Skip to content
0
  • Home
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
  • Home
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Sketchy)
  • No Skin
Collapse

Wandering Adventure Party

  1. Home
  2. PC Gaming
  3. BioShock creator says "audiences reward" single-player games that don't have "other methods of monetization," like Baldur's Gate 3, Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2, and Clair Obscur: Expedition 33

BioShock creator says "audiences reward" single-player games that don't have "other methods of monetization," like Baldur's Gate 3, Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2, and Clair Obscur: Expedition 33

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved PC Gaming
pcgaming
87 Posts 70 Posters 4 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • N n3m37h@sh.itjust.works

    And Multiplayer games like Helldivers 2

    A This user is from outside of this forum
    A This user is from outside of this forum
    a_union_of_kobolds@lemmy.world
    wrote on last edited by a_union_of_kobolds@lemmy.world
    #10

    Shoutout to FromSoft still having Bloodborne servers ready for me on my very first runthrough 10yrs after launch

    1 Reply Last reply
    8
    • N njspradlin@lemmy.world

      I enjoy single player, story driven campaigns like the new GOW, BG3, and spider-man, just to name a few. Would I like KC:D2 and CO:E33?

      H This user is from outside of this forum
      H This user is from outside of this forum
      hideakikarate@sh.itjust.works
      wrote on last edited by
      #11

      I’ve been playing truth E33. It’s definitely slower than the Action games you list, being a JRPG-like game. It’s your side vs the enemy. Think old Final Fantasy. A closer comparison would be the Mario RPG series. While it is a lot of your turn->their turn->your turn etc, there are timings during both your turn and the enemy turns for button presses to do more damage (or in some cases, any damage), or to negate or even counter enemy attacks. It’s so much more of an engaging experience vs just pressing a button and watching your character do a massive combo. For me, getting really good at the parry timing is so satisfying. Most enemy attacks have multiple hits during their attacks, and if you parry every single one, you launch a counterattack. There is a dodge, but while it has a large window than the parry, all it really does is negate damage. That’s another thing: because you can learn enemy timings, your can take on bosses that are well above your punching weight. I find that part very fun. The characters are well written, in my opinion. For what a dreary story the game writes, there are moments of levity and extra background you have the option of engaging with for each character. The game is a serious contender for game of the year, it at the very least several awards. And for only $50usd, it blows many other AAA(A) games out of the water. Give it a chance and I think you’ll find it well worth your time.

      1 Reply Last reply
      5
      • alessandro@lemmy.caA alessandro@lemmy.ca
        This post did not contain any content.
        termus@beehaw.orgT This user is from outside of this forum
        termus@beehaw.orgT This user is from outside of this forum
        termus@beehaw.org
        wrote on last edited by
        #12

        Spider-Man 1, 2, Miles Morales & Dragonage: Veilguard also deserve to be mentioned. I’ll buy a game on launch at full price if it’s not loaded down with bullshit or shoving the rest of the game behind a paywall. Otherwise I’ll just be a patient gamer and get it in a few years cheaper and patched up.

        1 Reply Last reply
        4
        • besselj@lemmy.caB besselj@lemmy.ca

          If I go to the steam page for a singleplayer game and see a bunch of paid DLC content, I usually skip it. Look at Stellaris, for example

          S This user is from outside of this forum
          S This user is from outside of this forum
          supernight52@lemmy.world
          wrote on last edited by
          #13

          This describes just about all Paradox games made in the past 15 years, sadly. They release with a barebones concept, then slowly drip-feed content for 5-30 bucks a pop, each one usually sitting at “Mostly Negative” because it doesn’t fundamentally add or change anything most of the time, and the times it does- meh. Crusader Kings 2 was my bread and butter for a long time. Played Crusader Kings 3, and it felt like almost every helpful mechanic that existed in CK2 was stripped, and then added on again over the course of years. It was so infuriating, that I just don’t buy their titles anymore.

          S 1 Reply Last reply
          18
          • besselj@lemmy.caB besselj@lemmy.ca

            If I go to the steam page for a singleplayer game and see a bunch of paid DLC content, I usually skip it. Look at Stellaris, for example

            S This user is from outside of this forum
            S This user is from outside of this forum
            saigot@lemmy.ca
            wrote on last edited by
            #14

            Depends on how old the game is and how big the DLC is IMO. Rimworld, for instance, has quite a few DLCs now, but they are all well worth it if you like the base game. OTOH if a game just has cosmetic DLC or the DLC is coming out super near release that’s a red flag.

            B G 2 Replies Last reply
            30
            • S saigot@lemmy.ca

              Depends on how old the game is and how big the DLC is IMO. Rimworld, for instance, has quite a few DLCs now, but they are all well worth it if you like the base game. OTOH if a game just has cosmetic DLC or the DLC is coming out super near release that’s a red flag.

