• DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Fucking hell

    Why does everything new coming out have to be a goddamn live service?? Don’t you have a blood dragon 2 to develop Ubisoft??

      • ampersandrew@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think people largely have stopped buying them, apart from very few exceptions, which is why games like Hyenas get cancelled at the finish line and why we’ve got a graveyard of live services that shut down just this year. Second Extinction didn’t make it out of early access. Rumbleverse didn’t even last one year.

          • ampersandrew@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            They’re different teams, but it’s relevant because, according to this article, this spun out into another live service project after HyperScape quickly died and the Ghost Recon game wasn’t going to recoup its costs. The entire industry is facing a live service reckoning right now; it can only support so many, and making more expensive games like this isn’t panning out.

            EDIT: Man, I forgot XDefiant too. If that game isn’t cancelled before it officially hits 1.0, it’ll likely be shut down within 18 months.

              • ampersandrew@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                if anything they are still looking to recoup the development costs of those games. So why not use that technology in a multiplayer game that’s surely to sell well? Right?

                But it’s been spun out separately, according to the article…I think we’re talking past each other. Ubisoft and Sega are not the same company, but Hyenas was Sega’s most expensive project ever, and they still found the best decision to be not releasing the game at all, which makes some amount of sense because live service games have recurring costs. Maybe Ubisoft is staring down that barrel right now, as there’s definitely a world where, like with Ghost Recon, a successful franchise’s name won’t carry your live service endeavor to even recouping any costs as opposed to just killing it in the womb and avoiding the sunk cost fallacy.

                It is my hope, and it’s possibly the reality, that Ubisoft has discovered that live service games are not guaranteed money printing machines. Then maybe we can get back to an industry that isn’t so intent on destroying itself rather than the semi-dark-age we’re in right now.

  • raptir@lemdro.id
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why can’t we just have cool multiplayer modes in games instead of a separate game?

    • Moonguide@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Honestly, I prefer this, as long as the single player option is unaffected by the multiplayer component’s performance, and the resources allotted to the SP game don’t suffer because of the MP.

      • ampersandrew@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Historically, some of the best multiplayer components attached to single player games were done with very few resources in a matter of weeks, like Halo and Goldeneye.

        • Moonguide@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          True, but that was before mtx became the name of the game. Nowadays when a game has a multiplayer component with no bells and whistles and just works, it’s an outlier.

          • ampersandrew@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            And now those games just get shut down with no recourse. Eventually, those companies will realize that they’re better off making a multiplayer game that doesn’t get 5 years worth of updates to chase after bazillions of dollars that never materialize.

          • ampersandrew@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Sure, and game development in general takes longer than it did 20 years ago, but allocating a proportional amount of resources is all you need. If it’s a hit, it’s a hit. If you want to patch it up a bit to fix some glaring flaws, go ahead. Expecting it to maintain tens of thousands of simultaneous players is going to end up with the dev putting lots of resources into something unlikely to be the next big thing.

        • BmeBenji@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Tack Call of Duty Zombies into that list too, but Moonguide has a point. CoD: BlOps 3 was the last really good zombies experience and that was just as they were starting to turn it into an MTx nightmare.

    • aperson@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I liked how FEAR did it back in the day. The multiplayer was a separate game you could download for free and play. Then, if you liked the game, you could pay for the single player.

      • Callie@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I definitely don’t mind the multiplayer being separate. I typically buy games years after their shelf life and their multiplayer is usually dead, so having that MP component be a separate download would save me space for something I can’t even play

  • Gamma@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    This sounds awesome, extraction shooters are a genre I’m glad is taking off

    • Dr. Jenkem@lemmy.blugatch.tube
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Same, but I’m still eagerly waiting for someone to do the genre better then Tarkov. But so far, nothing has scratched the itch like Tarkov.

      • Gamma@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Fair! The place I’ve played it most is a VR mod called Escape from Pavlov, so it was a bit basic feature-wise but still a ton of fun

      • baconicsynergy@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ve been a long time Marathon fan and I think the new game has the potential for greatness. The art style is out of this world

        • Dr. Jenkem@lemmy.blugatch.tube
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Marathon was a bit before my time, but I definitely agree, the art style on the trailer for the new marathon looks really cool. But between cod dmz, marauders, the cycle frontier; I’m just a bit skeptical that anyone can properly replicate what makes Tarkov such an interesting and addicting game style.

          That being said, definitely hoping for some proper competition to Tarkov as it has some serious issues that I don’t see getting fixed anytime soon.

  • Computerchairgeneral@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Not the biggest fan of extraction shooters, but the permadeath mechanic sounds interesting. Although I’m not sure how common that is in this kind of game.