What it means when a game is dead | Forums

[crowlecj]

I've been pondering this idea over the past few days: what makes a game dead? When is a game dead? What are the signs? The general agreed connotation is that a game is dead when players stop playing it. While I'm not game expert, this has been the conclusion I have come to: a game is dead when the player base stops becoming excited about it. Not when people stop playing, but when they stop talking about it. Here is the thing some people miss, me saying I think the game is dead is in no way saying it's a bad game. GRW will forever be a great game. I don't think many of us argue with that, and it is for this precise reason why games will always have "comebacks" years later. GR will never cease to be a "good game" in my mind.

Rather I believe a game is "dead" when developers and game company stops putting out meaningful content, and clearly indicates that they are not in a position to put the resources or the effort into making quality content. This drives players to become frustrated with the game yes, but more so they get drawn to other games that are advancing, that do content that is up to the calibre of a AAA title. People will stop paying 15-20$ for a game when there is clearly more rational ways to spend their money. Some might say, "well consumers are not always rational", to which I agree and say yes! Absolutely, and thats what drives loot boxes.

Take the car metaphor for example: a vintage car that is no longer produced/updated will never stop being valued. It has its own unique value despite other cars coming out that look better, drive faster, and offer more control. What makes a car line dead is when nothing new gets added. Even vintage cars get new paint jobs, cleaned up rims, updated stereo, all to make it still relevant. They make it look good even despite the ball being moved forward. But when both manufacturers and custom shops stop innovating with the car, whether through styling or other updates, then a car line truly dies. When there is nothing new to see, not new tricks, nothing sustain interest, then you see the gradual decline and eventually "death" of a car. I think this also draws parallels to the "mod" community for games.

What I am getting at should be pretty obvious. If a game company truly wishes to suck as much money out of a game as they can, a long term approach is necessary. Companies and developers must either provide the foundation for a game to have a post launch life in the form of custom missions or mission editor, or provide meaningful content themselves. Or they can take the sleezy way out and release a half finished game thus artificially extending the games lifespan simply through pushing it out too early. GRW future does not look bright and the signs are blatant. What is important for people to do is stop asking for stuff thats not going to be put in this game or already been addressed: aka bloused boots.

Listen: if Ubi can't add in a gun they already have in twice without it glitching, or adding in new missions to the main game without locking all attachments, we are not going to see a drastic change to the charactersmith, gunsmith, vehicle selection, or main campaign. Neither will we see jets of any sort, the game already has issues with render distance as it is. Simply out of the question. For many reasons, as stated by the CEO, once a game stops being able to let the devs do what they want, they move on. Thats GRW. So perhaps this post is half for the next GR game. As you can tell these are all subjective opinions and speculation. That being said I think opening this up to a constructive conversation would be beneficial to both those who are still on the forum as well as for the future of the franchise.

[KingSpawn1979]

Personally I think the failed Health Patch was the last Chapter for many Veteran Players. When the Devs don't put any Love into the Game anymore, then why would we? You can see it at the Forum Traffic, and the Number of active Posters here.
But the Fact remains: GRW was worth its money, and we all had good Times with it. This Game had a long Runtime, at least for a military Shooter. It had the Potential to please the Playerbase for much longer tho. And that's a bit sad in the end.

[DIDJAMOM]

The biggest hint that GRW was dieing was when they added battlecrates

[MikeWeeks]

The biggest hint that GRW was dieing was when they added battlecrates

When did that happen?

[Kane_sg]

Game is dead when it's no longer receiving support from the developer and when it has multiplayer aspect (yeah, multiplayer means co-op and/or pvp), that aspect is no longer populated.

So the game is not dead. It's just that the Co-op side is on coma.

[Emlloren]

It's just that the Co-op side is on coma.

No, you’re in a coma. Coop is still booming.


Op, the game’s not dead at all; you just haven’t put enough time into it to be able to break the game. The death of a game is mostly on a personal level. And a game only dies once you’ve managed to break it in every way possible. People talk about glitches in GRW. What glitches? You’ll know what ‘broken’ really means when you fly a plane under the map and suddenly the world switches upside down as if the gravity just got reversed. Or when a Sicario gets into a car you just parked, you get in as passenger before he drives off, he spots you but doesn’t mind and takes you for a drive. Break the game first, then talk about death. This game is far from dead. Players haven’t even scratched the surface and are sitting there complaining about how bad they are at the game; sorry, I mean how hard Tier One mode is for them.

[Ghost-Ami]

No, you’re in a coma. Coop is still booming.


