• Jul ( irotsoma@piefed.blahaj.zone ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    4 months ago

    I wish there were more games that were fully complete single player offline games with online multiplayer being an afterthought. I miss a good story and experience that isn’t grind for years or pay to continue.

      • artyom ( artyom@piefed.social ) 
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        I’d like to play some of those “popular” games but they’re all enshittified in various ways, whether it’s Denuvo or mtx harrassment or third-party account requirement or online-only or kernel anti-cheat. Honestly at this point I’ve been disappointed so frequently that I’m driven away from the entire industry.

  • Scrubbles ( scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    4 months ago

    I like how aAanah Pearce put it. (Summarized) GTA online makes obscene amounts of money, like crazy amounts. Personally I’m not someone who wants to spend money on online, but others do. When you think about it, rockstar is able to build things like red dead redemption 2 thanks to the online players. Games do cost money to build, and it’s directly thanks to online players that they’ve had enough money to build these games for us.

    I like this take. Is GTA Online slimy? Probably, and it can even lean on greedy. But people still pay for it, and thanks to them rdr2 and now gta6 were funded. The fact that GTA 6 has a single player experience proves they’re still committed together single player narratives, but at the end of the day they need to fund them. So thanks online players for funding our single player experiences.

    • just2look ( just2look@lemmy.zip ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      4 months ago

      I understand the logic behind this, but the $80 price tag for a game that is forecast to sell incredibly well kind of undermines that thought. If they are using the absolutely absurd amounts of money they have made from GTA online to fund the game there would be no justification for the higher cost for this game in relation to other AAA titles. So this is purely driven by greed, and Rockstar is happy to increase profits and enrich their executives through predatory behavior.

      We should not be making excuses for corporations that will happily embrace profit with no regard for morality or ethics.

    • kobra ( kobra@lemmy.zip ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      I give them so much credit for RDR2 but also have so much hate for them for abandoning it and not creating any extra story DLC or really finishing any of the online aspect.

    • rozodru ( rozodru@piefed.world ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      yes but if you initially charge for it then you can make MORE money.

      Honestly they could go the MMO route of old and charge you for the game, then charge you a monthly sub, then charge you via an ingame shop and people would gladly pay it. I mean hell just look at WoW, that thing is still raking in money 20+ years after initial release and it does all of the above.

  • Hux ( Hux@lemmy.ml ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    4 months ago

    I just hope this, plus the existence of GTA+, isn’t a prelude to online play being a fully subscription based model.

    The overwhelming prevalence of subscription models, their success with shark cards, and consistent revenue stream for GTA+, would incentivize Rockstar to do something like that, even though I do not think the community would support it—not in the numbers we are used to.

    The ultimate question is—what makes the most money? And fewer—but PAYING—players could potentially drive that. I hope not.