{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
3/12/2019 12:54:18 PM
21
Is live service just considered in development at this point?
-
1 ReplyI think the problem we have is that these games simply don't provide the content out the box. They really need to provide a proper amount of content out the box then build off it. Starting with a solid 30+ hour story. Not only that but a proper game plan for the future 1-3 years of story/end game content as well. World and world design that is interesting, engaging and fun to play in. A proper amount of end game content in various strikes, strongholds, raids, etc. A balance in which leveling isn't too easy but not too time consuming. A loot drop rate that feels rewarding & access to high tier loot. Speaking of loot, a steady stream of new loot to chase doesn't hurt either. I think taking a page out of the MMO book and adding Notorious Monsters in the world w/ specific loot drops would be a good idea as well. Have a great looking, great stat/perk piece of armor or weapon to farm. A bounty system that rewards players and keeps them engaged end game. The problem is we seem to get these Vanilla, dumbed down games out the box. If we had adequate content the developer could then move on to providing more end game content, focus on events, etc until a true expansion drops. I've said this a billion times now but... I really hated that Bungie changed the model but at some point I thought this $40 Fall DLC plus a $35 Season Pass might be good since it could provide the content we lack. It's apparent that's not the case. They really should have taken this new model and provided some solid content. Also I think raising the power level every 3-ish months was another moronic idea. The power cap should be increased in the Fall only. The remainder of the year Bungie should be focusing on adding more end game content, additional loot, events, and coming up with new events. While Bungie wants to sell us a game then DLC followed by a Fall Expansion [if you can call it that] then a Season Pass as well... Now we're starting to see other games offer free updates for the first year at least. Monster Hunter will have had almost 2 years of free updates by the time their expansion drops. Anthem is using this model but like all other games they released a game shallow as all hell with no end game and an anemic story. ok it has end game. 3 strong holds, 1 of which is horrid and Legendary Contract that after a week you realize how pointless it is to actually run them because you get the same crappy Masterwork Components every time. I wondered if content wasn't actually cut for it to be released shortly after release. But as of last week Bioware wasn't even sure they'd be releasing the first DLC planned in March by the end of the month. The Division 2 is also taking this approach but at least that should be coming with another decent 30-ish plus hour story and seems to have some end game. Though at the end of the day it's surely going to be another game with far too little early in it's life.
-
1 ReplyNot going to contribute to the poll because I don't know what it's taking about. Sorry
-
It’s a trend thing. If it’s lower effort and everyone gets away with it, go for it. Day 1 patches, loot boxes, paying for online, games as service-these are but a few examples and are piling up
-
1 ReplyDepends if you're playing destiny or monster hunter
-
2 RepliesThing is, it can be done right. Imagine a game that will release complete, with very little bugs. Then add live service, it would be great. Unfortunately the style of delivering games as a live service is being tarnished by half baked games.
-
Edited by sXeth: 3/13/2019 9:50:07 AMMore or less. Probably you could trace the origin point to Minecraft, which spent eons as the top-selling game while still in early access (and still took years to sort of resemble a finished game. And arguably still isn't great without dumping mods into it). GTA5/Online, Overwatch, Final Fantasy 14, and Destiny 1 itself of course are some of the big pioneers on the AAA side for throwing out road maps and promises to offset a weak delivery on release (though FF14 was far more acknowledging of its underwhelming reception).. Part of its the success of early access games, part of it was a swathe of games doing the "Redemption" thing. No Mans Sky is usually cited as the codifying work, though No Mans Sky was an indie dev getting way out of their depth and at least a bit understandable, compared to these massive experienced AAA studios (and apparently workhorses, because they managed to add online multiplayer into their game in a shorter timeframe then it took GTA to add Heists that included none of the promised options, and were just missions with obnoxious teaming requirements). Epic actually just seems to have adopted this as their only model. Unreal 4 has been in permanent beta for like 3 years. Fortnite (the co-op one) has been in development for 8 or so, and been in "Early Access" for over a year now with full microtransactions and seasons while its main campaign is still missing the final chapter and the release to proper FTP has been shifted four or five times now. (Battle Royale while not having such an obvious structure to critique or firm release date also is still sitting in Early Access officially).. Bungie for their part, while iterative updates could work well for Destiny. Are not very good at delivering in this model. They have roadmaps, but they're names and wispy nothings. Hell some of the names haven't even stuck around. Is anyone really hyped for "Arc Week", whatever thats supposed to be. It certainly doesn't help when they're charging for the (majority of) the content, and leaves little wonder why many people are irked that they've spent money and feel Bungie has shell-gamed them by dropping some unappealing game mode and little else. Certainly buying into Jokers Wild without any knowledge of what it was going to deliver is a questionable choice (don't look at me, buddies gave me the annual pass), but while one might expect that Gambit was going to be a focus point, the new PvE mode, every speck of new loot save a couple of pinnacle guns, and the storyline itself locked behind that game mode was certainly not as advertised.
-
1 ReplyWhen anthem was announced to be a "10 year journey", a bunch of red flags went off in my head and killed my hopes for the game.
-
Yes, very much so. The big problem is new content over the long term. You get a bunch of neat content to start with, but hardcore players finish it quickly and then want more to do. Unfortunately, that means gravitating toward something easy and repeatable. That's why PvP and Gambit get so much more love than any other game mode and that's why the whole experience is inherently flawed. You go into an annual pass because you want to play stuff, but then come to realize that, so far, you've paid for a half assed Black Armory DLC that was level gated so hard it took weeks to grind there and then Gambit Prime, a PvP mode. I think games as a live service is still a newer idea and developers haven't figured out a framework to continuously add meaningful content without leaning back in the cheap stuff you can get with any other game, like PvP.