Op, the game’s not dead at all; you just haven’t put enough time into it to be able to break the game. The death of a game is mostly on a personal level. And a game only dies once you’ve managed to break it in every way possible. People talk about glitches in GRW. What glitches? You’ll know what ‘broken’ really means when you fly a plane under the map and suddenly the world switches upside down as is the gravity just got reversed. Or when a Sicario gets into a car you just parked, you get in as passenger before he drives off, he spots you but doesn’t mind and takes you for a drive. Break the game first, then talk about death. This game is far from dead. Players haven’t even scratched the surface and are sitting there complaining about how bad they are at the game; sorry, I mean how hard Tier One mode is for them.

Mm, that's a fair point for some people. That Never KIA group for instance, the people from there like Posmertnyy and The Hand, frequent content creators and contributors on this forum, they've managed to milk so much more out of the game than most players think possible and have found a lot of enjoyment in pushing the game to its limits and discovering all the crazy ways you can break the game.

I think, however, that that sort of thing doesn't appeal to most players. Speaking for people like myself who play computer games for immersion, either to relive "glory days" or to find excitement and adventure otherwise out of reach for whatever reason, the quest to drink the game to its idiosyncratic dregs doesn't really appeal. So I can understand the other perspectives voiced here as well.

In the end I think it really does come down to an individual person's tastes and experience. Some games are long past developer support, and their communities may have shrunk to nothing, but for some passionate individual players they may never be dead. Likewise if you've got everything you can that's going to bring you joy out of a game it will feel dead to you even if developer support continues and plenty of people are still playing.

I suppose the essence of this thread comes down to people asking themselves, "Is it time to move on?" And sadly for some of us the answer will be yes.

Me personally? I'm keen to stick around a bit longer, I think. ))))

[crowlecj]

No, you’re in a coma. Coop is still booming.


Op, the game’s not dead at all; you just haven’t put enough time into it to be able to break the game. The death of a game is mostly on a personal level. And a game only dies once you’ve managed to break it in every way possible. People talk about glitches in GRW. What glitches? You’ll know what ‘broken’ really means when you fly a plane under the map and suddenly the world switches upside down as is the gravity just got reversed. Or when a Sicario gets into a car you just parked, you get in as passenger before he drives off, he spots you but doesn’t mind and takes you for a drive. Break the game first, then talk about death. This game is far from dead. Players haven’t even scratched the surface and are sitting there complaining about how bad they are at the game; sorry, I mean how hard Tier One mode is for them.

I would agree to say that what makes a game dead is partially personal and subjective, but what do you think gives you the right to tell anyone they "haven't put enough time into it to be able to break the game" I mean thats a real stretch there man.

Listen I get your point, there is a ton of content there and a plethora of ways to fill your time. Unfortunately for me that ends up being repetitive after a while, like trying to see how quick I can take down the predator, no matter how impressive that may be(definitely not a shot at theHand, I am very impressed just not how I'm personally trying to spend my hours on gr.) But unless you have access to my play hours, which I can tell you I have far too many of, I'm not sure how you could make that claim. In addition, if you make the claim it's subjective, how can you claim that someone else hasn't gotten enough out of it. I'm not going to make this a play time competition, we are all committed players here, at least committed enough to go to the forums, but your post seems really over the place, unfounded, and seemed more an attack on others experience rather than a constructive addition.

[TheHand]

I think the game far exceeded my expectations. I never thought I would hang around as long.

It reverts me back to another thread I posted in. My belief is this if they had spent all that DLC, GM and ffs emote energy on an expansion. The game would have captured the endgame player base. ...Expansions are the end game providers. Not DLC's. Not in a game like this. Once you have invested a good deal into a toon you don't start over, where you have achievements and weapon skill ups only assigned to that character.

For example: I raced through GM lvl1-tier01 in 16hours played in my coop group. Doing some pretty crafty stuff. (Not admitting to anything Ubisoft, i didn't cheat. Just saying I did what the game allowed me to do). Out of respect we don't post that.stuff. There was no purpose for GM other than getting the exo suit. After that there is absolutely no reason to touch that toon again. Never will I convoy hunt and skill up more guns on another character.

When I got this game 5 months ago, my expectation is that it had a very limited life span. When you see DLC's, you already know that Ubisoft isn't thinking endgame. They are thinking "New Games"
Start over.. Using the same exact engine with some tweaks and ask you play through progression all over. that's the easy software model for endgame. Real endgame is Expansions and developer support. Expansions and DLC's are two entirely separate business models. Real Expansion requires dev support, programming, dialog, writers, character designing, artwork, voice dialog, map design, testing...

