Old Games are KILLING Modern Gaming

[@KansaiCool]

Modern gaming is killing modern gaming.

[@jamespaguip5913]

you know indie games and double AA games are doing a lot better than triple AAA games maybe you should play more indie and double AA games.

[@alface935]

It is like that one image of a Snake eating its own tail

[@luckerooni1153]

Exactly. Bad new games that are worse than good old games, just because the bad new games have good graphics doesn't make them good.

[@roxaskinghearts]

No people dont want to work to pay for the things they want for these inflated costs

[@roxaskinghearts]

Imagine blaming society because the adults dont value your games when you fail everything

[@AMabud-lv7hy]

It's not old games' fault that modern games are mid

[@Saviliana]

Yeah, if they can't cater to actual majority of people consider as fun, how do we want to buy their new game?

[@FTWMFXD]

mid? Mid is generous.

[@grz782]

Mid suggests that they're at least passable, which most of the releases from major publishers barely even reach.

[@Honed-]

its company's making digital shopping malls for games, and not games... that's what's killing games today...as bg3, wukong, eldenring, all do AMAZINGLY... because there not digital shopping malls.. but theres an argument to be made for genshin impact, wuthering waves, and those types of games that do well.. and every company wants to be like that cause they make millions in a month, but its companys that want to make whats already popular so they can profit off of it, rather then make a solid game from the git go, as they HAVE to make it live service, they have to keep players spending, because they desperately want that peace of the pie, and they often flop... and then when the game starts to die out they kill it, make it unplayable, take the servers down, and kill it themselves... and thus kills the game. people now when they hear live service they groan and roll there eyes. they don't want that, they want a solid well made game.

[@InvaderMedia420]

You are downplaying it 99.9% of modern games are just cash grabbing pieces of crap

[@windatar6351]

AAA devs don't make games. They make money extractors. Old games are well, games. New stuff coming out aren't. It's not that hard.

[@burningsheep4473]

Except that there is an incredibly huge variety of games out there and there are more and more games being released every day. I'm pretty sure some of them are "good" ;)

[@windatar6351]

@@burningsheep4473 Oh there is, A-AA-Indie devs are all pushing out great video games. I'm talking about AAA devs and publishers. Or are you trying to tell me. AAAA devs like Ubisoft have done good lately? Lol, Lmao even.

[@luckerooni1153]

@@burningsheep4473 There is not a huge variety of TRIPLE A games. Read the original comment. There is in fact the least amount of variety in games that cost more than $10 million to make than there has ever been, and I would also suggest there is by far the largest amount of full on flops from AAA games of any generation. Even the person who works for Epic Games in the video says this. Yes, indie games have and continue to be hitting new highs. The system for the Steam Store gives indie devs with a dozen teammates or even zero teammates the opportunity to launch something like Stardew Valley and become a millionaire by yourself, meanwhile EA has to spend 300 million dollars to get as much advertisement coverage for their game as simply being the most liked game in the Steam Store that month. The problem is indie games are not the games that move the needle in gaming, though I will say that's not entirely necessary for every game dev to be doing, the point is, the people who are trying to do that are failing badly at making good games that people like in the process. They are wasting the company's money in the millions, consumer's passion and goodwill for the hopes of the game, and another game dev's opportunity who could actually make that blockbuster game fans want. You make it seem like not a big deal but actually it's a really big deal and a very bad thing.

[@burningsheep4473]

@@windatar6351 I wouldn't know. I barely play any of them, but I also rarely see anything about them that gets me interested. I guess from my perspective it seems almost pointless talking about just AAA as there are so few of them and because they rarely go for excellence.

[@Bustermachine]

@@burningsheep4473 It's rather fitting in my opinion. AAA was a term borrowed from investment. AAA bond (?) is considered a highly secure asset with a good return on investment. And for the first wave of AAA games this was probably true, since money was coming in to studios that still had an innovation culture. But with each successive title, the money has taken over more and more and the creativity and innovation was eroded a bit more. Today's AAA games are, to quote Act Man - "Microsoft GAMING experience - beep boop - Would you like to buy ONE (1) ENTERTAINMENT UNIT?'

[@power123498]

Could live service games also be a reason why people don’t want to upgrade to current gen ?

[@freekieleekie9353]

Makes sense. Why buy a PS5 if your kids only wanna play fortnite?

[@GamingEthos]

Hold up...ur cooking something here

[@tonyctm]

@@GamingEthos Low specs translate also in high FPS

[@KhyeTheWandereR]

Live service games are the cause of many social ills

[@LuciusAugustusRex]

Yes because most of the games that are live service are on the old gen still. GTA VI may be the only game that would force most people to upgrade.

[@aaronbennett3966]

I love how game companies never factor in the current economy. Not all people can buy and play all the games and still be able to pay rent and eat.

[@michaelpettersson4919]

And that includes the cost of a modern machine capable of running the new game.

[@albatross1779]

@@michaelpettersson4919 Seriously, what was Sony thinking with the cost of the PS5 Pro? Who's supposed to afford that?

[@michaelpettersson4919]

@@albatross1779 The modern audience I suppose. Hint, Sony was wrong.

[@MrTrev80]

Modern gaming is failing and people are going back to older generation of gaming. It’s not rocket science.

[@solblackguy]

Still playing City of Heroes in 2024 because Marvel's Avengers was trash

[@dathip]

Playing Sly Cooper 2 and 3 recently and Batman Arkham Origins(Never played its DLC) They all feel a breath of fresh air.

[@robinhood263]

Still playing Most Wanted in 2024 because Forza Horizon was trash.

[@DBFigGaming]

Yep. While new games are fun, my backlog is huge. I'm in no rush to buy anything at launch. I rather play a modded version of Daggerfall, a game that came out in 96, than the vast majority of these live service games.

[@Korn1holio]

mad respect for Daggerfall Unity. I recently tried it and was amazed how great it was.

[@christiancountryboyilovejesus]

No. I don't want games that are similar to the Call of Duty and Fortnite. I want games that are new and hook me with something truly special. And if I can't get it I'll play old Nintendo games or something.

[@therealjaystone2344]

Even Nintendo is making more remasters/remakes such as the upcoming ocarina of time remake for the next gen hardware by 2026

[@rps215]

Tell that to DICE of all people. I want a Battlefield game, not a clone of CoD of Fortnite.

[@Feniksds]

Modern games are either too woke , too greedy or both

[@JustForGaming_Alt-kf8lz]

​@@Feniksdsmuh woke

[@Londonlink]

@@therealjaystone2344 To be fair a lot of Nintendo fans do ask for certain remakes because Thousand Year Door was well received but Donkey Kong, I doubt anyone asked for that. And they try to be innovative with newer games, but it seems to be split among fans either people take it for what it is and enjoy the game or just flat dislike it. Echo of Wisdom is catching more hell than the CD-I Zelda games at this point

[@mitoryninja]

Nah. Answer is simple. Modern gaming is getting killed by themself making shitty games. Make a good game and it will get popular and be secccesful. Old games are good because they are good. Modern gaming is shit because they started making shitty games. Simple as that.

[@sacredpower7530]

Facts, as long we getting quality driven singler player like Black Myth Wukong and coop games like Warhammer 40k space marine two. I'll be chillin like a villain

[@DanteVerde-pt9zc]

Also factor in the fact that too many games are coming out and some of them even bank on hooking players for years on end, there's only so many games a person can buy and with prices getting steeper, games coming out broken, unoptimized, and unfinished... what reason is there to buy these new games when I can just go back to my old one's for free? and I never have to upgrade my machine like I would have to with a new game

[@theobell2002]

Oh yeah? What about the studio that made Hi-Fi Rush? Shut down. The studio that made the fantastic Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 1+2? Absorbed by Blizzard. No, it's not as simple as just "making a good game". To think otherwise is incredibly reductive and the video specifically addresses that point.

[@MaoMavo]

No one bought hifi rush, it was a game pass title that flopped.

[@theobell2002]

@@MaoMavo Doesn't change the fact that it was a good game. So by OP's metric, it shouldn't have "flopped". (It had 3 million players and it was reported to be a "Gamepass success" so I don't know what you're talking about.)

[@superkingarmaan9875]

Gamers aren't fraud you can look at wukong or elden ring, sales number.

