I simply don't buy live service games. I hate them

Unless it's an MMO, or something like an online aRPG, the tag "live-service" immediately means that you're fully expecting to release an unfinished game, collect your preorder money, get backlash for the game being unfinished garbage, and then release a few patches as a "Sorry we got caught" excuse.

The days when you'd buy something, and you would know that is the final version of your software, have been over for a long time

Very much so, because to me it openly announces that the game is centered in its design about something between:

• Microtransactions
• Extrinsic motivation
• FOMO

None of those are a good story, great characters, good world building or good intrinsic gameplay design. And they don't need to be for a live service game, but it also means it's inherently worse as a game than the same underlying idea not developed as a money squeeze service.

I don’t have a problem with the core concept since it can technically be done well (Fortnite, despite it not appealing to me personally) but since everyone wants the “live service” staying power and money without putting in the “live service” effort it’s become a red flag to me to prepare for an unfinished, buggy, likely money-grubbing “game” with a shaky future - case in point, Halo Infinite’s campaign pretty much going nowhere and being Act 1 of what will be pretty much nothing now since all the campaign staff went bye-bye.

I find the word "service" off-putting. I want to buy things outright and own them. I do not want recurring fees.

"Service Games", gotcha games, games with excessive DLC (looking at you sim games), internet required and Denuvo games are all hard passes.

Theoretically it’s not a turnoff: for example, I was fine with paying the subscription for World of Warcraft back in 2007. But in practice I know what it means today, and that means being psychologically manipulated and crit in the wallet, so hell freakin no.

I actually am in favour of government legislation against them since they generally appeal to the young, who are essentially psychologically defenceless against most of the trickery. I don’t quite think they’re “spiritual opium” as the PRC would say, but the line was crossed long ago

Live Service Game, the idea...I find unappealing and just plain skippable. Live Service Game, the phrase...is so much better than "Game as a Service."

But hey, not every game/genre/delivery method is going to appeal to everybody. The industry is big enough to cater to multiple niches, even if some are much (much, much) bigger than others. I'm happy that people can find whatever game they like, and I can find my favorites as well. That doesn't make anybody more correct than the other.

Live service comes across as life service. A game made to monopolize my time and become a significant part of my life by using addictive systems. By the very nature of enjoying the variety of games, it will immediately turn me off a game.

Live service games/ games a service are an automatic no from me. Too many have little to no content, constant delays on content, a dying community, or ridden with predatory monetization. Not to mention I dont like to pay for games that i cant play when the servers go down.

After Destiny, yup. The term's become synonymous with "increasingly-higher wallet drain with increasingly diminished returns over time, and we're still gonna need a fully-staffed cosmetic shop and battle pass to get the last couple dollars we didn't hoover out of you with the season pass's cost".

I don’t have the time to play live service games. The next time I play a game it might be completely different? No appeal to me at all

I'm not a fan of it. I think live service games generally comes with battle passes, which are essentially preordering DLCs. DLCs that have not been announced, with no details and nothing else. They also often offer some exp bonus or in game items. I think this has an impact on how the game is balanced. The bonuses can't be game breaking so they have to nerf the base game experience to make it "valuable".

I think it can be done well if the base game is free. Dota 2 and csgo are good examples of it because the bonuses that come with battle passes are mostly cosmetic, and they help the support game development. If the base game is £60, then the company can fuck off. I prefer standalone games with expansion packs being released at a later time. Being able to play offline is also great, even though I am rarely without Internet access.

I don't have the long term attention span demanded of live service games, since once I'm done with a game I move on.

I have nothing against mmo/live/gaas games but the quality is never there to justify it. If anything gaas have less content than a singleplayer offline game. It's a total bait and switch.

On one hand constant updates and continuing a games longevity can be nice, but in reality it usually just means fomo which I despise.

In anno 1800 (which is the only game I've played with denuvo) it still needs to have a connection to the ubisoft servers to run, so live service isn't just about dodging 3rd party drm

its perfect really, they all should put it front and center! cause it tells me right of the bat i i never should touch said product, its a money saver really.

Eh, no big deal. The only one I don’t care for on your list is day one DLC. That always seems sketchy. plenty of game I've gotten into had day one for me DLC, but that's cause I joined late, like rimworld. That was a hard DLC package to swallow. If I lived somewhere that I didn't have good internet I could see caring more, but that's rare enough to be written off by developers.

I just stopped buying main stream games for the most part. Indie games is where it is at. Often better gameplay loop and comes at a better price and I would rather see my money going to creative people instead of some greedy CEO.

Live service is a no from me.

You really missed out not playing Command and Conquer

I'm fine with it, if it's fun enough. I'm no gaming activist/snob.

~~But~~not a problem in free to play games, not in full price games

Not at all a problem for me. I pretty much only play competitive shooters/racing games, so live service is a pretty important part to both genres.

Much prefer it to the older DLC models where DLC content would be dead half the time because nobody would buy it.

Edit: Love that the Lemmy hivemind is as bad as Reddit. Can’t have anyone disagreeing with you