I would be very surprised if words like cross platform, expansions and MMO aren't whispers around the offices of Ubisoft. That's what you will see in the future. Pooling the masses and creating a large world like Wildlands and entering the world with the feel like when you stepped into world of warcraft for the first time.. Not saying Ubisoft is capable of this, in the near future.. but I promise you others are looking at it and thoughts are coming together for a legendary game like world of warcraft. If a company can capture what Blizzard did just on the PC into cross platform "Wildlands" style. That would be the epic game. The hurdle for all companies will be cross platform. The MMO is achievable. The cross platform would be crucial for endgame population, sales and overall player interest in future games.

It never really had an endgame. Its actually a testament to the game when people are disgruntled about having endgame. No one wants it to end. Hence it deserved an expansion. When folks are frustrated because there is nothing left to do or mistakes Ubisoft made they are quick to fire. I paid for the LVOA-C and pack with the M4super90. I found out its glitched and won't reload in a fire fight.. do I want my money back? no, I'll mention the issue and perhaps they will see whats going on with that...and move on. No expectations.. the game is dieing for me. where its new for others. If I do care to post its only for R&D purposes for Ubisoft. As I am sure everyone's posts are looked at and categorized with some level of priority.

However, Ubisoft is a software company and when sales are down, its a business before anything else. The message I get is that they stepped away from the game months ago. Either to focus on other titles or perhaps another Wildlands. Or maybe, they are keeping an Expansion quiet... =p oops

@crowlecj
great post, well said and one of the better thread starts I seen in a long while.

[crowlecj]

I think the game far exceeded my expectations. I never thought I would hang around as long.

It reverts me back to another thread I posted in. My belief is this if they had spent all that DLC, GM and ffs emote energy on an expansion. The game would have captured the endgame player base. ...Expansions are the end game providers. Not DLC's. Not in a game like this. Once you have invested a good deal into a toon you don't start over, where you have achievements and weapon skill ups only assigned to that character.

For example: I raced through GM lvl1-tier01 in 16hours played in my coop group. Doing some pretty crafty stuff. (Not admitting to anything Ubisoft, i didn't cheat. Just saying I did what the game allowed me to do). Out of respect we don't post that.stuff. There was no purpose for GM other than getting the exo suit. After that there is absolutely no reason to touch that toon again. Never will I convoy hunt and skill up more guns on another character.

When I got this game 5 months ago, my expectation is that it had a very limited life span. When you see DLC's, you already know that Ubisoft isn't thinking endgame. They are thinking "New Games"
Start over.. Using the same exact engine with some tweaks and ask you play through progression all over. that's the easy software model for endgame. Real endgame is Expansions and developer support. Expansions and DLC's are two entirely separate business models. Real Expansion requires dev support, programming, dialog, writers, character designing, artwork, voice dialog, map design, testing...

I would be very surprised if words like cross platform, expansions and MMO aren't whispers around the offices of Ubisoft. That's what you will see in the future. Pooling the masses and creating a large world like Wildlands and entering the world with the feel lie when you stepped into world of warcraft for the first time.. Not saying Ubisoft is capable of this, in the near future.. but I promise you others are looking at it and thoughts are coming together for a legendary game like world of warcraft. If a company can capture what Blizzard did just on the PC into cross platform "Wildlands" style. That would be the epic game. The hurdle for all companies will be cross platform. The MMO is achievable. The cross platform would be crucial for endgame population, sales and overall player interest in future games.

It never really had an endgame. Its actually a testament to the game when people are disgruntled about having endgame. No one wants it to end. Hence it deserved an expansion. When folks are frustrated because there is nothing left to do or mistakes Ubisoft made they are quick to fire. I paid for the LVOA-C and pack with the M4super90. I found out its glitched and won't reload in a fire fight.. do I want my money back? no, I'll mention the issue and perhaps they will see whats going on with that...and move on. No expectations.. the game is dieing for me. where its new for others. If I do care to post its only for R&D purposes for Ubisoft. As I am sure everyone's posts are looked at and categorized with some level of priority.

However, Ubisoft is a software company and when sales are down, its a business before anything else. The message I get is that they stepped away from the game months ago. Either to focus on other titles or perhaps another Wildlands. Or maybe, they are keeping an Expansion quiet... =p oops

@crowlecj
great post, well said and one of the better thread starts I seen in a long while.

Well said, I agree with the selling points thing. I was looking at 2017 sale numbers and it had numbers that put it in the same league as Call of duty, destiny ect. Yet the endgame and follow-up response has been that of a much lesser game. I am very surprised they did not take advantage of those insane sale numbers, and make the game what it could have been. Done right, this game could have ensured a long title life/follow-up for the GR franchise, similarly to how they did the division and Div2.