What do you all prefer? Games as a Service / Platform vs Games that have finite development and why?

[platocplx]

In a lot of development circles there are a few methodologies when it comes to developing software. I know that Agile and Waterfall(Iterative approach of planning a whole product ahead of time and doing a step by step process until full delivery) are the two major ones. (I wont get into Scrum Etc) just high level here.

I see more and more games being treated as Platforms or Services than just having a finite end of life and what those ramifications mean for game development as whole.

I see there are pros and cons to both of these methods.

Games as a Service/Platform

Pros
Can Last "Forever or tons of years"
Continuous Content
New Features/Gameplay Mechanics
Constant Add-ons/ Expansions

Cons
Devs might be stuck with a single IP for a longer period of time.
More Bugs and issues at launch to be fixed
Less Content in the beginning
Less Feature rich in the beginning
Games can totally flip game play over time for better or worse.



Games With Finite Dev Cycles

Pros
Usually are complete games
Major Gameplay stays static other than minor tweaks
Devs can move on to the next project faster
Still some life can be added with Add-ons or Expansions
Usually Less Bugs on Launch

Cons
Less Gameplay changing features(sticks to the core)
Sometimes Re-Sold as Remasters in a few years or generations.
Can become stale content wise. You "Finish" the game.



So i was curious are people really into having more games become platforms or services or they like the more traditional model with some added life now where games can be updated at times.

Personally for me I dont really like Games as a Service or Platform, But I do enjoy games like say Monster Hunter who had updates an Add-on and then a final update to the game.

Looking for actual discussion here on peoples thoughts on these different ways of making games and what they prefer and if they are okay with a future where we see more platforms and GaaS and traditionally dev'd games go away.

 

[PlanetSmasher]

Service games almost never have the same level of love and care put into them as games with a definitive end of life. It's extremely rare for modern GaaS games to live long enough to become a Warframe, most of the time they launch with no content and then bleed players until they have a tiny fanbase left, then just support that fanbase and ONLY that fanbase until the money dries up.

Just give me one and done games.

 

[Jaded Alyx]

Both. Depends entirely on the game and genre.

More Bugs and issues at launch to be fixed
Less Content in the beginning
Less Feature rich in the beginning

Click to shrink...

Ehh... Less content and features compared to what it becomes in the end, obviously, but not necessarily less compared to a game with finite development.

 

[Afrocious]

I've yet to see GaaS be worthwhile outside of MMOs. I know we got some F2P games that do well enough, so maybe the future is bright for the service. I don't vibe with paying 60 bucks and then be expected to pay more money on a continuous basis.

 

[Deleted member 73507]

I almost never revisit a game once I've finished it so GAAS does nothing for me.

 

[Kalentan]

It would depend on the genre and the story/gameplay for me. So I don't prefer one or the other.

 

[Van Bur3n]

I've played a good bit of both, I like both and I think both should exist.

 

[The_R3medy]

Depends on the game I suppose. For Destiny-style games GaaS is obviously the best for continual play. But even for something like AC Odyssey it was nice to get DLC & new missions.

Both ways are good!

 

[Mona]

i dont like smelly GaaS

 

[rpm]

Good GaaS > normal games > Shit GaaS (which is most), assuming it's a genre where GaaS fits

 

[shoemasta]

Generally, the traditional games model with an end is my preference, but there are games that are GAAS that make good on their premise. R6 Siege, Warframe, etc are games that definitely benefit from their model.

 

[THEVOID]

Both.

 

[Rosebud]

Great games are releasing every month, I can't justify playing the same game for years.

Unless it's Pokemon TCG.

 

[JED BARTLETT]

I'm a bit conflicted on this. I played Destiny 2 today for the first time in a long time. I've bought all the content. I honestly had no clue what was going on. I've hundreds of hours in D2, but I'm now a bit worried about doing a strike and people expecting me to know what I'm meant to be doing. At this stage for me a Destiny 3 would suit me better. Exactly the same thing with Rainbow Six Siege, played loads of hours but fell off. Bought a season on sale, jumped in, no idea what was happening. At this stage I'd prefer a Siege 2. I know I'm an edge case in this.

 

[Bradford]

Finite development.

No early access. No GAAS.

I don't need these ridiculously prolonged life cycles for games that aren't outright competitive games. This is why I wait multiple years to play most single player stuff, just to get a fully released and contained experience.

 

[Deleted member 44122]

less bugs are a con now? ^^

 

[ClickyCal']

Gonna be the most one sided poll ever.

 

[Garrett 2U]

I think they both have a place.

People give GAAS a lot of shit, but I think it's actually really great for the industry. It gives developers a secondary revenue stream that they can continue to support over many years.

