decided to stop playing the game because he didn't find the game fun anymore. But he told me the reason he kept playing was because he was scared to miss out on the new characters or events. I think people don't like live service games because of that same reason. I am playing right now Persona 3 reloaded ( tell me how it live service game), Honkai star rail ( Benny what your team and why kafka is the best), and Xenoblade Chronicle x ( Tell me how it a live service game the Will U die this is a joke by the way)
But I will say in the future games should do what halo does with it battle pass once you buy it, it will not go away that a great system but they should also make it easier to level up in some of these battle pass come to point why do good in game when your going to get the same amount EXP as the other guy. It similar talk what happen to the MCC when halo reach came out they had a battle pass and people were mad because we had to regain are armor through a battle pass that toke too long so grifball had people bolstering there EXP to make it faster ( I did do this because I wanted my Noble 6 to look nice in the story again)
I agree with overall points, and I just want to bring in another explanation from the same camp as your brother.
I think it boils down to *vibes, man*.
A game that (at some point in its marketing) proudly wears its Live Service moniker just… I don't know, it just ruins the vibes.
It messes up the game design in a way that doesn't happen with "sneaky Live Service" like the AC Layla Trilogy, and even then the sneakiness of the Live Service part was wearing thin in Valhalla.
And the most frustrating part is that those Live Service games, i.e. Avengers, could have been what I wanted if we just look at the elevator pitch without what "Live Service" brings to the table.
And that's where games like Helldivers 2 work despite being a Live Service and people not seeing it: the game being a Live Service doesn't change the game design (or at least it doesn't feel like it does)
In terms of core design, it could have come out during the PS360 era with little change needed.
Whereas a game like Avengers couldn't have hid behind an "our game is forever" smokescreen for their "the first 2 hours are fun" gameplay loop, and in doing so it "robs us" of the actual Avengers game we want.
I know I'm terrible at expressing my thoughts, I hope I managed to make some sense while also helping with the 𝓐𝓵𝓰𝓸𝓻𝓲𝓽𝓱𝓶 with some engagement!
Live service absolutely changes the game design. What are you talking about? This is just obviously true kill the justice league's a great example of this fact.
Valid
Battle pass games should be pve not pvp
Best live service is Minecraft. Change my mind.
Benny's brother is pedro pascal confirmed??
Shhh
For me how i see it is, multiplayer games or games as a service, the first one would be like hell divers 2 or the new subnautica, you get it yo ucan play it with frens, you dont need to put more coins into it, in the future there is an expansion? oke you can have it if you want not mandatory at all; then you get to the games as a service, like wow, ffxiv or destiny, where you have 2 options, or you get the expansions or you miss out on the core gameplay, just look at what you can do in destiny without any expansion, where is the main campaing? nah vaulted, fuk you, pay me the expansions, -insert Jojos never forgive the japanesse meme, but change japanesse with bungie-, wow or fxiv, yo uget to play certain stuff, granted ffxiv does let you do a lot more than wow, but at some point its pay or you dont have full features. Of course there is games like warframe, where imo its way way way better done you can hop on and not put a dime into it. Thats what people is hating, not only i need to put so much of my time in this game, BUT i need to pay soooo much for it (again, just look at the prices for destinys expansions + the focus on pay the bp and pay cosmetics meanwhile you pray to have another campaing like forsaken or witch queen and not like the last one).
So for me i dont mind a multiplayer game with some mild things in their store, but you can tell when a game has its focus on getting your money rather than showing off amazing and fun gameplay.
I really like how Hitman did live service. They release the full main game up front, start to finish. Then as it goes on they release more challenges and weapons and all that. A few new maps. I really prefer that method over how they tried to do their first game in the new trilogy, and how a lot of games do it now, where the story doesn't end in the main game, it keeps continuing through updates throughout a number of years.
No, I’m dead set on disliking any and _all_ live services.
They are the sole reason why the industry is in such a terrible place.
Had GTAO never existed, this never would have happen.
You lost my viewership when you said suicide squad was good. It goes against what every gamer and fan of dc stands for and is defined by woke ideology. You lost credibility
As much as I dislike “woke” ideology, the game barely has it. Also the hate the game gets is just cuz it’s forcibly tied with Arkham. The game is a 5/10 at its state right now, but can reach a strong 8/10 if the level design is improved along with variation in levels and gunplay. It’s a big missed opportunity with a lot of undeserved hate
Please shut up about “woke ideology”
The game has problems and none of it is being “woke”
Dude just bias with no logic