[@ALatte13381]

Theres so many bad takes in this video

[@oo--7714]

Not really as live service are too big, those are the exceptions not the norm

[@nathanmitchell7961]

@@ALatte13381 But you cant mention one of them?

[@Zwei22]

@@oo--7714 It's not the exception, it's the fact that most triple A games are complete ass and only care about pandering or shoving in as much microtransactions as possible which make them unenjoyable. When you look at all the really successful single player games or indie games, they usually lack all this predatory fatigue inducing stuff. With multiplayer games, a lot of them do have this microtransactions, but the game itself is still there. You can pad lack of content or stupid stuff with a great time with friends. That's why they get away with it.

[@NihongoWakannai]

@@nathanmitchell7961 Sure I'll mention one, he focuses way too much on "gamers time" rather than their money. Obviously live service games are going to have more play time than a 40 hours singleplayer experience. That doesn't mean games are "dying" they still have extremely good sales numbers and fans love those games. Companies don't live and die on playtime, they live and die on sales numbers. Elden ring and BG3 sold extremely well and made a lot of money, who cares how long people played them for.

[@Sondi]

a statement that still eats at me is an argument I had with friends after a salty 2k match. "I'm not a gamer" they told me as they spent hours daily researching builds, grinding rank and optimizing strategies. When i told them to take a break and play a single player game or something, they couldn't fathom the idea of that. I think there are a lot of gamers like this that only play because its something interactive to do with friends, and not an artistic medium. it's a silent majority that only nibble at the surface of gaming and unfortunately that majority is more willing to spend money on these live services and annual releases than try a game like Flintlock or Cruelty Squad.

[@ransargoyl6165]

Your friend is right. Sport videogame players are not gamers.

[@cattysplat]

@@ransargoyl6165 They are however incredible valuable to publishers, are very loyal and spend a lot of money.

[@FURognar]

Its been like this for a long time. Its why companies are tying themselves into knots trying to figure out how to get the next big GaaS online multiplayer game, because thats where the real money is.

[@EvilUmagon]

Some gamers just prefer competitive live-service games. Not every medium is for everyone. Another aspect is that successful live-service-games create purposefully addictive gameplay-loops that keeps players more hooked than a lot of story-focused single-player games do. And the social component is also a major part. Due to big live-service-games longevity there will always be people to play with. It can be more difficult to convince friends to buy a new coop game every few months and if no friends are available one usually can't just play them with random people like with live-service multiplayer games. Imo there will always be a market for singleplayer story-driven games, but it doesn't surprise me that multiplayer games are getting far bigger in the gaming-space. It just has a lot of advantages and appeals to a lot of people.

[@Sondi]

@@EvilUmagon it's a weird dichotomy especially as someone that was a big MMO player. I see all the time with live service and MMOs people complain or desire better progression,story,graphics, immersion, when all of these things are done better in a premium title

[@redtail564]

I mean look at the past 5 years alone. Almost every AAA game that has come out looks like it was rushed out just to be a cash grab. Like even the new Dragon Age is just outright awful in every aspect that I've seen and AC Shadows is essentially Ubisoft's final game before bankruptcy for all we know.

[@theobell2002]

Veilguard looks good. Maybe it looks bad to a tourist like yourself. 🤷

[@tonycrayford3893]

​@@theobell2002the new game looks worse than the previous title in the series. You must be one of the Devs and if not they aren't reading your comment cocksucker.

[@panwu6602]

@@theobell2002 Looks great? Sure, tourist 😂. Now go and play it. Somebody has to and god knows I don't play bad games 🤷

[@GroundCap]

I’m not sick & tired of life services games. I’m sick & tired of BAD life services games.

[@Gnidel]

Exactly. I really enjoy that Genshin Impact dripfeeds lore, which means there's more fun in speculation what will come ahead. If the entire game was done at once, it wouldn't be the same. It's similar effect to watching weekly episodes vs Netflix dumping entire season. Speculation, theories and change are fun in themselves.

[@mgntstr]

"You don't like our games? Ugh, must be a white supremacist. Ugh, Whatever."

[@Miraihi]

​@@Gnidel TBH I had to force myself away from Genshin Impact because otherwise I would never touch my backlog of singleplayer games. The game is good, but it also exploits your FOMO in a bad way. KZbin is also pretty dam addictive in the same way. I have to consciously limit my time spent on youtube so I can actually watch movie and TV series I want. My point is - video games and media can both be enjoyable and simultaniously utterly disrespect your time.

[@dragonriderabens9761]

@@Gnidel we’re talking about bad live service games then you go mentioning a gacha game as if that isn’t a prime example of what a bad live service game is

[@rps215]

There are many I enjoyed. However, my concern is the business model of Live Service games, as in good ones. I mean sure they have continuous income instead of a single purchase, but they are also being weighed down by server rent and such which often lead them to do insane things in the hope of getting more money.

[@fcmc7908]

Im not buying the argument that gamers don't want to move away from old titles because of "skill" or "sunk cost" only a really small minority of players do that .The truth IMO is much simpler for me , modern games suffer from a acute stagnation both in terms of gameplay and of creativity .Why would i start playing fps2 when fps1 has 90% of the same mechanics and 4+ years of development.

[@EhurtAfy]

Yeah, games haven't evolved much in the past 10 years. 10+ year old games like Dark Souls 1&2 , Skyrim, The Last of Us, GTA V, Tomb Raider (2013), Black Flag, BioShock Infinite, Minecraft; besides graphics, not a whole lot new going on mechanically in games. Now, many games have five years between sequels, continuation of same story, similar gameplay. They don't feel like they're five years apart, maybe 1-2 years apart. Compare Dark Souls 3 to Elden Ring, Horizon Zero Dawn to Horizon Forbidden West, Breath of the Wild to Tears of the Kingdom. Those games are 5+ years apart and it's kind of crazy. We're lucky if those same types of games aren't more expensive, more grindy, and have way more DLC and online-only BS

[@rps215]

Also in term of Live Service, the majority of the MTX income comes from Whales. Whales only makes around 2-5% of active players.

[@fcmc7908]

@@rps215 5% sound a bit too much but apex legends is a clear example of whales farming .

[@BrightLord1823]

​@@EhurtAfyhonestly tears of the kingdom wasn't a bad game but $70? Most of the map felt like a chore to work through and was copy paste, I was so disappointed in the sky islands.

[@yaderkunsama9454]

You've... just proven his point. His main argument is that people are too comfortable playing the games they are used to

[@JuwanBuchanan]

Not my fault that most modern games especially those with microtransactions and live services are mid to old classic games. I’ll rather play a game like the Simpsons: Hit and Run that offers a straight to the point complete experience out of the box than touch any repetitive shooter that wants to nickel and dime me.

[@HollowRick]

Agreed we didn't know back then but 1989 to 2008 was when gaming peaked

[@elsevillaart]

Old games cheaper, has more frames, better implementation, no bugs...more content. I wonder why they are selling more?

[@solblackguy]

And you actually own them

[@gustavheinrich5565]

New games are full of micro transactions, fomo, garbage daily quests, pay2win, bugs and bad writing. A lot of older games are not. Customers will always choose quality over a release date. And if you're not delivering quality, your game SHOULD die.

[@solblackguy]

This

[@markmessi9020]

​@@solblackguy I saw guilty gear one for the first time yesterday after getting into strive a week ago. Holy ish that game was busted 😂

[@KE-yq2eg]

We are dropping game companies hints that we like quality but they keep coming out with remakes instead of something new that's good to play...

[@Grunton]

gamers are not rich they dont have top of the line pcs and dont have 60+$ for a single game for every new game

[@Zencijr]

Bro, you must be smoking crack. Elden Ring, Black Myth Wukong, Persona, God of War: Ragnarök, Resident Evil 4, Death Stranding-I can keep going. The argument about playtime is like asking why there’s a lower player count a few months after release. Well, it could be because everyone finished the game and moved on. You could say the same about the 2009 era, which was full of multiplayer shooters like Halo and Call of Duty. The single-player market didn’t vanish; we’re just in an era where people support something for a while. But when games like Saints Row reboot or Forspoken are released, don’t be surprised if audiences don’t support them. The issue isn’t risk; it’s that we’re in a time where there’s no passion, and developers are focused on checking boxes to please a small percentage rather than making normal games. For example, look at how Dragon Age was originally created versus the creation of newer games. There’s a different tone, attitude, and respect for the consumer. The care and respect are gone-nowadays, games hold your hand, direct you everywhere, and give you no freedom. But when you recommend Star Wars: Outlaws, to be honest, it's hard to take you seriously. But that's just me, though

[@ALatte13381]

Yup this video shows how ignorant most gamers are about the industry and whats even worse look at all the comments praising it. I 100% agree new games are still doing VERY well if its actually a good game.