I'm not sure on this one, but I think it also gives beginner developers more job security, as it's easy an easy project to put them on instead of laying them off as you start a new project.

I used follow the development of OldSchool RuneScape fairly closely, which is a GAAS. If you look at the composition of that team, it's generally a single senior developer leading each department, along with a handful of beginner developers. It's a really small team that supports a game played by millions of people.

 

[Samiya]

I don't like to "rent" culture, especially with a huge trillion dollar corporation deciding on what games to experience and profitting from this control over culture.

And I definitely don't like products that are tailored to drive monthly engagement with certain behavioristic mechanics so that the games actually never ends.

 

[Abi]

i dont like smelly GaaS

Click to shrink...

Yeah, it's pretty disGaaSting

 

[Firmus_Anguis]

Definitely traditional. I like endings. I don't won't to be stuck to a game and for it to overstay it's welcome.
A service that provides games? That's another story. Service-based games? Not for me. Besides, the quality of said games pales in comparison to the traditional approach in many, many ways.

 

[Tsuyu]

Edit : nvm misinterpretation.

I prefer games as service if I have a fun and non-toxic group to play with. Otherwise, I want my endings in games.

 

[mael]

If you think a game being GAAS means they're not gonna try to sell you a remaster, you haven't been paying attention.
ATVI is definitely going to try to pull that shit and WoW classic is a thing too.

Finite dev time.
No GaaS, i like paying for my products rather than getting roped into a service.

 

[Mr.Deadshot]

Finished games with a clear beginning and end.

 

[Glio]

It depends on the genre of the game, of course. There is no absolute answer.

 

[HStallion]

The latter. GAAS games tend to be a never ending grind and while I don't mind a bit of grinding when your entire game revolves heavily around that idea or has many of its systems tied to that idea. It just makes a lot of games not fun for me even if the graphics are amazing and the gameplay is a lot of fun. Not that there aren't long running games that get constantly updated that I enjoy, but its games more like No Man's Sky and not Fortnite

 

[Deleted member 76797]

Depends on the game. Tekken 7 is way different now than at launch and is still getting another season. I wouldn't call that comparable to something like Warframe but by your definition it's the same.

 

[Aureon]

a GaaS is only ever worth it if it's focused on creating a community

All of the mobile gaming landscape is hell and is probably driving depression worldwide

 

[platocplx]

less bugs are a con now? ^^

Click to shrink...

meant that as a pro lmao

 

[Kill3r7]

I like both but if we look at all the time I spent gaming over the last 7 years. The bulk of it was spent on GaaS games.

 

[iceblade]

It really depends on the game and genre. Both can work well if done right.

 

[disco_potato]

I've put >8k hours into warframe, destiny, destiny 2, division, division 2, monster hunter this generation. The amount of hours put into all other games doesn't even get close to 1k.
Would still pick quality games with a definitive ending almost every time. GaaS games you almost force yourself into playing them as much as possible to "get your money's worth". People use the "time/money" argument about those games for a reason.

 

[GooberDooberCBC]

I think both are important in their own right depending on the game genre, type of game, scope of game, etc. However, GAAS are little bit more volatile in the sense that often content can't keep up with demand or the content becomes repetitive which diminishes from the core gameplay. I do think I slightly favor a well defined/ scoped game with optional significant expansions or DLC more than GAAS.

 

[CaptainBojangles]

GaaS - Great for making communities

Traditional - Tends to tell more complete stories and works much better if you don't want to play with others

I like RPGs, platformers and visual novels, so obviously I prefer the traditional route

 

[Cosmic Voyager]

Finite for sure.

There are rare examples where I get excited for/invested in GaaS games, but 90% of the time the end product is worse than if it had just been a one-and-done game (with a couple meaningful DLCs if warranted).

It's my main fear for future Bethesda games now. Will Elder Scrolls VI remain a traditional Elder Scrolls experience or will it become a "platform" in the same way that Halo is being made into a 10-year platform?

This is my main fear about streaming services in general as well. The service providers like GaaS because it keeps players subbing each month to see the constant stream of updates — the player is less likely to play the game they want and then cancel their subscription for 3 years until the sequel comes out.

 

[mangrilla]

It'd be more interesting, I think, to think about what games would work better as GaaS than they are now. I'd argue that it's probably better for games like Madden and COD to be a platform going forward rather than a new $60 plus the MTX they have in there anyway.

Avengers is a huge bummer but I think it could have been, or could still be, a really interesting GaaS game, so long as the Devs actually fix it and the community sticks around or returns. Comics being such a long-running serialized thing, having big crossover events and such, I think GaaS could be good for it and the plethora of heroes they have the potential to introduce. Would I have liked a single-player Avengers game only over what was actually launched? Fo sho.

