As the title suggests, over the last couple of days there’s been an influx of doomer comments over the SKG petition. While it’s fine to disagree, I’m finding it suspicious that there weren’t comments like this posted a week or 2 ago

  • Zwrt@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    The implication that “games as a service” is somehow a positive for game preservation is its own kind of illiteracy.

    • abbotsbury@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      24 hours ago

      It makes sense if you are completely consumer-brained and only see it as “companies will make less (live service) games if they are forced to support them/let them be community supported”

        • abbotsbury@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          23 hours ago

          No, remember, it only makes sense if you are consumer-brained

          Less live service games = less consooming. Some people literally don’t care about things that are in their best interest, they will happily pay $120 for a game that has pay2win microtransactions and requires a monthly subscription and will also shutdown after 18 months, as long as there is a new one to buy after it.