• Paradoxvoid@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    ·
    8 months ago

    Here’s another example where trying to chase the live-service money train has just ended up with a subpar product that people abandon or avoid almost instantly.

    Unfortunately I suspect the wrong lessons will be taken away from this as well - e.g. the console/PC gaming market is too fickle, etc.

    • ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      8 months ago

      There’s been more than enough examples of great IPs being ruined by overly aggressive monetization.

      The reason why it still happens, and will continue to happen, is because the games that generate the highest return on investment are the ones with aggressive monetization. Clash of Clans made way more money than Baldur’s Gate 3. Investors and shareholders don’t care about rave reviews and game of the year awards. They want money. I just wish they’d keep it to new IPs instead of ruining a great series.

      • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        8 months ago

        It’s frustrating because like … people could just not spend money on garbage. Like there are exploitive games that make a ton of money, right? How do we get people to stop spending money on them?

        We probably can’t because many people are morons who can’t pass the marshmallow test.

        • SuiXi3D@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          If we could figure out how to get people to stop spending money on things that are awful, the world would look a lot different.

      • SkyNTP@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        So what you are saying is maybe the free market is not that efficient.

        What would be a more efficient economic model (with objective of getting quality goods in people’s hands)? A cooperative?

        Makes me wonder if other economic models collapse under their own weight too.

    • dovahking@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      8 months ago

      Let then take all the wrong lessons and drown in incompetence. There’s no lack of indie companies these days ready to replace big game companies.

  • Altima NEO@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    8 months ago

    It’s one of those games where you gotta ask, who asked for this? It seemed like the second game was doing very well. They should have gone the route of Counterstrike and just done and in place upgrade with the same content, but better.

    • Dettweiler@lemmyonline.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      8 months ago

      Payday 2 was good for a while, but then it got buried under a mountain of DLC and people slowly stopped playing because of the aggressive monetization. They came out swinging with the same tactics in Payday 3 with only minor content improvements, so people weren’t as motivated to buy the same game again.

      Cities: Skylines 2 appears to be going the same route.

      • Katana314@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        To me, this is actually why I’d want a Team Fortress 3 rather than more updates. The wave of cosmetics in some way turned the previous game a bit unplayable.

  • win95@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    8 months ago

    Booted it up for the first time today to play local co-op with my husband. Or so I thought. After fighting for 15 minutes to make an account, which already pissed me off, it turned out they removed the local co-op option. Not interested anymore.