twintail said:
| Barozi said: Live services don't really attract new players, it's a way too keep existing players engaged. If you want to make more money off existing players it makes sense, for acquiring new players it doesn't. Nobody that doesn't already own a Playstation console will say: "oh they're going to include a proper live service for the multiplayer of [insert existing Sony IP], because of that I'm definitely getting a Playstation." Besides, Sony will now cripple themselves by putting live services in their MP shooters like Killzone. This will only decrease the player count of Destiny. |
Any game can attract new players to your hardware or subscription service. After all, MS themselves have done Minecraft, Fortnite and Rocket League bundles - all live service titles attached to a console buy in order to bring in new consumers into their ecosystem, hardware or subscription. Where's the connection to the Bungie acquisition? There isn't one. Sony can bundle as many of their own games as they like with their console or make contracts with 3rd parties (such as with Bungie if they were still fully independant!) to bundle their games with the system. The fact that Sony now owns Bungie is completely irrelevant for this to happen. And there's no way of knowing what IP's are being used. Besides, Factions and the rumoured Twisted Metal, every other live service potential game from Sony appears to be new IP's. And it shouldn't matter if it's an existing IP or not: are you suggesting that the latest Forza Horizon didn't see an influx of new players? That Halo Infinite is made up only of Halo fans? Is the growth of a userbase through sequels not possible? Again, completely besides the point and I never said sequels can't grow a userbase. However, the fact is and you already mentioned that before... Bungie is helping other 1st party studios with the live service aspect of their games. Bungie does not create a new 1st party game for Sony, those 1st party games would've been made even without Bungie. Then there's Bungie developing a new IP. That or Destiny 3 would have a rather big impact on Playstation.... if they were exclusive. Since they aren't, well they would've been made either way. So again, the acquisition has no impact on customers. At the end of the day, we know what is happening in the gaming industry. IP's can grow; IP's can become insanely popular under the right conditions; IP's can attract new users. And similar based games don't have to take away from existing userbases: CoD, Battlefield, Apex, Destiny, Halo all have healthy numbers. And that's not even taking into account many other popular FPS and BR games that are doing just fine, too. As you said, IPs can grow and attract new users. Doesn't mean they need live services to do that. What's the difference between supporting one AAA game for 10 years or releasing 3 AAA titles from the same IP within the same timespan? Why should the old game - even with proper support - attract more people than the 3 AAA sequels? Similar based games don't take away from existing userbases? That couldn't be more wrong. Just because the userbase is healthy doesn't mean it hasn't lost players to other games. Especially weird point when you include the flop that is Battlefield 2042 (and prior to that BF 5) or CoD Vanguard which is also underperforming. Hell BF 2042 dropped out of the top 40 and there's no other BF game in the top 40 either. So BF players clearly have abandoned the series for now and are now playing Halo, Destiny or whatever. | 
Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions
