MultiVersus officially closes down and is delisted today
-
If the business model were successful, then the GaaS model wouldnt be full of bloated corpses of failed projects
wrote on 30 May 2025, 15:12 last edited byIf you think that GaaS means that you have more failed projects, then look at how many normal games failed before launch.
-
If you think that GaaS means that you have more failed projects, then look at how many normal games failed before launch.
wrote on 30 May 2025, 15:15 last edited byGaaS means you have ongoing expenses after launch in a way that normal games do not. The costs are higher, but they keep chasing the much larger reward that only a super small percentage will ever achieve.
-
It's not going anywhere until people stop playing the games.
wrote on 30 May 2025, 15:41 last edited byI'm not playing them as hard as I can.
Live service games have been failing constantly, so unless the change is happening already I don't think they're deterred. That perpetual revenue stream is some exec's idea of a lottery ticket.
-
It's really gross how people's games can just be disappeared these days. GaaS is a terrible business model.
wrote on 30 May 2025, 15:46 last edited by landedgentry@lemmy.zip 6 Feb 2025, 20:18::: spoiler spoiler
askldjfals;jflsad;
::: -
It's really gross how people's games can just be disappeared these days. GaaS is a terrible business model.
wrote on 30 May 2025, 15:52 last edited by spankmonkey@lemmy.worldThere are a very small number of games where a changing world is a benefit to the game, although sometimes the approach also means skimping on some development before going live.
Helldivers 2 is an example of a game that benefits from the changing world approach of GaaS and it doesn't have predatory monetization. Playing the game gives enough in game currency to buy optional equipment needed for the changing world even if you only play a few hours a week. Heck, play it more regularly and you can afford most of the thematic warbonds which again and not necessary. The changing world and adding more enemy units keeps the game fresh over time, and the evolving story is like playing a giant semi shared campaign. You play a small part in a shared experience. I don't think doing the game as a single or coop campaign would have been a better experience.
That said, when they do end the ongoing campaign at some point it would be awesome to have some kind of automated system campaign for people to still do things. It wouldn't be as focused, but it would extend the game's life.
MultiVersus was hurt by trying to do SaaS because they added more predatory monetization after the beta where it was bad enough and tried to milk it for everything to the detriment of the gameplay. It is a great example of a game where the SaaS approach was terrible, and that is the case for the vast majority of SaaS games.
-
It really sucked because Smash Bros is basically the only other big platform fighter on the market. Multiversus was set up to actually be a viable alternative to smash, it was massively popular at first, and they had such an amazing library of characters to pull from. The game had everything going for it. And they just blew it. So badly.
wrote on 30 May 2025, 15:54 last edited byThe beta was fun, although the monetization was bad even back then.
But the official release made all the wrong decisions to amplify the worst parts of gameplay and dial up the monetization. It was like they got all the player feedback backwards.
-
wrote on 30 May 2025, 16:02 last edited by
Do you even have to pay hosting costs, if you put a game on steam or does valve not distribute your game for free?
If I'd have to guess the bigger issues with a game like this would be licensing or that delisting allows some form of tax advantageous asset depreciation.
-
It's really gross how people's games can just be disappeared these days. GaaS is a terrible business model.
wrote on 30 May 2025, 16:11 last edited byThe catch is a free to play online gaming service isn’t a “game you own” in most cases.
-
wrote on 30 May 2025, 16:13 last edited by
It's not going anywhere until people stop
playing the gamesspending ridiculous amounts of money in them.Fixed that for you. The problem isn't the casual players, it's the people spending $500+ worth of skins and battle passes on one game. Those are the reason GaaS are so successful.
-
It's not going anywhere until people stop
playing the gamesspending ridiculous amounts of money in them.Fixed that for you. The problem isn't the casual players, it's the people spending $500+ worth of skins and battle passes on one game. Those are the reason GaaS are so successful.
wrote on 30 May 2025, 16:16 last edited byIf people play, it becomes popular, which attracts more players, which attracts spending. Even if you spend $0, you are still supporting the type of game it is by playing it.
-
wrote on 30 May 2025, 16:24 last edited by
I would venture to guess it's to avoid potential licensing issues that could arise down the road that they don't want to deal with.
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote on 30 May 2025, 16:40 last edited by
This game could have easily been another Marvel Rivals. An absolute success using its strong IPs in a game type that is underrepresented. There's no other big name doing Smash Bros style combat, and definitely not outside of Nintendo's platform. The elements were all there to make this a successful game, but they completely blew the execution.
-
If people play, it becomes popular, which attracts more players, which attracts spending. Even if you spend $0, you are still supporting the type of game it is by playing it.
wrote on 30 May 2025, 16:42 last edited byNot to mention the GAAS titles which are competitive in nature. The whales thrive on having a mob of casual players they can crush with their P2W advantage. If the whales were only matched against other whales, they'd win less and play less.
-
It really sucked because Smash Bros is basically the only other big platform fighter on the market. Multiversus was set up to actually be a viable alternative to smash, it was massively popular at first, and they had such an amazing library of characters to pull from. The game had everything going for it. And they just blew it. So badly.
wrote on 30 May 2025, 16:45 last edited byThe Nickelodeon fighter game is still available I believe, but you're still right in that there's still basically nothing to hold a candle to Smash Bros.
-
The Nickelodeon fighter game is still available I believe, but you're still right in that there's still basically nothing to hold a candle to Smash Bros.
wrote on 30 May 2025, 16:46 last edited byRivals of Aether II is a more realistic contender to Smash. It had a really good turnout at Combo Breaker this year.
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote on 30 May 2025, 17:06 last edited by
This game leaves behind a legacy of extremely funny poor decisions and mistakes, culminating in becoming one of the few games that got to be shut down twice.
-
The Nickelodeon fighter game is still available I believe, but you're still right in that there's still basically nothing to hold a candle to Smash Bros.
wrote on 30 May 2025, 17:13 last edited byI bought the first Nickelodeon game a couple months after it released, and the online was already dead, I literally couldn't find a match. Just went ahead and got a refund on it.
-
It's really gross how people's games can just be disappeared these days. GaaS is a terrible business model.
wrote on 30 May 2025, 17:36 last edited byIt's going offline. You can still play it.
If you never owned it then it doesn't matter. -
wrote on 30 May 2025, 17:58 last edited by
Pretty sure hosting costa arent it, the only thing possible woyld be licensing issues for the IP's otherwsie they could leave it on steam forever and STILL make money off of sales. There are games that do this by making the players host their own servers each match.
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote on 30 May 2025, 18:00 last edited by
The reason that games are even hosted on "official" servers like these is to ensure the company can take the game down once the devs run out of time o the contract they made for all the IP's they use in said game. Otherwise its possible AND has been done before to let the players machines spin up a server each match.