Wow the richest company in the world almost made a passable game *sarcastic golf clap*
36% user score on metacritic and mixed reviews on steam though, so I wouldn't call that a success.

People would probably rather have good single player games rather than half-assed live service multiplayer games from a company notorious for making single player games. Ask Bioware how Anthem turned out.

The reason Ubisoft is making employees return to the office is because they can't sexually abuse employees as easily when they work from home https://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/368010/New_allegations_show_the_cycle_of_abuse_and_misconduct_runs_deep_at_Ubisoft.php

If you defend israel you simply don't care about freedom. Israel invaded and pushed out Palestinians for almost a century. Israel has one of the most powerful militaries and the US gives them billions every year. Palestinians have almost nothing in comparison. This is not a war, it's genocide, like the US did with indigenous people. People criticizing Palestinians are like criticizing a mouse for resisting being eaten by a cat.

Came to check the crybabies in the comments canceling Ubisoft for being political lmao. They're so passionate about complete nonsense. Funny to watch. The real reason Ubisoft should be canceled is because they have been protecting known sexual abusers for decades within the company https://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/368010/New_allegations_show_the_cycle_of_abuse_and_misconduct_runs_deep_at_Ubisoft.php

@Barighm: I didn't say Destiny succeeded BECAUSE it was a live service, I said it succeeded AS a live service. Yes it being created by bungie and the astronomical hype helped it a lot. Pretend for a minute that destiny didn't exist. If destiny was released with a different name today by EA with the exact same code, it would fail like all the other live-service games being churned out. That's what anthem was, that's what avengers was, and that's what outriders is.

I also didn't say mmorpgs and live service games are the same thing. I said that the trends in AAA gaming companies are similar for both styles of games. In the past, they saw the success of WoW and tried to copy it, and now they see the success of Fortnite and try to copy it.

I don't think every live-service game released today is doomed to fail, but for one to succeed they need to do significant bug testing and make sure the game is polished and the microtransactions are fairly priced. Apex succeeded because it was received well when it launched. Games that are received poorly at launch rarely fix their reputation.

@Barighm: Konami as a decent game company is dead. Their profits are from making pachinko machines and mobile games.

The article you linked mentions the main problem with Konami: "One of the main reasons why there are many who want other companies to acquire Konami's IPs, primarily ones like Metal Gear, Silent Hill, and Castlevania, is because Konami itself isn't really doing anything with them at the moment."

@Barighm: People were saying avengers was a success at launch too even though the reviews were terrible. Both avengers and outriders have sold a lot of copies, but I doubt the games will have long lifespans due to all the things I already mentioned. Games that are received poorly rarely get fixed to the point that it changes everyone's opinion of the game. FFXIV and No Man's Sky were able to do it, but that isn't normal. Most companies abandon games that are received poorly.

A "failure" is a lack of success, and neither of these games are succeeding at satisfying fans. That is obvious by the review scores and general sentiment among players. You can wait 6 months before calling outriders a failure, but I'll go ahead and call it now like I did with avengers 2 weeks after launch. It's not difficult to notice the trends because it's happened so many times already. AAA game developers make early access games for $60 then wonder why nobody is satisfied and they give up on the game. It's like they are putting their hand on a burner after they already burned their hand on the same burner. Pretty dumb.

@comments123: Destiny had the advantage of being one of the first live service games of the modern era and therefore had a lot of people playing it regardless of the quality. The live service bandwagon has created an oversaturation of live service games and most of them fail and people go back to the ones they've already been playing a long time (such as destiny/fortnite).

The live service bandwagon reminds me of the mmorpg bandwagon from around 15 years ago. Everyone was trying to release mmorpgs to replicate WoW's success but almost all of those mmorpgs failed quickly and people went back to playing WoW. Seems to be a similar trend with live-service games.

@zerojuice: I distinctly remember people saying that about Avengers right after launch "it's not a failed game", but time proved otherwise. A heavily-advertised game like Avengers or Outriders will always sell a lot of copies at launch because gamers are easy to advertise to. Outriders has even worse reviews than Avengers did at launch on steam.

Live-service games are released with the promise of regular content updates, but most of the time they're simply AAA early access games. People are fed up with paying $60+ for early access games. If a live-service game doesn't have a good launch, playerbase is likely to abandon it quickly and the reputation of the game is almost always forever-ruined. This leads to the devs investing less money into the failed game which only guarantees that the promise of regular content updates is broken. This results in fewer players, which results in fewer updates, etc until the game is dead.

If greedy devs want to release live-service games to get recurring revenue, the game better be good and well-tested at launch, otherwise it's going to go just like Anthem, Avengers, and now Outriders.