              B This user is from outside of this forum
              B This user is from outside of this forum
              brucethemoose@lemmy.world
              wrote on last edited by
              #15

              Rimworld’s DLCs are kinda assumed purchases for the modding scene, too. I feel like this drives a lot of their sales TBH.

              1 Reply Last reply
              8
              • besselj@lemmy.caB besselj@lemmy.ca

                If I go to the steam page for a singleplayer game and see a bunch of paid DLC content, I usually skip it. Look at Stellaris, for example

                yardratiansoma@lemmy.caY This user is from outside of this forum
                yardratiansoma@lemmy.caY This user is from outside of this forum
                yardratiansoma@lemmy.ca
                wrote on last edited by
                #16

                At the very least, you can still pirate it and play cracked multiplayer with friends.

                I made the mistake of buying the game year ago, and bought a bunch of DLC at 50% or greater sales, and now the sunken cost fallacy has taken hold on me, and I still want to buy more . . . . (at least I’m broke so I can’t right now hehehaha)

                S 1 Reply Last reply
                2
                • M mog_fanatic@lemmy.world

                  I appreciate the sentiment but the (very shitty) reality is single player games don’t come any where near the profitability of these multiplayer games in the current climate. Like no where even remotely close in terms of effort to profit. You can straight up clone call of duty every year, or add a few maps to fortnite, or add a new operator to siege, and monetize every tiny fraction of the game thru micro transactions and people will keep on playing and keep on paying.

                  Single player games operate pretty much the opposite. You buy it once. Play thru it. Beat it. And generally never touch it again unless maybe some dlc comes out and you might add a few more hours to it and then never think about it again.

                  I say this as a giant fan of single narrative games, it’s just a much smarter business move to pump out shitty online multiplayer games.

                  Fortnite was released in 2017, last year it netted almost $6 billion.

                  Call of duty has been dog water for like a decade. Its been the best selling game every single year since 2009 unless Rockstar releases a game (and Hogwarts legacy randomly dominating one year).

                  World of Warcraft came out in 2004. Last year they announced they had over 7 million active subscribers… Over two decades later.

                  Apex legends came out in 2019, last year it made over $3 billion.

                  The list goes on and on and on. You just can’t compete with weirdos obsessed with showing off a wizard hat on their character in an online game or busting open a loot box to get a new weapon skin or something.

                  yardratiansoma@lemmy.caY This user is from outside of this forum
                  yardratiansoma@lemmy.caY This user is from outside of this forum
                  yardratiansoma@lemmy.ca
                  wrote on last edited by yardratiansoma@lemmy.ca
                  #17

                  Minecraft is the most popular best selling game of all time, and the single-player mode is still being updated. Granted, many people play on multiplayer servers, but still.

                  D 1 Reply Last reply
                  7
                  • besselj@lemmy.caB besselj@lemmy.ca

                    If I go to the steam page for a singleplayer game and see a bunch of paid DLC content, I usually skip it. Look at Stellaris, for example

                    P This user is from outside of this forum
                    P This user is from outside of this forum
                    punnyname@lemmy.world
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #18

                    Vampire Survivors is an exception.

                    C 1 Reply Last reply
                    10
                    • brobot9000@lemmy.worldB brobot9000@lemmy.world

                      Absolutely!

                      Games as a service is a scam.

                      halcyoncmdr@lemmy.worldH This user is from outside of this forum
                      halcyoncmdr@lemmy.worldH This user is from outside of this forum
                      halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #19

                      Games as a service can be okay, in some situations. Ones we very rarely see due to (primarily) publisher greed.

                      If you’re paying for the game itself, at any point, GaaS is stupid and extremely exploitative.

                      If they choose to go that route however, the game needs to be free to play with separate monetization. They need to mebe things that are completely optional and don’t affect gameplay.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      7
                      • W weirdfish@lemmy.world

                        KCD is unique, personally I love it. In some ways it’s kind of the dark souls of first person RPG. The systems are at times a bit clunky, combat is hard, complex, and both you and your character need a lot of training to be profficient.

                        But that’s the fun of the game. Henry is a useless lump at the start, and you mold him in to what you want.

                        Personally, I love hardcore challenging single player games, and few in recent years match KCD.

                        I dont have a system to play KCD2 yet, but from everything I’ve seen, the developer doubled down and kept the majority of the systems in place, just adding scale and polish.

                        I’m sure the first one is on discount these days, and highly recommend it.

                        J This user is from outside of this forum
                        J This user is from outside of this forum
                        jaycifer@lemmy.world
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #20

                        KCD2 is exactly like KCD1 with a few more years of development refining and in some cases expanding the rpg systems, a new map, and a continuation of the story. It feels the same, just a little nicer. In other words, it’s a perfect sequel.