[@paluxyl.8682]

You are making a mistake, because games like Resident Evil 4 or Death Stranding are already "old games". Every game from 2023 is killing new of 2024, the same will happen in 2025 ... every game of 2024 will kill new games of 2025.

[@theobell2002]

What exactly is a "normal game", huh? And Dragon Age has always been a progressive series because it was made by a very progressive studio. BioWare did LGBT romances in 2003 when everyone else was scared to do it. I think Veilguard looks good and I've been a fan of the series since Origins. Veilguard is different sure but Dragon Age has been different since Dragon Age 2 so I don't get what you're complaining about. Also, "different" doesn't necessarily mean bad.

[@Zencijr]

@@theobell2002 What I'm referring to by 'normal' is not thinking about checking boxes or worrying about offending someone. When the first Dragon Age came out, it was dark, gritty, and brutal. You'd hear and see things you probably wouldn’t encounter in modern gaming. The LGBT part wasn’t something forced; when bisexual characters would ask to be with you, you could respond coldly, saying, 'I’m a man,' and that was accepted. Today’s games wouldn’t allow that or encourage such responses. Speaking of Dragon Age 2, the sad part about that game is mostly EA's fault. I think they had only 12 to 16 months to develop the game and were forced to crunch to meet a deadline. That pressure caused many people at BioWare to leave, and the passion behind the project faded. The new people at BioWare don’t remember what made the originals great. The point I'm making is that gaming won’t be the same if developers don’t respect the wishes of players. Don’t be surprised if a game doesn’t sell well when you don’t invest in great gameplay and writing.

[@kirillshvedov3283]

CrAAAp, not games.

[@Malxer]

Maybe modern games shouldn't be so trash

[@stabakoder]

Remember when Sony/Play Station was the console known for their single-player game(s) instead of a live service?

[@GilbertoPaulo1970]

I'm 53. I saw the games being born. They had 4 continues, no saves AND NO ONLINE. Internet wasn't even an idea, no videos, no tutorials... The player was on his own and the game didn't pamper in no single way, riddles were riddles, puzzles were puzzles. And the story was solid on a game to play for a whole week, minimum... Online ruined gaming, the competition to launch new games creates crappie bugged games but the devs blame the hard to please transphobic, homophobic and misogynist incel players instead of assuming the bad product. That's what we have...

[@davedavidson8892]

This video might offer some insight into why game studios are trying to crack down on video game ownership. I can imagine a future where they simply shut down older games, forcing players to buy the sequel.

[@Simoss13]

Overwatch is a good example of this

[@TheAzureGhost]

There was some article about how they wanted to shut down the first flappy birds cause no one played the newer, microtransaction riddled versions of it that comes to mind...

[@davedavidson8892]

@@TheAzureGhost You just reminded me of Peggle Classic being replaced by Peggle Blast which is just a worse (microtransaction filled) version of the original.

[@xXYannuschXx]

EA is already doing that with Battlefield, where they shut down fan servers of their old titles.

[@atiagooqkinguliaalu4027]

Cod and warzone 1 verdansk

[@xXYannuschXx]

We are at a point where DECADE old games beat new ones in terms of gameplay. To put that into perspective: there was a decade between late PS1 and early PS3 games; imagine a PS3 game with worse gameplay and less polish then a PS1 game. Such a game would have failed back then and I am surprised how long it took for current day gaming to flop like that.

[@MateoC-f4n]

Nah fam L takes everywhere in this vid. We go back to old games because new ones suck. However, when games like Elden Ring or Wukong come out we buy them, we finish them, maybe play a few more times and then move on. I dropped all live service games a while ago and don't plan on going back. I want to play interesting things, but will keep buying old games if things keep this way.

[@doot4452]

And also, we cant preserve live service game

[@TheBlademan-]

there’s also a section of gamers that only want to play “the next big thing” and don’t invest their time and money in games that may come from smaller studios or newer IPs. I have a friend who has played Red dead redemption like 7 times since launch but also says stuff like “I can’t wait for some new games to play”. there are people who really only play the next big budget AAA experiences from certain studios.

[@paluxyl.8682]

I play since years most of the time games like Genshin Impact or other asian f2p on pc. I would buy and play other new games, but there is not a single new game that is similar like Stellar Blade on pc. :(

[@therealjaystone2344]

We haven’t have a great AAA game in 7 years straight

[@therealjaystone2344]

@@paluxyl.8682stellar blade is just shovelware

[@paluxyl.8682]

@@therealjaystone2344 Everybody got a different taste, for me are all the first person games and games with ugly main characters just shovelware. Maybe it's not everybodys taste, but Genshin Impact is a fantastic AAA game. I think it's sad that so many western game studios has become so lazy when it comes to good games. :(

[@yaderkunsama9454]

​@@therealjaystone2344TOTK, GOW Ragnarok, Ghost Of Tsushima, FF7 Remake, FF7 Rebirth, FF16, BOTW, Xenoblade 3, Elden Ring, Sekiro, BG3 (technically indie, but AAA production quality), Metroid Dread, Super Mario Wonder, Doom Eternal, DMC 5, Street Fighter 6, Super Smash Bros. Ultimate, Resident Evil 8, Resident Evil 2 remake, Red Dead Redemption 2, Dragon Ball FighterZ, Black Myth Wukong, Spider Man PS4, Persona 5, Nier Automata and I can keep going. I recommend every single one of these, try them if you can.

[@conduit64]

Nah you're completely wrong. Modern games are failing because they have either super predatory monetization schemes, pander to an audience that doesn't exist, have objectively terrible terrible gameplay mechanics, or some combination of those things.

[@bencegergohocz5988]

I love how the video directly named multiple good games that also fall into that tiny percentage and you all just decided to ignore it and/or commented before even watching.

[@theobell2002]

"pander to an audience that doesn't exist" Stop obfuscating and say what you really mean.

[@conduit64]

@@theobell2002 I said exactly what I meant, the "modern audience" doesn't exist. Every time something panders to the "modern audience" whether video game, tv show, or movie it flops.

[@conduit64]

@@bencegergohocz5988 I did watch the video, his premise is simply wrong. People are playing old games because they're better than the vast majority of the slop being churned out currently. Old games are not killing gaming, shitty modern games are killing gaming.

[@bencegergohocz5988]

@@conduit64 again "waste majority" is a cool way to say you too know that's far from all games. You guys are also quick to forgot that garbage was everywhere in previous generations too, it just didn't go viral like it does now. Do you unironicly think if a new moba came out and it was slightly better than LoL, people with 15 years of investment would mobve over? Hell, basicly all digital cargames failed regardless how well made they were because people just keep playing HS.

[@EternalNexxxx]

I quit league and overwatch like 4 months ago, been playing real games again. Realized I didn’t have to torture myself for 30+ minutes anymore, I still play aram every now and then with my friend, but it’s something about queing up for a potentially terrible experience I just don’t wanna do anymore as I get older.

[@ALatte13381]

Kind of weird to say "playing real games again". Theres nothing wrong with playing what you enjoy until you don't want to anymore. This video is super shallow and barely scratches the surface of an ever evolving gaming industry.

[@olgagaming5544]

Haha I recently started playing Dota 2 and I enjoy it after I found a hero called Enchantress, I can go on the support position and after a bunch of levels, I can dunk auto-attack spears from a maximum range with huge damage, then I can turn a jungle monster to my control to help me with farm and being a support, I can fcking dunk enemy carries, I can get a bunch of attack-speed int items and be another carry XD I also always rush a particular mana regen ring so I can spam spears and heal myself without worrying for mana. Or I was playing an undead mage Death Prophet, with a fricking OP ulti and with tanky items, I usually ended up with top DPS and damage taken in team... so I realised I can do similar stuff on a support position and let another carry be on mid and I started going support and still ended up with top DPS sometimes xD And there's a very cheap OP item with HP and Int that gives u an auto-target, long range root lol, I always rush it ASAP and surprise people with that root on ganks, it makes my team catch way more people than they would usually do On Enchantress though, I always get as similar item but one that silences the enemy for 5s, it makes killing heroes with op defensive abilities way easier because they simp[ly cant use them lol On the other hand - in LoL, it feels everything got too nerfed etc. and it feels like the fun was sucked out of it

[@rps215]

Another way that you might not realize some shady publishers are doing: Fake Loading Screen. Why you ask? To fake engagement time number.

