By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
sales2099 said:
DonFerrari said:

Still those multiplayer games with all these advantages are still worse evaluated and sold than the single player games Sony have been putting, so doesn't seem like these advantages even with several years of improvements made much of a difference. And I prefer to play a game complete and be done with it instead of playing the same game for a long time even more if it isn't as good as that other one.

It is a double edge sword. Polished single player game gets critical acclaim and practically guaranteed audience. Negative is little long term incentive to return. GaaS gets critically panned and it’s really anybody’s guess if it makes it past the first 6 months. But if it claws itself out a community, the long term rewards are great. 

Otherwise I get it, you do you. It’s different preferences we talking about. 

Not wrong. But even the single player games that excel get legs that keep selling months or even years after release.

duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."