| Mummelmann said: Bolded: Absolutely, but as mentioned above; this isn't an argument for why GaaS in general is a positive trend. FIFA, Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed are also massive sellers, can you tell me what positive influence they have on current gaming? Some gamers want GaaS, and even some developers. But most don't. Some GaaS titles selling and making money is not a good argument, it's not an argument at all. It's overall not a positive for the industry, or for gamers. I understand that a lot of people enjoy some of these titles, that still doesn't change the argument. Again, I feel like throwing in the lootbox argument; plenty of people liked that too, especially in FUT, and it made EA billions on top, but it was widely regarded as a shit idea for the industry as a whole. |
My argument is that a massive amount of people play GaaS titles every single day, at least as much as plays single player games and probably more, which indicates to me that millions of gamers want to play these games.
Your argument is that that most gamers want GaaS to die but I haven't seen anything at all that validates that position.
The main issue here is that people are pretending Concord represents all GaaS titles when obviously it does not. It's a copycat game with poor character designs and a terrible economic model that took far too long and far too much money to develop. It's like using Forespoken to represent all single player games.