[@Ziko577]

@@rps215 That's just BS especially with the lighting fast load times with current gen consoles. Fortnite, Apex, even OW2 has this BS even though it's not really necessary.

[@AnANas00-x3p]

I'll be fine clearing up my backlog of old quality game. Corporations can make games worth my time and money or go bankrupt, why should I care 🤷‍♂️

[@Bustermachine]

My only problem is the people shrieking about the four letter W word ruining things rather than it just being corporate tokenism to try and whitewash themselves. But I figure they'll die off along with the companies so, win win.

[@theobell2002]

So you're saying if a developer doesn't specifically cater to your tastes, they should go bankrupt? And gamers say they aren't entitled. lol

[@AnANas00-x3p]

@@theobell2002 exactly. If I don't like Chinese food, I will not buy it. And if there is not enough Chinese in town, you better change your Menu or go bankrupt 🤷‍♂️ That's how free market works l.

[@DovahZeux]

​@@theobell2002 You are literally upset that CUSTOMERS don't PREFER an END OFFER meant solely to ENTERTAIN them in their free time, and you have the gall to even employ the concept of "entitlement" into whatever rgument you're trying to present... So by your logic, if a car dealership or appliance distributor or seller of any other manufactured mechanical work of the hands of actual people tries to sells me a lemon, and I just flat out turn them down, *_I'M_* the one who's in the wrong.....because _sooo many hard-workers have been hard at work sweating and toiling just to create such a device for me,_ and I should simply *"Take what I get, and be happy."* What a horrid world perspective to have...

[@antonpayne919]

​@@theobell2002 thats exactly how a free market works. you create something and i may or may not buy it depending on my taste. i dont buy games out of pity, i watch reviews, check if it has any known bugs and consider if its really worth my time and money

[@trevor_mounts_music]

I have enough games from the 80's through the 2000's that I could never get through them even if I tried in this lifetime.

[@ripoutyourprejudice]

TimeSplitters - Future Perfect (aka TimeSplitters 3) published by EA, developed by Free Radical in 2005 for the XBOX, GC & PS2. Tell me for example if there is one modern FPS game released NOW that offers as much content on the disc at launch with no post-release support as TS3 did. Fully replayable SP campaign that lasts 5-6 hours, that depending on the difficulty you selected results in more content being unlocked in the arcade and multiplayer modes as you progress. Full SP - COOP to be played in local splitscreen and online. Multiple game modes in arcade and challenge modes that after playing them, unlocks even more content as you progress. Full mapmaker to make your own levels and missions, where you can use all previously unlocked content. Full online support for up to 16 players for multiple game modes, with the ability to download user made maps to extend the variety. Released by Electronic Arts... These developers KNOW they can give you the best value ever for a game, especially today. They just don't want to. Which is why I don't play their games. Period!

[@playamcnugeegames8267]

Old games are art, new “games” are products

[@matthewrodgers740]

And a lot of these live service games are being sold as something they’re not

[@veilmontTV]

I've been buying games that are 5 to 10 years old for cheap. They run insane on my 4080 super. 4k 240hz is something i could have only dreamed of when these games came out. I play a modern title or two a year. Plus i can buy a game once it's finished not when it's released.

[@TomKayito]

Totally missing the point on so many levels. Hyenas didn't fail because of a crowded live service field, it failed because it was bad. Also bad and failed: Suicide Squad, Skull and Bones, and to really highlight it: Concord. The fact that Steam's new one Deadlock is succeeding is proof of that. Gamers will play new games if they're good, but most modern slop just isn't. Then you're also totally missing the point of single player experiences that gamers can pick up, play, and then be finished with, vs. games you go back to with friends regularly and play together, the multiplayer side of the experience. Conflating so many of these things as having direct impact on each other makes everything gone over in this video pointless at best, and actively wrong quite often. The ONLY thing you got right was mentioning the new warhammer game being a feature complete game and single player is something the industry needs more of, but even at that you completely miss the fact that it was just a *good game*, in a field of crap. Look, by contrast, at Dustborn, also a singleplayer and "finished" game, both released around the same time, and Dustborn had nearly no one playing it, for a game that the media jumped around to try to prop up, it's in the single digits playercount. This vid is just repeating talking points from 5+ years ago while ignoring the larger problems in the current market. Might be time to take a step back and get a better view of actual issues currently affecting games and gamers.

[@ALatte13381]

THANK YOU! There were so many bad takes in this video it kind of blows my mind how many comments were praising it. New games are selling just fine IF its something that gamers actually enjoy and it doesn't matter if its live service or not.

[@burningsheep4473]

"Bad" is relative. One thing that isn't debatable however is that something like Skull & Bones was comically expensive and ultimately a surprisingly mediocre game.

[@nathanmitchell7961]

This comment doesnt really say anything or explain it in any detail. The numbers show these live srvice games are taking OVER other experiences because the investment is higher than other games. I dont know how people have missed the entire point of Etho's video. Why did Tango shutdown when their game was a universal critical success? Why is FF7 Rebirth not selling when its a great game? Evil Within 2? The Last Guardian? Sunset Overdrive made $567 profit Titanfall 2? Alan Wake 1? Alan Wake 2? Spec Ops: The Line? Alien Isolaton? Mad Max? Guardians of the Galaxy? Psychonauts 2? Prey (2017) ? Sleeping Dogs? Mirror's Edge 1 & 2? Saying a games quality is the only thing is a reductive and simplified way of viewing the success or failure of games. Deadlock is made by one of the most established well trusted companies of earth, Valve. Ubisoft is one of the most disliked companies, of course it didnt sell. Concord is the studios first game, not established. Suicide Squad presented an outdated version of live service. "Look, by contrast, at Dustborn, also a singleplayer and "finished" game, both released around the same time, and Dustborn had nearly no one playing it, for a game that the media jumped around to try to prop up, it's in the single digits playercount." Different genres Different studio Different marketing or lack thereof Different target audiences Different team size Different financial budget Different engine Why is this an apt comparison? None of these external factors are mentioned in this comment. "Might be time to take a step back and get a better view of actual issues currently affecting games and gamers." I think it would be a wise thing to follow your own advice.

[@TomKayito]

​ @nathanmitchell7961 If you don't think I went into detail then you're not paying attention to the industry. Sure there was the Tango Works situation where a big company was too stupid to hold onto their talent after a good game release. Titanfall 2 failed due to stupid placement between releases of established franchises, and half your list is older games where some of the topics were slightly more relevent, but let's single out two that are actually current. FF7's new release failed miserably because they turned against their fanbase and began insulting them, which is even worse than just making a bad game in many ways. Alan Wake 1 was a cult classic that got 2 made, but 2 turned against the fanbase too, that's why it's yet to make back its development cost. By your list, you're trying to double down on what the vid is saying that it's just single player games failing, mostly by pointing to more niche games. So I'd like to point to Astro Bot, Stellar Blade, Hogwarts Legacy, Black Myth Wukong, Baldur's Gate 3, and Elden Ring. What's your reason why all of these did amazingly? And to include a few multiplayer games recently out, Helldivers 2 (before the trouble they caused), Palworld, or the many other free to play ones that come out and gain a large audience for a bit, then people move on. And just to really hammer home how many ways you're wrong: "Concord is the studio's first game, not established", they got bought by sony and money hurled at the game, and it failed badly. Look at Astro Bot for an "apt comparison", the studio behind them did almost nothing of note before this release, but it absolutely boomed in popularity because it was just a GOOD GAME. Or your claim that Ubisoft games just don't sell because they're disliked. They've been disliked for over a decade, but I didn't see that stop Assassin's Creed Odyssey from being one of their best selling games ever. While now Assassin's Creed Shadows is looking like it's going to be another in a long line of flops that's going to tank the company. Sure there's the exception like Hi Fi Rush, which they shut down the studio despite it doing well, but that's because Microsoft are retards who are chasing gamepass, which is an entirely different can of "we screwed up". But as a whole? Respecting customers and making good games is more important, regardless of if it's single player, multiplayer, or live service. Unless you're brownnosing these corporations so deep that you can't tell what's good and what stinks of shit anymore.