 

[THEVOID]

It's like saying do you prefer Movies or a TV series. Both are awesome.

 

[Papercuts]

I ultimately prefer games that come out and are finished, but GaaS absolutely has an important place.

I've been playing Apex since it released, and will continue to do so for awhile to come. Multiplayer games benefit a ton from this model, as they can become a platform itself to maintain and support instead of the previous model which killed off old games when a new one invalidated them (which still happens with yearly CoD releases). No more map pack user base splitting within that year either, as they can find other ways to monetize and make sure the content is given to everyone.

But biggest issue with GaaS is that there's only so many of them you can juggle.

 

[OneBadMutha]

Great games regardless of format! They exist both ways. If I had to choose one, most of my gaming friends I met playing online.

 

[Daebo]

I have a rare opinion when I think most games are a gaas. God of war? We're getting a sequel to continue on from the first game. You just have to wait longer to get content than a "normal" gaas, and you usually get charged full price. Miles Morales, sequel to spider man, continuing a game series. Horizon 2 a continuation of the first game, just at a later date. So on and so forth. If you continue in the same universe, same characters, but just a different story I think of that as a long term gaas. The dev is making you wait longer for extra content.

But I don't see that as a bad thing. I think mostly, this argument over single story vs gaas is mostly just console warrior stuff at the root. Finding a person to have a legitimate conversation with is hard.

 

[Praedyth]

I liked GaaS until Destiny 2 introduced FOMO to me.

 

[Pyro]

I like my games to end

 

[TripleBee]

GaaS as additional content, dlc, expansions to keep me engaged = good

A billion battle passes = bad

 

[Mubrik_]

Traditional games mainly for me.

For a PVP game tho, I might slant towards GAAS if done correctly.

 

[IIFloodyII]

A mixer, not really 1 or the other, I usually have 1 or 2 GAAS games I play often, while I play/replay "1 and done" games when they release/I want. Currently playing lots of Rocket League (GAAS), Warzone (GAAS), Nexomon Extinction (just finished) and Fallout 4 (replaying).

 

[platocplx]

It'd be more interesting, I think, to think about what games would work better as GaaS than they are now. I'd argue that it's probably better for games like Madden and COD to be a platform going forward rather than a new $60 plus the MTX they have in there anyway.

Avengers is a huge bummer but I think it could have been, or could still be, a really interesting GaaS game, so long as the Devs actually fix it and the community sticks around or returns. Comics being such a long-running serialized thing, having big crossover events and such, I think GaaS could be good for it and the plethora of heroes they have the potential to introduce. Would I have liked a single-player Avengers game only over what was actually launched? Fo sho.

Click to shrink...

I do agree games like Madden or even COD. It could make sense, Sports Games especially because it does seem they force them selves to find better way to play a real life game that pretty much is locked in how it works.

 

[THEVOID]

I have a rare opinion when I think most games are a gaas. God of war? We're getting a sequel to continue on from the first game. You just have to wait longer to get content than a "normal" gaas, and you usually get charged full price. Miles Morales, sequel to spider man, continuing a game series. Horizon 2 a continuation of the first game, just at a later date. So on and so forth. If you continue in the same universe, same characters, but just a different story I think of that as a long term gaas. The dev is making you wait longer for extra content.

But I don't see that as a bad thing. I think mostly, this argument over single story vs gaas is mostly just console warrior stuff at the root. Finding a person to have a legitimate conversation with is hard.

Click to shrink...

👆🏼

 

[JudgmentJay]

I could not care less about GaaS. I very much prefer traditional games, single-player specifically.

 

[platocplx]

It's like saying do you prefer Movies or a TV series. Both are awesome.

Click to shrink...

TV Series for the most part end, but same time you still run into the Ending issue. A lot of people get pissed off how tv series finally end.

 

[dtcm83]

I prefer traditional (finite development) since I want to buy a game, play it once or twice, then move on to the next game. Games for me are contained experiences with a defined beginning and end, like a book. Probably why I prefer story-driven single player games. I realize this is increasingly becoming an aging mindset that really got shaken up with the introduction of MMOs back in the days and their continuous dev cycles, so call me old fashion, but I am a gamer that hops from game to game so non-GaaS works best for me. If I was the type of gamer that plays one or two games only all the time, then yeah I'd probably prefer the GaaS model since I would be getting game updates/changes/content continuously to keep the experience fresh.

For the record, I have played a few GaaS games that I liked and returned to periodically (Rocket League, Fall Guys more recently), but they are few and far between.