this post was submitted on 08 Feb 2024
74 points (100.0% liked)

Gaming

628 readers
1 users here now

Sub for any gaming related content!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] papabobolious@feddit.nu 11 points 9 months ago

This is how I even found out they were making the game, so pretty good news. Never got around to playing the other one they released, though.. Or finishing the first.

[–] _dev_null@lemmy.zxcvn.xyz 4 points 9 months ago (4 children)

First I've heard of that term, and after looking it up, I like the term Game-as-a-Service way better.

Seems like a perpetual fee if you want to keep playing. I guess I'm missing something, but I think I'd rather pay a monthly fee of I dunno $10/month to play, if there is a $0 cost to install the game.

So to be clear, none of this $60 game purchase and a $10/month subscription, it's one or the other. For most games that are decent, I get into binge playing and beat the game within a month anyway and then never play it again. I win in this scenario, since I'm not coughing up ton of cash.

For exceptional games, I generally reinstall maybe 1-2 times a year and do another playthrough, which means after 3-6 years then I'm in the hole. The other huge case where I'd lose out: Playing more than one game in a given month. I typically have 2-3 games installed at a time to mix things up in a given month, which would mean being out in the hole way quicker. There's also the being a "patient gamer" and buying shit on extreme sale, which I'd be fucked by GaaS too.

So I suppose I'd rather than buy my games outright, and say fuck that rent bullshit.

[–] MonkderZweite@feddit.ch 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I'll just wait a year or two until all bugs are ironed out, buy the game for $10 on sale without DRM or get a crack to own it.

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I've also heard it called "evergreen".

[–] ampersandrew@kbin.social 1 points 9 months ago

Which is funny, because they're not built to last.

[–] hitmyspot@aussie.zone 1 points 9 months ago

I like the idea for AAA games that I know I like. I play sf6 daily and have played sf5 for years. However, id probably stop of ot was that cost monthly as it would seem poor value, knowing my habits. Saying that, I pay for ps+ monthly for online play. I'm considering getting a steam deck on the future to cancel that subscription.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Wahots@pawb.social 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I hope Subnautica 2 is better than BZ. The original was so good, just was missing co-op with friends.

[–] ArmoredThirteen@lemmy.ml 16 points 9 months ago (2 children)

A core part of the first game is how isolated you are though. I don't usually say this with survival crafters, but for me coop would take away more than it would provide

[–] Faydaikin 4 points 9 months ago

All the more reason to keep it "quite" and expansive like the first game.

BZ was so noisy and tiny. That, combined with other players would be terrible.

I think OG Subnautica could be fun with a Co-op mode. But any more players than that would ruin it.

[–] Wahots@pawb.social 3 points 9 months ago

I always enjoy a game solo at first, then do co op with friends. It was really fun solo. But I'd like to create a giant underwater farm with friends, and have various seamoths and other vehicles to use with buddies. The multiplayer mod works, it's just buggy as mods are.

[–] bjmllr@lemm.ee 2 points 9 months ago

Will it work offline though?

[–] Kaldo@kbin.social 1 points 9 months ago

They are still being vague about the monetization (it does seem like it will have MTX) and I'm am completely certain that designing it with co-op in mind is going to ruin the singleplayer vibe and progression. Hopefully I'm proven wrong though