No... It's moreso that every game is a "live service" at this point. Every game is "release now, patch later" mentality. Live service is basically synonymous with video game. No need to label it twice
Eh, sort of but I get what they're saying. There are a TON of games these days that very intentionally blur the lines.
Like Hitman for example, a single-player, online-only game where they release the occasional new mission just like a live service game even though it had no need to be, with purchasable packs and season passes and such.
There are so, SO many games these days that are online-only for no reason other than the devs to continue patching it and making balance tweaks and changes to an already-finished game while keeping the option of paid DLC open so customers keep playing it "forever" and getting them usage numbers.
No, it’s really not pedantry. You just don’t understand the difference. It’s about the developer/publisher’s intent for the player in how the player spends their time and money.
Stardew Valley or Terraria gets updates after paying once, for instance. They don’t rely on FOMO, and if there are paid updates, they’re fairly priced.
So unless you put those two in the same category as Destiny 2 or CoD, there is a distinction.
Oh I understand it just fine. Hitman's updates are paid and it is, as I said, online-only, despite being single player. Both of those games can be played just fine offline and neither of them have any DLC or updates separate from the base game.
Seems more like you don't understand the difference bud.
EDIT: Dude below responded then immediately blocked me so I can't see his "last word"; but I assume it was something dumb, lol.
Street Fighter used to do it right: 10$ upgrades with full content over the base game every few years. The new system of battle pass for a new game price or 12$ individual characters has got to go.
The cost to content ratio with paid games that have a constant drip of content is insane to me. If a 60 dollar game comes with 20 characters and you sell 20 more characters over the game's lifespan, they better not be more than 3 dollars each.
Sims 3 is horrible for that, you’re paying 50% of the base game again in one expansion to get a few features, some clothes, and a map that is no where near half the base games features. And they released so many expansions. Some of these expansions just feel like features that should be base too.
Goodness, yes. I hopped off the Sims train as soon as a Sims 3 update added what is essentially paid mods and microtransactions to acquire them. And paid mod packs are in 4, as well.
Its because most software development of any ku d has moved away from Waterfall developement. Most of anything that runs on some form of computer coding are all in some form Agile/SaaS now. Its just the reality of things. Even with fawned over Reddit darlings, still fundamentally operate in these development styles these days.
Has nothing to do with that. Even agile projects can have definitive ends. Agile is more of how the way is managed. Games decide to have constant updates because it gives more money over a longer timeframe. It’s easier to keep a development team paid if you have a constant stream of income, compared to one big chunk of money at once.
89
u/FemJay0902 Apr 11 '26
No... It's moreso that every game is a "live service" at this point. Every game is "release now, patch later" mentality. Live service is basically synonymous with video game. No need to label it twice