                        The only fault I have with it is that Henry starts the game bad to mediocre at most things instead of useless, and that beginning stage is my favorite to go through and out of. But being a sequel I can excuse it pretty easily.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        1
                        • alessandro@lemmy.caA alessandro@lemmy.ca
                          This post did not contain any content.
                          watsonW This user is from outside of this forum
                          watsonW This user is from outside of this forum
                          watson
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #21

                          Hell yeah! Give us more of that!

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          1
                          • alessandro@lemmy.caA alessandro@lemmy.ca
                            This post did not contain any content.
                            UlrichU This user is from outside of this forum
                            UlrichU This user is from outside of this forum
                            Ulrich
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #22

                            What about games like Fortnite? Are they rewarded?

                            apotheotic (she/her)A 1 Reply Last reply
                            1
                            • M mog_fanatic@lemmy.world

                              I appreciate the sentiment but the (very shitty) reality is single player games don’t come any where near the profitability of these multiplayer games in the current climate. Like no where even remotely close in terms of effort to profit. You can straight up clone call of duty every year, or add a few maps to fortnite, or add a new operator to siege, and monetize every tiny fraction of the game thru micro transactions and people will keep on playing and keep on paying.

                              Single player games operate pretty much the opposite. You buy it once. Play thru it. Beat it. And generally never touch it again unless maybe some dlc comes out and you might add a few more hours to it and then never think about it again.

                              I say this as a giant fan of single narrative games, it’s just a much smarter business move to pump out shitty online multiplayer games.

                              Fortnite was released in 2017, last year it netted almost $6 billion.

                              Call of duty has been dog water for like a decade. Its been the best selling game every single year since 2009 unless Rockstar releases a game (and Hogwarts legacy randomly dominating one year).

                              World of Warcraft came out in 2004. Last year they announced they had over 7 million active subscribers… Over two decades later.

                              Apex legends came out in 2019, last year it made over $3 billion.

                              The list goes on and on and on. You just can’t compete with weirdos obsessed with showing off a wizard hat on their character in an online game or busting open a loot box to get a new weapon skin or something.

                              J This user is from outside of this forum
                              J This user is from outside of this forum
                              jaycifer@lemmy.world
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #23

                              On the one hand, you’re right that the market for micro transaction laden multiplayer games is much larger than single player games. On the other hand, the market for people who want single player games is still very large. You showed that yourself mentioning Rockstar games and Harry Potter.

                              So while many publishers want a piece of that larger pie, every publisher trying for it just leads to over saturation and greater odds that a game will fail entirely. So there is still incentive for publishers to release large single player games even if the pie is smaller since there may be less competition making it easier to stand out. And what the article is saying is that, within that pie, one way to stand out is to avoid micro transactions. And since it’s discussing single player games specifically, I don’t see a lot of relevance for bringing up multiplayer games that exist in a different part of the gaming world.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              2
                              • brobot9000@lemmy.worldB brobot9000@lemmy.world

                                Absolutely!

                                Games as a service is a scam.

                                underpantsweevil@lemmy.worldU This user is from outside of this forum
                                underpantsweevil@lemmy.worldU This user is from outside of this forum
                                underpantsweevil@lemmy.world
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #24

                                I mean, MMOs were supposed to be continuously supported and developed during the enrollment period. Earlier iterations of the model had live DMs running encounters, active continuous releases to expand the game world and advance the storyline, and robust customer support to address the bugs and defects. Also, just maintaining the servers necessary to support that much data processing was hella-expensive on its face.

                                Games as a service don’t need to be a scam.

                                But eventually, the studios figured out they can do the MMO business model on any game. Justifying a fee for Everquest was a lot more reasonable than justifying it for a glorified Team Fortress knock off. Or a freaking platformer.

                                steve@communick.newsS ZeroOneM 2 Replies Last reply
                                48
                                • M mog_fanatic@lemmy.world

                                  I appreciate the sentiment but the (very shitty) reality is single player games don’t come any where near the profitability of these multiplayer games in the current climate. Like no where even remotely close in terms of effort to profit. You can straight up clone call of duty every year, or add a few maps to fortnite, or add a new operator to siege, and monetize every tiny fraction of the game thru micro transactions and people will keep on playing and keep on paying.

                                  Single player games operate pretty much the opposite. You buy it once. Play thru it. Beat it. And generally never touch it again unless maybe some dlc comes out and you might add a few more hours to it and then never think about it again.

                                  I say this as a giant fan of single narrative games, it’s just a much smarter business move to pump out shitty online multiplayer games.

                                  Fortnite was released in 2017, last year it netted almost $6 billion.