[@nathanmitchell7961]

@@TomKayito So did you notice that every reason you gave had nothing to do with whether the game was good or not? This is practically my point. "Concord is the studio's first game, not established", they got bought by sony and money hurled at the game, and it failed badly. Look at Astro Bot for an "apt comparison", the studio behind them did almost nothing of note before this release, but it absolutely boomed in popularity because it was just a GOOD GAME." Astrobot is an established franchise, Concord is NOT. "Or your claim that Ubisoft games just don't sell because they're disliked. They've been disliked for over a decade, but I didn't see that stop Assassin's Creed Odyssey from being one of their best selling games ever." Yes, the reputation has gotten progressily worse since then and after COVID people are less inclined to buy more games but less and Ubisoft isnt worth that time or money.

[@Crcvmbdfl]

🤡 its because talented AAA developers were replaced by activists that "identifies as game developers" in modern gaming

[@radicalcentrist4990]

Me, I've simply had enough of multiplayer games, doesn't matter if they're good or bad. I think I'm getting too old for them, I just don't care about 360 noscoping skrubz MLG style anymore, I lost the interest to prove myself to sweaty tryhards on the internet. All I still want is games that I can play at my own pace, that doesn't require me to keep up with anyone else, which is single player games. Of course, I don't like every single player game, like if they're made by Ubisoft, Bethesda or Sony then it's an automatic pass for me. I just don't like their specific formula of game design.

[@Rumariss]

Playtime isn’t important when you make a game with a start and finish that folks purchase, you make your money off the product not the playtime, this is a live service problem, not a general gaming problem.

[@paluxyl.8682]

Playtime is important, I wouldn't spend more than $10 for a game that takes less than 15 hours to complete. Also, I want on the other hand in a game nice modern 3d graphics with pretty characters, that means games must be for me from the beginning on a high level just to get my attention.

[@jamespaguip5913]

you know indie games and double AA games are doing a lot better than triple AAA games maybe you should play more indie and double AA games.

[@paluxyl.8682]

@@jamespaguip5913 I'm personally an indie game developer too, not sure what you are talking about ... fact is that over 95% of all indie games are unsuccessful and make almost no money.

[@jamespaguip5913]

@@paluxyl.8682 gaming isn’t dead first of all, second it’s because you don’t try out new indie games and double AA games gaming isn’t dead you if you think gaming is dead then don’t play video games anymore, maybe you should really try out indie and double AA games or take a break from video games.

[@jamespaguip5913]

@@paluxyl.8682 gaming isn’t dead, the reason you think gaming is dead because all you play is triple AAA games maybe you should give indie games and double AA games second chance.

[@wishingstar8701]

go woke go broke, 4 words that describe the modern gaming industry, and the reason why people are jumping ship back to older titles

[@Epic3032]

Modern games are built for the so-called "modern audiences" NOT gamers

[@100BeastMike]

The 40-60$ game with everything working day 1 needs to come back … don’t even tell me there’s DLC planned for it until a year later . But unfortunately with the success of 2Ks VC and Fortnite’s vbucks or insert successful live service here we probably won’t see that happening.

[@WCCXtra]

This is what I thought Embracer's strategy would be when they went on an acquisition spree. Just release "smaller", but polished games in a lower price range to gauge customer feedback. They get a quicker return on their money due to decreased dev time and we get more frequent releases. Subsequent releases could be larger and regularly priced depending on the success of each respective game.

[@jamespaguip5913]

you know indie games and double AA games are doing a lot better than triple AAA games maybe you should play more indie and double AA games.

[@Homiloko2]

It's the companies' own fault if the new games they make are all for the "modern audience" and not the actual audience

[@Bustermachine]

By modern audience they mean the people pouring money into mobile games at absurd returns on investment. But that's like expecting someone to come to a Casino 'for the story'. Vegas at least understands that their shows and non gambling attractions are there to make the strip more appealing to families and people who don't want to gamble. After all, even if it's a lower return on investment, they've already cornered the gamblers, not making something for everyone else is just leaving money on the table for no reason.

[@solblackguy]

If you think that, you're just a distraction from actual issues. Thanks for overlooking massive layoffs at the expense of shareholders, IPs being held hostage, inflated budgets invested into single titles, and terrible management decisions inflicted on artists and developers that should have creative control. Your complaining about culture war nonsense has really contributed to how awful game development has become.

[@Homiloko2]

@@solblackguy I'm not disagreeing with any of that, those are all also the companies' own fault

[@tidus725]

I think gaming will be fine. Live service games and AAA cinematic games will slow down because the return on investment is too low. There's not enough space for them. The bubble has already popped lol. So there's just no justification for companies to continue wasting millions of dollars on these doomed projects. The demographics for gamers will direct the industry. Most gamers are males between the ages of 20-45. And we don't have the time, energy or money to waste on games that don't interest us. I've got too many responsibilities and I'm not even a parent yet. Yesterday I got so burnt out playing high intensity multiplayer/action games that I had to take a break. Today I downloaded Kirby's Return to Dreamland and bought Legend of Zelda: Links Awakening for the switch. These games have reminded me what it's like to play a videogame and just have fun again. And when I have kids those are the types of games I want them playing, too. The gaming industry/ecosystem has also been overrun by streamers and that's playing a major part, too. In order to make a profit the streamers are constantly broadcasting FPS/multiplayer/fighting games that are trending. Then they make a clip of the gameplay and upload it to either KZbin/Twitter/TikTok in order to go viral. Showcasing an unrealistic and unsustainable lifestyle.

[@paluxyl.8682]

Legend of Zelda: Links Awakening on the original gameboy was back in the days one of the first games that I have played, my taste has not change a lot when it comes to games ... my main game nowadays is Genshin Impact, it's like a modern version of Zelda and the best thing is that the world is getting bigger and bigger, and I need to learn with every new update new game mechanics. For me it's the best game to relax.

[@tidus725]

@@paluxyl.8682 genshin impact is awesome! I was addicted when it first came out on PS4 during the lockdown lol. It’s intimidating to get back into it now after all these years. I wish there was better way to unlock good characters other than the gacha system

[@paluxyl.8682]

@@tidus725 I think the gacha system is not bad, you just need to play daily 20 minutes to complete the daily and use all the promo codes. I got at the moment 55 characters, tbh I collect all the 5stars just on C0 ... that's enough because I never play the Abyss. As I started with it the game was 35 GB big, now 3 years later it's over 84 GB ... my poor ssd. lol

[@nathanmitchell7961]

seeing so many people go back to older games

[@TheForever206]

2:25 Alot of those games with a high budget ARENT GOOD game. They are average at best or "been there done that" type games.

[@nathanmitchell7961]

You're provng his point. He said that games not only need to be live service hundred hour pieces but in your words need to reinvent the wheel as well, it's just the worst expectations.

[@emperorontheinternet6510]

​@@nathanmitchell7961 not really games like Astro bot and space marine 2 aren't really innovative/new but have a degree of polishing and passion that gamers notice and love so these games are successful.

[@nathanmitchell7961]

@@emperorontheinternet6510 I don't know what that has to do with what I said. OP says games need to be something his never done before. I'm saying that ontop of the things mentioned in the video this is unrealistic expectations. If anything you should be saying that to OP not me.

[@Seoul_Soldier]

Yes, singleplayer games have front loaded sales. But something you left out is the fact that once you finish developing a singleplayer game, that's it. Anything you make on that game after covering the development costs is profit. Live service games can make money "forever", but they also never stop costing money. Maybe companies like Sony should stop spending 400 million dollars on failures like Concord, and try investing into complete experiences like Space Marine 2. If gaming is going to continue down this road then I'm going to find a new hobby.

[@christiandauz3742]

Ukraine wished it had gotten that 400 Million Dollars five years ago!

[@Ziko577]

I keep telling my brother and his friends this all of the time that the more bloated these companies have become as well as blowing money on all these games that keep failing, that they should go back to how things were around the early 2010's where cost were under control and not whatever the hell all this ended up being.

