The Deadly Spiral Of Live Services (The Jimquisition)

Jim... Are you secretly the time-traveling reincarnation of Mrs. Cleo? Can you say, "Call me now!" in a Jamaican(?) accent so I can test my theory? Please?

Naterkix

Jim is the game pundit we need, and definitely what we deserve!!!

Paul Kasinski

No jim! I love tamatoa and now my brain will associate him with AAA bs. Why!?

Drachma55

Jim, this video is GOLD - exactly why I throw a buck your way every month ;)

The sad part is, there's games where I *would* almost accept a patreon-esq situation to keep the servers on - however, they're all old, less-loved MMO's and the like who have been all but abandoned by their attached companies. A way to see if the community could band together to keep the lights on? I'd be all for it. Unfortunately, it'd more then likely go horribly once everyone else got their hands on it. Bleh.

I wonder how long we've got before the publishers start baldly going for the telethon/pledge drive model: "We need to receive $10,000 from customers to keep the servers on your game on for another 24 hours; otherwise, all your in-game purchases and hours of grinding are going to go up in smoke like the EULA you skimmed said they would. Tomorrow, it will be $20,000." (No, any corporate monkeys who might be skimming, that is NOT a suggestion. And if you follow up on it, I will not be held responsible. You think you have ill-will now...?)

Kraken

You know, what I suspect with all of this (and it adds a very sinister shitty narative to this) is that publishers KNOW it is not a sustainable circle. You don't make billions without anticipating everything 2-3 steps in the future. When I look at the current state and shifting to "Live Services" I ask the question : How would a massive billion dollar publisher ensure that any new business practice or scheme be worth the time, effort and risk (i.e. $$). And in my mind it says" Because they have a backup plan". If a game that is primarily a single player game but is still "online" required to allow for microtransactions and feeding into players addictions, eventually peters out, in many cases it just dies. But if all major pub's feed on this live services trend, and it ends up collapsing onto itself, they will just shift gears, start making games that don't require it and broadcast it as them being the godly saviors they want to be. As well they can go back and sell "Complete" or "Essential" editions of some of their games (including most if not all of the microtansactions) and effectively re-sell everyone the game they abandoned. And they'll leave the option to buy credits (or crystals, or points, or what the hell ever) in case players want faster progression in game beyond the resources included. it means some games releasing with little to no work to re-release, and in other cases, releasing an older game to a new generation of technology with a slight coat of paint to make it seem worth buying (compared to the original release). Cause if you can re-sell everything you already have, why wouldn't you? Essentially, I think the companies anticipate failure and already have schemes to bounce back. Cause then they can ride these practices, and up the ante for as long as they can, take in tons of money, and when it wanes just shift to new practices and keep on trucking. Too many gamers are the commonfolk that DON'T pay attention to your videos, or other similarly critical ones, or game news, or online communities. They walk into a store, buy the game, and play it. Nuff Said. So there will always be a large population of naive or willfully ignorant folk feeding the machine.

Sterling Treadwell

Is Comcast done something shitty recently to be on the wall of the opening this week, or is it a general statement like with FucKonami?