I played Gears 5 from beginning to end BEFORE day one on Game Pass. Had one if the most enjoyable experiences of 2019 and didn't spend a penny on microtransactions (because I don't play multiplayer outside of co-op).

So games are only relevant if they are being played by a bunch of people today? Does that apply to movies and books as well? Should I never talk about Return of the Jedi when discussing films? How about Lord of the Flies with books? Exactly where is the cutoff line between relevancy and irrelevancy? Does a game suddenly go from relevant to irrelevant once it drops from 100,000 players to 99,999 players?

The whole idea that games are only relevant so long as they are being played came right from some GaaS game's marketing department.

Gears is primarily a multiplayer experience, so most people aren't going to be able to say the same thing as you.

Just click inside the parenthesis and it will get you there.

For me in the forum listing I just click on the thread title and it gets me there.  Maybe you are glitching.

Two different companies = different strategies. I don't think there is anything that needs to be countered. Sony is doing great and why throw a wrench into it? If it's not broke don't fix it.

It's not fine. Trust me. I'm a mod on this forum. We've listened to a lot of feedback and have made it a rule not to use M$ in place of MS. Using it going forward is a problem and you will be moderated for it. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt right now as you're a new user and politely informing you to stop with it. This isn't an attitude. It's a rule that we've come to agreement to as a mod team based on community feedback. It's similar to other such rules we have here such as back-seat moderating, calling another user a troll (that's what the report button is for) or name calling like Xbot, Pony, Nintendrone. So again, please refrain from using M$ going forward. If you have any questions about this, you can PM me or bring it up in the mod thread. Anything further here will be considered derailing.

And no, I'm not just trying to be a problem. I honestly have no clue why you would assume that someone playing games on a service that offers a wide variety of games would not play a wide variety of games. Particularly when the user in question listed the games he's played which seems in my estimation to be pretty varied. And when you could try out new games with no added cost, this seems like it would encourage people to try out games and genres that they normally would not have, if they had to pay between 20 and 60 dollars for the opportunity. 

Indeed. I'm glad AAA single player experiences are still made. Not everything has to be multiplayer to remain profitable yet with gaas and game pass it is turning in that direction. Still no GTA 6, Grand Theft auto skipping an entire console generation because GTA online is so profitable...

In the end stuff will go back to normal. Microsoft experimented with AoE online and Microsoft Flight, didn't work. And now we have a proper Age of Empires 4 coming and amazing new Flight Simulator in a few weeks. Perhaps Sim City will go back to what made it great as well.

At some point people will get tired of all the early access releases, unfinished games evolving over time or not. It's always a gamble, follow the mainstream hype if you want to keep playing since those early access games that miss the hype train usually fall off the radar and never get finished. Same with episodic content.

Yeah same, I would probably just quit console gaming if it wasn't for good quality AAA exclusives.

PC's do just about everything better with no pay-walled garden outside of games that are GaaS. These types of games I would rather not become popularized on Playstation as it lead to another another service that sets the standard for the generations to come.

Just like we've all been acclimatized to Live/PS Plus, DLC's and micro transactions. You'd have to be a little naive to think that these companies are not playing this for the long game.

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.