[@Bustermachine]

The market can also only sustain a handful of live service games at any one time. Because audience attention is finite and GaaS games live and die on monopolizing attention. It's like the MMO trap that preceded it. It's not enough to be a good game, you have to be a good game coming to market at just the right moment when an established game is faltering.

[@baki484]

I've already committed to other hobbies. Long waits for broken games that were revealed too early. That's really not worth it. Then you have devs with antagonistic attitudes toward the very audience they need to buy their games. Perfect example is a dev calling gamers talentless freaks.

[@CyrusIsnt]

I will say this as a guy who grew up with a n64 xbox etc sony and microsoft messed up. The backwards compatabily rush for hyper realism and graphics, and more adult themes. They went from blinx and ratchet/sly to madter chief and Kratos. Along with some publishers they grew up with me constanting appealing to my demographic. The average gamer is mid 30s. There should have been a reset. Now they a stuck selling to a generation thats constantly getting harder to sell to. We played and experinced too much to care about an average ubisoft game. And unfortunatly fortnite and mobile games snatched the youth.

[@Bustermachine]

The real problem with the average Ubisoft game is that they're now so big that ONE of them is enough to make you tired out on the whole formula. Which I realize when I played Horizon Zero Dawn and compared notes with friends. I loved Horizon, but a lot of them came into the game already sick of the formula. Since I didn't play a tony of Ubisoft games (my last one had been Assassins Black Flag years prior). The experience was enjoyable and didn't overstay its welcome. Thirty to Forty hours seems to be about the upper limit for an ubisoft style open world game before it needs to wrap up unless its' doing something really exceptional.

[@CyrusIsnt]

@@Bustermachine They are also si formulaic their games can be seen as their own competition. If odyessy is 40 with dlc why buy vahalla for 70? They are also too huge as a company average with their cost is not stable. They unfortunatly literally need a successful smash live service game to stay a float.

[@franticmonkey-h1s]

Bro I think it's the rise in price in pc parts and consoles required to run the new games.

[@Bustermachine]

To an extent, maybe. But even then, the next gen . . . current gen? Games just don't seem to be justifying the added hardware overhead. They're marginally prettier. But even when they're next gen exclusives they're not turning heads the way they used to.

[@Medytacjusz]

tfw you disagree with the fine points but then realise it would require you to spend an hour or more writing a dissertation in the comments to explain the disagreements because the topic is too complex. Good video nevertheless, thumbs up.

[@GamingEthos]

I appreciate you understanding the nuance of the topic. There's def alot of additional angles that I couldn't cover in this video but will hopefully discuss or debate those arguments in the near future. Thanks for watching 🎉

[@absm00thMusic]

I would love to see you guys debate it on a livestream

[@GamingEthos]

@@absm00thMusic As I always say, I'm never against having a conov. :D

[@jamespaguip5913]

@@GamingEthos you know indie games and double AA games are doing a lot better than triple AAA games maybe you should play more indie and double AA games.

[@jamespaguip5913]

@@absm00thMusic you know indie games and double AA games are doing a lot better than triple AAA games maybe you should play more indie and double AA games.

[@OhCanadaGamer]

All the reasons you give are way down the list for me. Number one is that "modern games" are just straight up worse. Game play, bugs, microtransactions, npc ai, woke crap, all of it, hell even graphics somehow. i know it's hard to compete with every game on Steam but that's what they need to do. They can't make something worse or people will just play the better older games.

[@Shifft-This]

1:52 The issue is the "buy in". There's so many of these complex games that expect you to spend months of your time to retain you, and for most players when given the choice of taking a risk of investing in a game they don't know, that they MIGHT enjoy... they choose to stick with the game they've already invested hundreds/thousands of hours in and they know they already DO like.

[@FAArscape]

Greed and forced D.E.I. is killing modern gaming.....

[@MistarZtv]

The hardtacking of live service models into every new release makes it very hard to get into new franchises. We only have so much time and money to dedicated to these games. And not to mention how competitive games are, it's very hard to to get into something new for most people because adapting and getting curb stomp inside it. Most people like to play for fun and their egos can't take that they might be bad and need to grow. Fighting games realize this decades ago which is why they've been dumbed down over the last few console generations. Cause getting new players is very hard. The thing about these older games is that they "adopted" live service models after they've already build a strong fundemental core. As much as their fanbses bitches and whines about balance, these games having lasted as long as they did for a reason.

[@muppetbehumble101]

When gta 6 comes out, I hope they just release the single player first. That way, people aren't tempted to go online and skip the story

[@takumifujiwara9181]

even if they don't who cares? why are you so concerned with how other gamers are enjoying their time?

[@Andre_ASG]

i hear ya, i agree - i wish they didnt even offer an online mode - it's gonna be filled with people exploiting/cheating soon enough, with it being a rockstar game

[@TheAzureGhost]

@@takumifujiwara9181 If the statistic says (almost) no one plays singleplayer, the investment in that part of the game from the game companies side pummels down into the abyss. So for someone who loves the SP experience, there is a selfinterrest in wishing for something that, atleast for a time , gets more players to play the part they enjoy. (which is more of a general statement, i don't know how especially rockstar ticks as the last GTA i enjoyed were the first 2 2D ones.)

[@theobell2002]

That is literally what happened with GTA V? It didn't launch with online. Online was added a month after GTA V's release so it's most likely gonna be the same with VI.

[@happyjam92]

To be honest this last year baldurs gate 3, ff7 rebirth, zelda totk and hell divers 2 are the main games I've played. I just hate how sweaty live service games are, I just don't have fun playing them hence why I don't play them. Hell divers 2 was an exception because it was focused around fun and humour the only problem with that game is a lack of content to keep the game interesting.

[@AndreOliveira-qq5nk]

The biggest problem with live service gamee, besides being a constant cashgrab, is that all the content might dissapear in a few years, which means that it doesn't belong to you. You know, I hate paying for things that will not be my propety, crazy concept right?!

[@Tyneras]

High speed churn through new content is a young person's thing. Older people have found what they like, and you have to be top notch to even get them to consider giving you a try. You know what there's a world wide shortage of right now? Young people. The world has never been older.

[@PriceAintRight]

It's fun watching folk talk about this stuff, because most people don't pinch zoom out. Sure there are new games.. but there are tons of games that are only a year or two old. The idea you're supposed to just throw your games to the side and move on nonstop is... unrealistic? My wife and I still play Cult of the Lamb and we bought Mario Wonder. Shit is crack. I'll still be playing Terraria next year too. About to run Gears 4 literally as we speak. Good video bro. Subscribed.

[@rexcatston8412]

Modern games suck and lack entertainment value. Ive been gaming since 1993 and once we hit the ps3 i saw no reason to upgrade or even buy any competing consoles ever since. 5 games per $500 console or $900 pc will never be worth it. Backlog of games between 1993 and 2003 add upto over 100,000 so nothing justifies all that

[@BUDA20]

because I needed to see.... I played again Mass Effect 2... oh my God... the dialog, the graphics... how we devolve so much... even HL2 "fixed" a lot of gaming back in the day, and the industry completely forgot... that happens when you put people in charge that never played those games...

[@D3C31V35]

It's crazy to think back in the day when a game was made based on a movie (HP) you expected it to be bad. But with so few single player options the bar is so damn low. If devs would make a single player game with a fleshed out story and focus a little less on the graphics it would sell.

[@sdgamer1860]

given how buggy and very greedy games are now and days it isn't surprising people are going back to old video games and Arcades. Dude, if i'm not mistaken emulators are also on the rise because of this

[@ezecskornfan]

so today gamers want a second job where they can meet their buddies? My retro collection looks more compelling today.

[@locnar]

I´ve left this "Online-Service-Games-Sector" after I realised, that I was milked like a cow from the gaming industry. FOMO, Season-pressure and passes, micro-transactions (especially for "gaming-shortcuts"), unfinished releases. I love video games since decades and this recent situation is destructive as hell for the whole scene. For my own - I´ve decided to not play any service game to escape the compulsion to dominate my everyday life too much and to make regular payments. I`m buying "complete editions", favoriced sologames or coop. Sometimes Indie and AA Games which are clearly distancing from this modern monetization.

