But is it the perfect model for consumers? Which should be your concerns as stakeholder unless your a shareholder?
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Halo Infinite Could Adopt Games As Service Structure
- Thread starter RevengeTaken
- Start date
Why wouldn't you want a continuous stream of content for your favourite games?
And price wise, yes gamepass is perfect for consumers. A monthly fee, for a pretty great library of games, sounds good to me.
Taking in consideration 343 really doesn't seem to be able to make a good campaign game... I'd be fine with this.
I mean, I know what GaaS means, been gaming for 2 decades now. Like I said, it initially turned me off when I saw it because Halo has never been pitched as a GaaS product in the past. Games nowadays seem to be going that route in order to make a profit and I don't knock it, I just didn't like the sound of it initially as it could be used as an excuse to milk us gamers. That's all.
There is a recent thread where people don't think Splatoon 2 as GaaS even after being presented evidence of Nintendo treating the game as live-service.
Feels like people see GaaS as something negative and don't want the game they like to be associated as one.
Which "concerns"? If it is a perfect model for the consumer the consumers will decide in the end. I couldn't be less concerned about it.
Like quote I mention above there incentives to release the game in what they think is the minimal acceptable state and release content in small regular basis to keep people subbed. Quality of the product become less in important when subs are involved. Games that can't be monetize become less viable to make. So no it doesn't so as good as you make it out to be.
Of course it can as you said MHW, Witcher 3, R6S are a few examples were it done right. Actually I would argue the previous Halo games did it right. HALO 5 didn't only because it lacked staple modes at launch.
Water is wet.
Sea of Thieves is GaaS, Forza Horizon 4 is GaaS, State of Decay 2 is GaaS, Gears of War 4 is GaaS, Halo 5 is GaaS, Forza Motorsport 7 is GaaS.
Heck, you could even say MCC is GaaS.
Sea of Thieves is GaaS, Forza Horizon 4 is GaaS, State of Decay 2 is GaaS, Gears of War 4 is GaaS, Halo 5 is GaaS, Forza Motorsport 7 is GaaS.
Heck, you could even say MCC is GaaS.
Redefining the term is exactly what people who claim that traditional expansions are GaaS are doing.
Morrowind, Fallout 3/NV, Skyrim, Horizon Zero Dawn, Spider-Man, etc are not GaaS. A game having post-launch support and/or paid expansions packs isn't enough to make it a GaaS. The primary focus has to be on the "service". The above mentioned games have the focus on the game and the content that comes later is more game, not a "service". GaaS games are almost always online games as well.
Trying to associate traditional expansion content with GaaS is just an attempt to normalize GaaS and downplay the exploitative nature of GaaS.
They are different varieties of GaaS. Huge difference between a Sea of Thieves model and a FH4 model.
I agree that too much of Halo 5's DLC was them simply playing catch-up, and bringing it to a favourable state. But they still added ~15 maps, and by the time Halo 5's content stream was ended, there were ~32 maps (with round ~20 being originals). Admittedly some of these were remixes, but the amount of content Halo 5 has today dwarfs the vast majority of shooters over this past decade. And you can access it all for a single retail purchase + XBL.
User Warned: console wars
I'm shocked at this news. Shocked I tell you.
This was inevitable, once Microsoft first party games started selling less and less.
For the most part, Sony's first party stuff sells like hot cakes, so they don't have to do this shit.
This was inevitable, once Microsoft first party games started selling less and less.
For the most part, Sony's first party stuff sells like hot cakes, so they don't have to do this shit.
Indeed... win/win. Great campaign and long term support for the online shooters part.
I guess that will mean various PvP modes, some big team battles with AI mixed in, rankings and *gasp* maybe some kind of BR mode.
In the end, SaaS games just make a lot more money since they keep players "busy" for years. Expect a lot more SaaS from Sony next gen, one could argue they missed the boat since it takes so long for their first party games to create.
I disagree. The campaigns in 4 and 5 were fine. The issue was that the Prometheans were just not a fun enemy to fight. They are such incredibly bland and boring enemies when compared to the Covenant and The Flood.
Indeed... it basically means a multi-year online support plan with an architecture that supports this.
I hope their support plan is better than what they did with Halo 5 where all they did was fill in the anemic multiplayer with poor implementations of missing game types and awful maps, and add cosmetics to their loot boxes.
Witcher 3 also. They had weeks and weeks of extra quests and then two amazing expansions plus some big patches that gave great QoL changes.
I am against first-party launch games taking the GaaS route especially if its the flagship franchise of the console. Keep it simple people especially at the beginning. The last thing the next Xbox needs is to have its launch period dominated by news on how the latest iteration of its flagship franchise, Halo, does not have enough content or has tons of bugs.
Having not played a halo game since Reach id like to know if GaaS for halo would just be a continuation of the stuff they did with 5 with microtransactions?
I take this to mean more that they can evolve what they did with Halo 5
More multiplayer evolution as the game ages
More Modes and features on regular update schedules
Halo 5 launched without firefight for example and then warzone firefight was announced and basically became one of the biggest modes Halo has ever had
More multiplayer evolution as the game ages
More Modes and features on regular update schedules
Halo 5 launched without firefight for example and then warzone firefight was announced and basically became one of the biggest modes Halo has ever had
I'm alright with it if they do it well... but they won't have a great track record of GaaS without those games being extremely light on initial content. Also anytime they have chased trends they've ended up with mud on their face (lootboxes / warzone via Halo 5 / Gears 4 most recently). I just don't trust them enough to do this. Their new studios need to learn how walk before they can run; create compelling, acclaimed, admired games that stick first. Then they should experiment with the formula.
Gaas
ask MatPiscatella every game you listed there is defined as GaaS by the industry. The very definition of GaaS is haveing post-launch support and/or paid expansions.
ask MatPiscatella every game you listed there is defined as GaaS by the industry. The very definition of GaaS is haveing post-launch support and/or paid expansions.
I don't blame you. Luckily, I purchased an xbox one and Halo 5 after the game had been out a while, and the controversy towards the campaign was already well-known. So I went in with low expectations. But the marketing for the campaign and stuff like that almost seemed criminal in how misleading it was. At least with Halo 3 and its epic marketing, I don't think it ever really went into the realm of straight out lies.
If the game release with BTB from the start I'd used Halo 5 as a template for how to release "Gaas" type games.
Its incorrectly defined in that case then.
The very definition of GaaS is having an ongoing service, support and service only have a small overlap in the Venn Diagram. Pre-planned singleplayer expansion content and bugfixes/QoL improvement patches don't quality as an ongoing service.
DLC is GaaS. Again you may not like the definition that the actual industry has set but that's on you. It's ok to like GaaS even. Some of my favorite games this gen are GaaS
Bloodborne
Breath of the Wild
Horizon Zero Dawn
MLB the Show
Spider-Man
MGSV
This whole notion of GaaS as evil is stupid tbh
You're incorrectly and narrowly redefining the term. It isn't what you think.
I'm not familiar with Bloodborne, MLB, or MGSV so I can't comment on them but HZD, BotW, and Spider-Man aren't GaaS. Like I said, pre-planned expansion content doesn't make a service.
Now GaaS isn't explicitly evil as a format, it does easily lend itself to exploitative practices as one of the key means of maximizing and maintaining revenue from GaaS is to keep players playing as long as possible and to siphon as much money from individual players as possible (monopolizing time and wallets).
Sometimes GaaS can be less egregious, especially when the initial game is F2P. Sometimes it can be blatantly exploitative especially when the game itself cost money, they sell season passes, and they sell microtransactions *cough*CODBO4*cough*.