                                  Call of duty has been dog water for like a decade. Its been the best selling game every single year since 2009 unless Rockstar releases a game (and Hogwarts legacy randomly dominating one year).

                                  World of Warcraft came out in 2004. Last year they announced they had over 7 million active subscribers… Over two decades later.

                                  Apex legends came out in 2019, last year it made over $3 billion.

                                  The list goes on and on and on. You just can’t compete with weirdos obsessed with showing off a wizard hat on their character in an online game or busting open a loot box to get a new weapon skin or something.

                                  underpantsweevil@lemmy.worldU This user is from outside of this forum
                                  underpantsweevil@lemmy.worldU This user is from outside of this forum
                                  underpantsweevil@lemmy.world
                                  wrote on last edited by underpantsweevil@lemmy.world
                                  #25

                                  single player games don’t come any where near the profitability of these multiplayer games

                                  True, but they are still very lucrative. You can make them, release them, generate a healthy surplus, and roll that into making the next game with plenty of cash to spare.

                                  Also, you don’t have half your dev team stuck supporting a legacy release, constantly fixated on juicing engagement and monetization. There’s a lot less overhead involved in a single-iteration.

                                  Fortnite

                                  Call of duty

                                  World of Warcraft

                                  Apex legends

                                  Had truly phenomenal marketing budgets. It’s the same thing with AAA movies. 25-50% of the budget goes to marketing, on a title that eats up hundreds of millions to produce and support.

                                  You didn’t need $100M to make BG3. You didn’t need an extra $25-50M to get people to notice it and pony up. These bigger titles have invested billions in their PR. And that’s paid out well in the end. But it also requires huge lines of credit, lots of mass media connections, and a lot of risk in the face of a flop.

                                  For studios that can’t fling around nine figures to shout “Look At Me!” during the Super Bowl, there’s no reason to follow this model of development.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  20
                                  • underpantsweevil@lemmy.worldU underpantsweevil@lemmy.world

                                    I mean, MMOs were supposed to be continuously supported and developed during the enrollment period. Earlier iterations of the model had live DMs running encounters, active continuous releases to expand the game world and advance the storyline, and robust customer support to address the bugs and defects. Also, just maintaining the servers necessary to support that much data processing was hella-expensive on its face.

                                    Games as a service don’t need to be a scam.

                                    But eventually, the studios figured out they can do the MMO business model on any game. Justifying a fee for Everquest was a lot more reasonable than justifying it for a glorified Team Fortress knock off. Or a freaking platformer.

                                    steve@communick.newsS This user is from outside of this forum
                                    steve@communick.newsS This user is from outside of this forum
                                    steve@communick.news
                                    wrote on last edited by steve@communick.news
                                    #26

                                    I miss EverCrack.
                                    Not the actual mechanics, things have come a long way since then. But the concepts. No end game. Mobs that take 100+ people all day to take down. And that last piece of armor you want, has a 2% drop rate off them. And even when it does drop, there are 10 of your class who wants it, and you have to work out who gets it. Levels took so long nobody worried about getting to cap, and just hung out. The grind and the community were the point. Not the next piece of gear.

                                    X K 2 Replies Last reply
                                    10
                                    • P punnyname@lemmy.world

                                      Vampire Survivors is an exception.

                                      C This user is from outside of this forum
                                      C This user is from outside of this forum
                                      caurvo@aussie.zone
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #27

                                      $ for hours on VS is insane, even with all the DLC it’s pennies. I feel like I’m stealing from the dev.

                                      H 1 Reply Last reply
                                      6
                                      • S saigot@lemmy.ca

                                        Depends on how old the game is and how big the DLC is IMO. Rimworld, for instance, has quite a few DLCs now, but they are all well worth it if you like the base game. OTOH if a game just has cosmetic DLC or the DLC is coming out super near release that’s a red flag.

                                        G This user is from outside of this forum
                                        G This user is from outside of this forum
                                        Goodeye8
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #28

                                        I’m of the opinion that Rimworld DLCs don’t actually improve the base game, they simply build an extra layer of isolated complexity ontop of the base game. I like the base game but I didn’t really enjoy the DLCs (at least not the first 2) because they didn’t actually expand the base game. They felt like mods I paid for.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        6
                                        • alessandro@lemmy.caA alessandro@lemmy.ca
                                          This post did not contain any content.
                                          S This user is from outside of this forum
                                          S This user is from outside of this forum
                                          solarboy@slrpnk.net
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #29

                                          I feel the same about multiplayer games without gated progression and LAN server hosting. (Or local/splitscreen)

                                          These days I can’t even play a multiplayer game with friends somewhere with shitty internet. And because of progression you have to force yourself to only play together, but never with different people or by yourself because then you will get ahead.

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          18

                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                          • First post
                                            Last post