[@x2link]

This video uses a lot of words to say very little. Furthermore, it ignores the actual problems at the heart of the matter. Yes, there's a subset of "gamers" rooted to a handful of games for whatever reason, sure. But that is just that, a subset. Take a step back and look at the industry as a whole right now. Modern gaming is dying not because of live service games, but because it's in a toxic place right now. Most AAA and a lot of AA games are overpriced, buggy and unfinished, and at worst, packed with toxic agendas over good gameplay. Furthermore, look at the quantity of AAA games these days compared to previous console gens. It's night and day with how many new IPs came out in the 90's to late 2000s, versus how few (most of which are sequels) come out these days. That's a large part of why modern games don't sell as well as they need to, because what's out, even if it's the rare good game, just doesn't appeal to most people or they've long since tired out of the franchise. Just look at Playstation these days vs the PS2 to PS3 era. The big PS games now all follow the same core structure of big, flashy cinematic experiences. Vs those days when you had so much more variety just from Sony first party studios. When the rare return to form comes out like Astrobot, look at how well it did. Most people are bored of the modern day Playstation experience, and doubly so for the tired, buggy, often agenda filled nonsense from companies like Ubisoft. Speaking of selling, that's the other thing this video misses. Games these days ARE selling, more than ever for the big successes and even the not so big. The problem, and why companies cry about not meeting expectations, is because game development has hit a critical mass where it now takes an astronomical amount of both time and money to develop a game, leaving the company in question needing to sell an even more astronomical number of copies just to break even. Something that just isn't feasible, especially in this terrible economy most of the world is currently in. Lastly, this video completely ignores the indie scene which is absolutely dominating the AAA market. Why is that scene doing so well, when there is very little to no live-service stuff in it, vs the full AAA market? Simple, indie devs are still largely passionate about making good games, games with a wide variety of stories, gameplay, mechanics and so on, while the big companies are all about profit and player retention in what is effectively a zero-sum game with the live service model.

[@jamespaguip5913]

@GamingEthos you know indie games and double AA games are doing a lot better than triple AAA games maybe you should play more indie and double AA games.

[@Bodphrah78]

I had this conversation with my daughter a few years ago as she was into Roblox (and I didn't want her playing it with all the shadiness that goes on in it) she played it because her friends play it. It took some time but she started to realise after discovering games like Undertale, Cult of the Lamb and some arena games like Spiderheck that she wasn't having fun in Roblox. I got her into the Monster Hunter series a few months ago and now she is saying to me "Why do people play mindless, toxic games like CoD and Fortnite and not play Monster Hunter?" I think education and a willingness to take a chance on something which is unfamiliar is where you can get the true experience of what it's like to enjoy games.

[@albatross1779]

Getting into SBC gaming has caused me to fall down a rabbit hole of retro gaming that has reminded me of why I used to love videogames, and what modern games are either lacking or have introduced that I may have put up with for decades now, but detract from rather than add to the experience. I've been finding it hard to go back to regular, modern gaming for the past year, and vids like this suggest it might be for the best if I don't.

[@elijahdixonowens5036]

I see a lot of people in the comments saying “It’s because modern games are trash”, but I don’t think these people listened to what the guy in the video is saying. At 0:54 he says that “Elden Ring” and “Baldur’s Gate 3” (Universally beloved games that everyone I know who’s played them rave about) account for only 3% out of 8% of the total play time of all gamers. This video is not arguing about the quality of modern games (at least not entirely, there are definitely jabs in there) but about how the landscape is narrowing to the point where less and less games have the opportunity to shine, primarily due to the rise of live-service games taking more and more of players time.

[@aMondayMorning]

Playtime in a videogame doesn't matter as long as the game is good and gives the player a good experience.

[@scottthewaterwarrior]

I'm aganst live service games on principle: I want to buy a game, take it home, and then never interact with the company that made it ever again unless _I_ choose to. What happened with The Crew just further validated my stance on refusing to buy or even play online only games.

[@SUREILLBYTE]

Gaming culture needs a restructuring. New games should be important events, not another item to add to your checklist/wait for sale list. There's also a value proposition problem. People would rather wait years for a new a triple A game to be $20 and then buy it, but have zero problem dropping money day and date when a new skin collaboration for their favorite multiplayer game comes out. And if I'm being honest, I don't really blame the trend. Multiplayer games are ones that are constantly fun, addictive, and more culturally important than most single player games. Single player games are a mixed bag of quality and values. Gaming is just in a really weird, but objective period right now in regard to what gamers want vs what they say they want. Part of the reason why I don't really take too much offense when a publisher says something crazy about games needing to cost more, adding more microtransactions, not having a disc drive with a $700 system. Your habits are shaping the industry, not the other way around.

[@00ABBITT00]

They USED to be....before zoomer culture became a thing.

[@nexalight599]

@@00ABBITT00 no dumbass they used to be before gaming went mainstream, has nothing to do with "zoomers"

[@mulatdood]

I think that largely game releases are already acting as important events considering the large promotional blitz that accompanies a new game release and the front-loaded nature of the sales. People who wait for a sale are in the minority of buyers for a game.

[@rps215]

The oversaturation of things will start to show its effect now. Don't listen to those fearmongering publishers telling you that if they collapse because you stopped paying for their (worthless) games, there will be nothing you can enjoy. The truth is, today there are already exabytes worth of entertainment available on the internet that you will not be able to finish consuming them all in 100 years. It is not that we hate AAA or anything, but we are tired of Minimum Viable Products they push out.

[@Bustermachine]

@@rps215 Pretty much this - Also, there's only so much media you can consume even if you're an avid gamer before you need to get out and do something else. The gaming industry isn't entitled to every second of our free time. Just like they're not entitled to every dime in our wallets.

[@danielryan5550]

This video discusses gamers who do live/MMO stuff. What about gamers (like me) who only do solo games: are we a minority compared to the online folks?

[@isikuu.tyrant]

pretty much man you'd be suprised how many NORMAL PPL just play cod and fifa. Single player games are an issue too like just bc a game is a souls like it doesn't make it good genuinely the cope I've seen to tought this being the golden age of gaming is laughable bc of elden ring and wukong like what gas are ppl smoking this era is shi

[@RandomnessOfcl]

For the past year or so, I have made sure to avoid everything live service. So naturally, I started playing older games again, along with trying some old games I never tried before I have been having the time of my life

[@games_n_that]

Thing is, with the last of us online, they didn’t need to do it as a live service. Giving us a better version of the last one would have absolutely blown everyone away but instead they tried to turn it into a live service game nobody wanted

[@arovetli5810]

All the new games and studios that have shut down failed to bring what gamers want. This isn't a problem with live service problem or retention of players being held "hostage" by old games. Players love comfort games and will play newer games IF its good enough.

[@Nightweaver1]

Brother, I don't mainly play games that released a decade ago... I play games released over TWENTY years ago that have NO live service or social connections at all. Single-player games that I can lose myself in without being bombarded by idiots in chat and constant microtransactions. That was gaming at its peak: Late '90s and early 2000s. Very few games made after that even grab my attention for longer than a few hours.

[@dh8203]

This is a good summary of why creating a Live Service game in 2024 is actually very high risk for AAA studios, but they can't resist chasing the infinite pool of money, so that's what they focus on. There are still great games being made outside the Live Service model, and they seem to do quite well.

[@GilbertoPaulo1970]

Old games were FULL REAL GAMES. New games are commercial BS sold in parcels called DLCs full of bugs and first day patches, microtransactions and woke BS... If it wasn't for OFFLINE ONE PLAYER OLDER games and emulation I would have given up gaming...

[@TalesDelma]

Old Games dont kill modern Games. Modern Games do that themself just fine

[@legacywolf443]

The Nintendo Wii DID increase that pie. It was marketed at those who haven't been gamers before, and from a sales perspective, it won the generation due to that.

[@animeking1357]

I remember reading somewhere that Todd Howard actually pissed that people were still playing Skyrim because he wanted more people playing Elder Scrolls Online. Devs don't want us to play games more than once because then we might not buy new games.

[@metaldiceman]

Finally an actual practical analysis and discussion on gaming's current reality, and not someone whining and screaming "corporations bad"...