-
1 ReplyNot in my estimation. The first annual pass has failed. It doesn't matter what's to come in penumbra... this formula is flawed. With D2, bungie has been reacting since the start. They've never gotten on top and taken this thing out for a ride! They can't. It's broke. There is no forethought in this game. There may be no fore thought in bungie. Systems still do not intertwine and work together well. Bugs, basic bugs go unaddressed. Bungie sits there and chases it's own tail. It literally is D1, all over again. So yeah, for bungie, games as a live service appear to be one long frustrating brilliant pocked beta marred by some actual game. I think, I believe, bungie will get it right. My fear is it won't be as a destiny game. The one thing I'm sure of it starts at conception. They have not wholly conceived Destiny correctly. *[i]so, now we know there's nothing they can't f'up...[/i]* But with that said, I sincerely agree and empathise... what they're trying to do-- where they're trying to go, and take us-- It's hard, and maybe Destiny is a little premature.
-
2 RepliesBorderlands 2 was a great looter shooter because it came out as a complete game, who knew people like to play finished games
-
Yea live service sucks but.....i know im probably being naive but i like D2 right now and i trust bungie again even if most of this forum is just cynical assholes.
-
11 Replies1. Persistent world games constantly evolve. If you want a static experience....then this really isn't your game. 2. These games revolve around SOCIAL SYSTEMS. So many parts of the game can't be "fixed" until you release them, and you see how the community interacts with them. Which is fine.....but the problem is that this runs into the Immediate Gratification/You-Should-Have-Gotten-It-to-me-Yesterday mentality of our current culture....and suddenly it becomes a problem. Not realizing that 20 years ago, this kind of game wouldn't have even been possible.
-
Yes because to even come close to releasing content of actual quality at a frequent pace you need a lot of people. In other words lots of money, and that's something no one really has. Live service games are one of those pipe dream ideas that can't be done well until the tools to make game content is incredibly streamlined to cut dev time and cost. This is from a customer perspective of course, because we all know corporate is having a ball making obscene amounts of profit over nothing.
-
1 ReplyI see all live service games as very expensive early access games. I mean hell look at Destiny. We're on game 2 and still in early access.
-
Malfeasance Quest is still broken. So much service!
-
Edited by Ogma: Destroyer of Worlds: 3/12/2019 7:25:13 PMWhile these types of games do change throughout their life cycles, think it kind of gets used as an excuse to release unfinished or barebones games where players are sort of “used” to test what works and what doesn’t work. It’s fine when it results in feedback that developers use to cater the game to what the fans want. Some developers don’t seem to do that though. *coughs Bungie *coughs Most of these games lean a little too much on it for me though. I want a game with a single player story like a BioWare game, but with a huge open world with LOTS to do in between story missions and post story. Anthem is sort of that, but freeplay is treated kind of like a mission in that regard. 4 players but if you solo queue everyone is kind of doing their own thing. There’s not much incentive for players to group up. Destiny “patrol” is better in that regard. I hope Anthem adds player triggerable and random events in its open world as well as increases the player count.
-
First of all, I think we are spoiled a bit from World of Warcraft. Vanilla wow was HUGE, and a ton of content was given out for free (meaning the raids from MC to Nec and the content that came with it) even before the first Expansion. During that time there were many updates, patches, etc as the game settled into itself and became better tuned. I often think these current live service games attempt to replicate that feeling of update. The excitement for patch day to see what the devs are doing this time around. Destiny 1 was broken at the start. Sure things ran, but most people I talked to, or read on the forums, agreed that something wasn't right. There were 'oops' moments, and 'we'll patch that' moments I think to give it a [i]feel[/i]. I say this with confidence because there is no way that stuff should have repeated itself in Destiny 2 unless it was intentional. Lets be real aside from a bug there isn't enough going on that problems would be missed. Here are attempts to push an update and feel like a live service game when there isn't need to be. To the point of the OP I don't think these issues are development, I think they are faux for the sake of saying its live service.
-
A more "living" game like what they're trying now with the Annual Pass has been something I've wanted to see since early D1(I've been here from the start). Whether people see it or not the game is gradually progressing(look at the Dreaming City and the Queen, and don't forget the Pyramids have been working their way to Sol for over a year now. I'm excited to see what Bungie has in store. Even though I hate Gambit I still like all the stuff they've brought to the table. Penumbra sounds cool. I know it'll be better once D3 comes(or D2 Y3?) since Activision is no longer affiliated(Activision and Bungie together always brought a terrible taste to my mouth so just Bungie at the helm is a relief. There will be more accountability and I hope Bungie knows that going forward. Activision has always been somewhat of a scapegoat and they no longer have that safety net. I know Bungie can do well. But all we can do is wait, hope, see and give feedback on the already existing system.
-
10 RepliesLive service games are always in development. Its "new content". Bungie doesn't do it right.
-
live service games = scam
-
4 RepliesWell, yes but it varies. I’m sure some live-service games will launch or have launched good or complete, but most of the time they don’t so I’ll agree with you.
![[ＳiＮ]大き氷](/img/profile/avatars/default_avatar.gif?cv=3983621215&av=1908957091){kind=avatar}
