The problem is that a lot of companies are already launching dead-on-arrival live service games, so unless they’re willing to make something unique, all they will do is saturate the market further and keep burning money. I don’t think this law would change those incentives much if at all.
Hawk@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
While this would be great for those “online needed to play” games, wouldn’t this also lead to companies preferring subscription models?
I’d assume it’s easier to not include multiplayer in the “base” game and just charge a monthly subscription for the online part. Now the proposed law wouldn’t apply, since the customer only paid for the base game.
It’s pretty obvious what the intention of the writers of the proposal is, but I feel like it could have an opposite effect and push even more to the “games as a service” model those greedy publishers so desperately want.
TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee 1 month ago
nasi_goreng@lemmy.zip 1 month ago
The reality is GaaS is exteremely hard to success. Every one success GaaS, there are probably 20 or 50 failed one that we even never heard.
yamanii@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Still better than the shit we have where Ubisoft just stole my game, The Crew.
That’s part of the intention, either make a service or sell a game, companies are getting it both ways without the responsibility of neither.
RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Prepare for it to be official that you own nothing.
yamanii@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Cool, than I can just stop buying new games.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 month ago
That’s already the case