Comment on Do you find the description Live Service Game off-putting?

• Boiglenoight@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  I absolutely will accept it because it brings better gameplay. FPS games are more fun when there’s constant balancing changes and new content on a schedule. It’s infinitely better than older game models where if one thing is broken you’re stuck with it for the entire lifetime of the game.

  How is this different than Valve continuing to patch Team Fortress 2 decades after its release? There’s no Live Service model here.

  Being able to run my own dedicated server isn’t even something I’d want to do, nor would I want to play on player hosted servers.

  I think that’s true for most people, but a small number of a community can support the vast majority. It would ensure a game isn’t dependent on a company to exist, either.

  When games go EoL, sure, require them to open source the multiplayer engine. But really, it’s not a big deal that an individual can’t host a Battle Royale server.

  If that was an actual practice that’d be great. There’s no incentive for the publisher to do this, however, and they’re profit driven.

  source

  • BURN@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    TF2 was technically a Live Service when it was actively receiving updates. The fixes that are added by valve are an outlier, and doesn’t change game balance. Constant balance changes are a necessary part of any competitive game. I’ve got no interest in something that isn’t being updated semi-frequently.

    Self hosted servers don’t make sense in most of these games anymore. Communities like this vastly overestimate the want for custom servers. Most gamers don’t really care, for better or worse.

    source