Games as a "Live Service"

[Demi-fiend]

Shout out to Black Mirror @ 3:00 lol. I'm telling you, we're all gonna be riding these exercise bikes to power the Alexa Cops/Caretakers/AI Sentient Programs.

In other news, Jim ####### Sterling Son thinks games should be free. Well, this ties into the Automated-Workfare model I've been talking about. It'll most likely be established in larger cities where "Smart Infrastructure" networks are built. Not that I'm complaining, mind you.

 

[Dark Drakan]

Im inclined to agree if games have the free to play style business model & microtransactions coming out of their eyeballs and paid lootboxes then yeah they can afford to be free. Publishers have made millions from them and it’s a constant revenue stream for the duration of the games life cycle.

If a game has its progression system purposely taliored around paid systems then why should we have to pay for it constantly after the initial retail price we have paid?

 

[Demi-fiend]

if games have the free to play style business model & microtransactions coming out of their eyeballs and paid lootboxes then yeah they can afford to be free.

I'd go further than that and say that even a few indie devs out there will end up adopting this model if it means more money via their streaming services.

The only "negative aspect" I can think of is that these games will most likely never leave beta. Or in some cases... alpha.

I'm just throwing this in here but, honestly the only reason I'm posting these vids is because I happen to agree with the subject matter. I'm not necessarily a fan of Jim himself.

Edit: I just realized what Ubisoft meant when they said "Player Centric" instead of "Developer Centric." Gamers will be the new QA Testers because publishers would rather have the players "working" for them for free instead of actually hiring someone.

But perhaps on the "plus side," devs might listen to player feedback for once when it comes to adding new features. But I doubt it.

 

[Demi-fiend]

 

[Demi-fiend]

Loif Sehviss