Appreciate you not jumping down my throat. You're right, it is a low bar, and HD2 does clear it pretty easily. But you and I both know that publishers won't hear the part about the game being fun (or they won't care). My point isn't that HD2 is bad, just that publishers will see its success and completely misinterpret why it's successful. They'll see a live service game doing well and think that people want more live service games, not fun games.

[–] bradbeattie@lemmy.ca 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I suspect the difficulty the publishers face is that fun is difficult to quantify. The read on this might end up being "All things being equal, DRM/MTX/etc aren't statistically impediments to financial success if the game is going to sell well anyway. If we percieve them to improve our bottom line, let's include them".

[–] Ultragigagigantic@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

I wouldn't mind live service games as much if these companies were forced to give up tools to allow the community to continue hosting.

Corporations have made it loud and clear over and over: they will torch every scrap of gaming culture if it meant an extra 20 bucks. They are NOT to be trusted with the preservation of this history.

[–] maynarkh@feddit.nl 3 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I haven't really got into HD2, too online for my tastes, but I can see its appeal. I think there is a broader phenomenon of a divorce between where big studios are heading and where "traditional" players want to be.

They’ll see a live service game doing well and think that people want more live service games, not fun games.

Couldn't have said it better.

[–] Sanctus@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

I can say, when you're out there with your squad and it feels like space Vietnam, that's why its selling. That portion of the atmosphere, gameplay, and intensity is on point

[–] Jax@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 months ago

You guys act like that wasn't already happening for the past 10 years. This isn't a new thing.