[@isikuu.tyrant]

the gaming community really has a professionalism problem in where they just think too much with there heart and not enough about the realism and business side of the perspective. It's scary to think they'll think AA- indie gaming will stay afloat if the AAA industry crashes. Like people are celebrating the thought of that like I get it too I'm not a fan of modern gaming myself like litrally I just play modded left 4 dead everyday. But a AAA industry crash means a holistically dead market with no money. Which means lower budget lower quality games. That doesn't sound bad on paper but seriously ppl are in for a rude awakening

[@spadesofpaintstudios1719]

You have to keep in mind a lot of the games we played then had souls and care and now you can feel that it’s about how much they can take, even then that was a problem but now it’s not even hidden. Overwatch 2 is a prime example along with call of duty

[@DweezyC]

Those stats are insane. I'm not a big gamer, and just got into it last year with my PS5 but i swear the live service games are part of what's killing it. I refuse to buy a game that I can't play unless I'm paying a monthly subscription fee. Screw that. I've been mass buying physical copies lately.

[@FieryAnubis]

Live service, AAA super graphics focus (which means super expensive games and the need to make all that money back through scummy practices), simplifying games and aiming them at people outside of the core audience (which is also an attempt to increase audience and get more money, but it fails 99% of the time), and that's just it. That's the modern game issue. Sure, there ARE good games still coming out, mostly from smaller studios who know what they're doing and are NOT blowing 99% of their budget for "le graphix", so if that's what I'm stuck with now, oh well. I have plenty of old games to play, I want more ports of older games for PC so I got everything on Steam in one nice place (convenience, you know). Don't care about graphics, just that good stuff. That's where I'm at, and that's where the core audience's at. It's not rocket science.

[@laurencefraser]

Indeed. Well, there's a minimum line for graphics (the tech has to be good enough to support the art and the art has to be suitable to the genre), but even for the genres where that line is highest, we're long past it.

[@evan-du3vk]

I really know only one game with super graphic is cyberpunk 2077. All other's are ok. But not jaw dropping. Pls show me one game that i will buy for graphic. Like Crysis in 2007 witch still looks amazing. I don't feel like games looks good this days. They all cartoonish. I hate that art style. It's looks like games for teenagers. I just played storm gate its rts from 2024 and it looks worse then sc2 from 2010. After Crysis I though game will look super realistic but I see only cartoons.

[@willia_music]

I'd argue a lot of these AAA games purposely shoot for that 60-100gbs of data because they want you to uninstall other games and not go through the hassle of juggling downloads. Big advantage small devs have is hard drive space. The fight at the top is ruthless, but the bottom is thriving because people are more willing to download a 3gb game just to try out for a few hours.

[@KingdomHearts0004]

Man, the Outro song made me remember I gotta buy that Phantom Liberty DLC. It’s been a while since I’ve been in cyberpunk.

[@GamingEthos]

Night city is always waiting for you. I'll pray for ur mental health. 😅

[@jamespaguip5913]

@@GamingEthos you know indie games and double AA games are doing a lot better than triple AAA games maybe you should play more indie and double AA games.

[@matheu6848]

Every month 1 or 2 games kept my attention, I think the main problem is were you are focusing you’re attention, since I change FPS and MOBAs to Jrpgs, visual novels and platformers I started to enjoy A LOT more this hobby.

[@janky477]

I try my best to have a good mash of games that came out this year, last year, and a while ago. And no, most of those Modern Games were never bought at Full Price, dont be Stupid 😂 Currently playing Caravan Sandwitch (2024), Watch Dogs (2014), Dead Island 2 (2023), Pokemon Mystery Dungeon Lonely Roads Fan Hack (2009), and Gori Cuddly Carnage (2024)

[@Poctyk]

Around 3 years ago I realized that with perpetual games the only winning move is not to play.

[@antoniobortoni]

The new standard should be free-to-play online. Why go back to a time before online gaming existed? The real fun comes from playing with real people. When we were kids, we dreamed of competing and playing with others around the world-and now, we can. Service-based games are evolving to embrace these new, engaging mechanics, constantly updating to keep up with the latest in fun. This new model will naturally replace the old one, as always. I see a future where gaming is all about sharing the fun with others, not grinding through a single-player experience alone.

[@thestud2]

It is just a sign that we have enough games.

[@ROForeverMan]

To play a single game for years is mental ilnes.

[@TrynePlague]

This year, I finished Zelda 1 (NES), Doom 2016 (PC), RE 1 Remake (GC), Demon's Souls (PS3), RDR2 (PC) and I'm playing through Yakuza 0 now. I would play R7Rebirth, but I'll wait for a Steam release even if it takes years instead of buying a 500$ console for a couple of games that will release on PC anyways. The only 2024 game I enjoyed was Shadow of the ErdTree. And the only 2023 games I played through were Tears of the Kingdom, Armored Core VI and BG3.

[@OdaSwifteye]

People who play one or two live service games throughout the year are not "frauds" they're just not gamers. At one point almost every household in the world had a television and watched cable, satellite or local at every possible opportunity. How many people actually knew or watched more than one or two channels? Very few. Humans are creatures of habit but people who are passionate about a subject don't do one thing out of habit so we're having this cross talk where we are pretending every person that boots up a game to wind down after a day of work is a gamer and that's false premise.

[@miasma82]

I only play games on older systems like nes, snes, ds, psp, ps1 and ps3. I have a big library of retro games and many of them have great replay value. And the romhacking and modding scene is very much alive

[@Londonlink]

The only thing I don't like is everything is going digital and then them saying get use to not owning your games. One of the best part of gaming for me was collecting the games and steel books are cool sometimes too.

[@AugnierCalyenin]

Old games have better performance, less bugs, properly optimized, more content, more replay-ability, no political agendas, less micro-transactions, and just overall way more fun to play. Warframe was made in 2013 and gets constant updates and it's my favourite game by leaps and bounds. New games have trash performance, littered with a plethora of bugs, a tiny bit of content that takes years to increase, lacks replay-ability, filled to overflow with political agendas, littered with micro-transactions, and has trash mechanics that just makes it boring to play. The ONLY good thing that modern games have is graphics, and those graphics makes performance take a huge knock. Oh and also they have terrible optimization, which is also a HUGE contributor to poor performance, which devs use to force you to buy a new PC every 2-4 years cause they work alongside Intel, NVidia and AMD so they all can get richer together.

[@abdulrahmanal-ashmori3928]

There are reasons for that: 1- New games cost 70 USD 2- New games require a very High-End PC and very few had access to PS5/XSeriesX due to Scalpers 3- Even though games cost 70 USD most of them are released Unpolished (full of bugs, glitches....etc) 4- Assuming a game is polished, some are just NOT GOOD, Poor Quality Story/Gameplay 5- New games nowadays focus on WOKENESS instead of FUN GAMEPLAY 6- Lack of New IP, this generation is somehow full of Remasters/Remakes 7- NO ONE WANTS another LIVE SERVICE GAME PS4/XOne and Regular PC owners see no reason to upgrade, games already run and new games are either Hardware demanding like CyberPunk, or just BAD like Star Wars Outlaws and Dustborne; Spider-Man 2 was very disappointing because of the bad storytelling (you play as MJ because of girl power and Miles who has no Idea who Harry is has to defeat Venom) so PS4 owners don't see a reason to upgrade since they already have GoTsushima and both GOW, LastOfUs, Horizon, Spider-Man & RDR games.

[@hideshisface1886]

It is a simple thing. In multiplayer games - when you have an established niche, people within that niche have limited amount of time and will to dedicated to anything new. That is why in multiplayer scene you can only have 2-3 titles per genre or sub-genre that matter. Very simple. In order to punch into that niche, you need to be either revolutionary in a good way or offer above and beyond levels of quality. AND modern releases usually offer neither of those things, on top of often being insanely overcosted. All they offer is the will to suck their customers dry. Funny how single player titles typically do not have this problem.

[@DARKOAMBER]

one interesting aspect i heard some years ago was that live service games are made for younger gamers but ironically they have often not so much money. Its logical they invest their money in games in which they can stay longer specially with friends. Another point i see is the streaming of games. Streaming platforms make it a lot easier to get inside into game without buying it and for some its enough they saw the content. Expectations and costs increasing over the years and the gamer community wanted static game prices. For the consumers are currently less risks as for the companies to create a fresh game which maybe nobody likes or is bored of playing. No wonder why the game industry looks like this when live service games generate more money and bind customers