this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2024
123 points (93.6% liked)

Games

32539 readers
2606 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
quinten@lemmy.world
shitpostpolice@lemmy.world
Dremor@lemmy.world
Dremor@jlai.lu
123
Is Palworld a “dead game”? Who cares, says the game’s developer (arstechnica.com)
submitted 3 months ago by Xatolos@reddthat.com to c/games@lemmy.world
20 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] CodexArcanum@lemmy.world 52 points 3 months ago

It's a ridiculous metric anyway. There are dozens of ancient MMOS that still manage to crawl along because a few hundred subscribers is enough to fund one or two developers in maintenance mode effectively forever. See also indie studios like Spiderweb Software who've been sustainably selling games to their fans for decades. See also indie roguelike devs who manage to make their one game a job by having a patreon and a few hundred fans. See also retrogaming. See also the boomer shooter renaissance.

Games on the whole have never been less dead, unless their studio intentionally smothers them by shutting down servers and locking off access.

[–] thejoker954@lemmy.world 41 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Wut? It literally just got a major update a month or 2 ago. And it's got great reviews.

How the hell would it be considered "dead" by any metric?

Stupid clickbate 'journalism'

[–] Xatolos@reddthat.com 21 points 3 months ago (2 children)

The article points out how other sites and articles are calling it a dead game due to the fact it doesn't have the 1.5 million concurrent players now (it did in Feb). Not that's it's been abandoned by the developer, but that is not getting the daily player counts that games as a services expect and how this game is bucking that trend and it's a good thing.

Its not clickbait journalism.

[–] thejoker954@lemmy.world 12 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I wasn't aware Palword was supposed to be a game as a service.

To me game as a service are games like world or warcraft or apex legends.
Their whole point is to get money by microtransactions and recurring payments using constant new content to keep players engaged.

[–] redhorsejacket@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago

You're making the same points as the article (and the devs), hence OP stating that what he posted is not the "clickbait journalism" that you appeared to accuse it of being originally.

If you were saying the other articles referred to in the headline are clickbait journalism, then I'm pretty sure we're all on the same page. Your phrasing was just a little ambiguous at first.

[–] cryptiod137@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

It's not a games as a service under any definition of the phrase, so the comparison is garbage

[–] scutiger@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

It's still in Early Access, it hasn't even officially released yet, how can it be a dead game already?

[–] NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth 1 points 3 months ago

Masturbation joke?

[–] yamanii@lemmy.world 32 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It's a sold game not a live service, as long as they deliverer all updates who cares, the media also had this discussion with Manor Lords decaying numbers, after it sold millions...

[–] mesamunefire@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago

Also they already succeeded according to their own metrics.

[–] Limonene@lemmy.world 25 points 3 months ago

No, it's not dead. The number of players is irrelevant.

A "dead game" is a game that needs work but is not under any development. It could be in Early Access, and incomplete. Or, it could be released, but still incomplete (looking at you, 7 Days to Die). Or, it could be an MMO that needs ongoing server maintenance, but they shut the servers down.

A game that is being worked on and making good progress isn't dead. A game that is complete and relatively bug-free, but not being worked on, is not dead. An MMO getting no new content, but just enough labor to keep the lights on and the servers up, is not dead.

I guess an MMO or multiplayer game that has mandatory multiplayer aspects could be considered Dead if there aren't enough players available to reasonably play the game. But Palworld is a single player game, or co-op with friends, not really an MMO.

[–] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 18 points 3 months ago

No, it is not.

[–] Katana314@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

I feel this way about Back 4 Blood too. It got a taste of backlash for not living up to the hopes of Left 4 Dead players - but, it has plenty of its own enjoyable elements (Left 4 Dead doesn't really let you run a "build" that "specializes" in one thing and accepts a set of weaknesses). The developers announced they were going to stop updating it - but that only means it doesn't file into the category of junky "Live service" noncompetitive games, which to me is fine. People shouldn't necessarily avoid it on sale, the servers are up and it's still fun.

[–] GeneralEmergency@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago

Palworld is a dead game because the fad is over. All the media outlets and YouTubers made their edgy Ash with the Glock thumbnails.

And outside of that what more is there to talk about. It's just your generic crafting survival early access title.