Action-RPG colossus Elden Ring is reportedly getting a free-to-play mobile adaptation with in-app purchases, which takes inspiration from miHoYo’s Genshin Impact. It’s being published by Tencent, who apparently acquired the licensing rights to Elden Ring back in 2022 and put a few dozen people to work on a prototype, even as the company acquired a 16% stake in Elden Ring developer From Software.

  • the_q@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    FFVII for PS1 didn’t need a server. There were no mtx or post to social media buttons or pay walled content crap, just a game you paid for and played. It didn’t need to always be online or require a secondary launcher.

    Fast-forward and here we are with profitability being the most important aspect of gaming. Sucking every tiny bit of money and attention away from competing games that do the same thing. Character licensing fees and in game ads literally everywhere. Single player experiences requiring online components so that even though you aren’t directly participating in the mtx system the companies you buy from are still mining your usage data and selling it off to third parties. Mtx and ads and all that are just how gaming is now. Younger adult gamers have a pretty big role in his this had turned out. Instead of saying no to these types of games, they were just like ‘meh I like posting $5 for horse armor…’ and that’s all it took.

    Downvote away. I’m right though.

    • iAmTheTot@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      10 months ago

      Addressing only your first paragraph, the comparison is a bit silly. FF7 didn’t have any online features. Elden Ring does.

      Your rant or point is hard to take seriously when it eschews any kind of nuance and comes off as “old man yells at cloud”.

      • the_q@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        It’s hard to take seriously because people don’t like their hobbies and interests being scrutinized.

        I’m not going to argue about this anymore. It’s one of those things where the hobby I used to enjoy is no longer for me. It’s for you kids to buy your V Bucks and season passes at an ever increasing price. Let the publishers know you love giving them more and more money for beta software wrapped in a new Peter Griffin skin!

        • iAmTheTot@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          9 months ago

          Lol, I am very critical of my hobbies, especially the companies that produce my hobbies. That’s not why your comment is hard to take seriously.

          Also, who is “you kids”? I’m in my thirties and don’t buy mtx.

          • the_q@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            I didn’t choose it and neither did you. You had this forced on you and you were like “yes, daddy more” because people don’t have the stones to say no with their wallets. You won’t give up your Diablo IV Season Pass trinket pack with 666 Devil Coins and a new Overwatch “Dablo” skin for Moira. You’re out of your depth.

      • Gamoc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Listen if you want to piss away money on transient shit you are welcome to go and do it, but the person missing the nuances here is you. The industry moving towards these models is negatively affecting gaming as a whole and it’ll only get worse, even if you’re too blinded by tacky skins to notice the reason why.

        • iAmTheTot@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          9 months ago

          Player connections are peer to peer, but a server is absolutely still involved in match making and serving up player messages.

          • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            Matchmaking is also peer to peer as far as anyone knows but I can’t find any info on how messages are handled. It’s entirely possible those also work on their peer to peer system but even if not a server that serves short text snippets with coordinates to all these players could be run on 20 year old hardware so not even costly enough to register.

              • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                Oh, yea, they have a verification server for shadowbans but it isn’t strictly necessary for matchmaking, if that verification process were removed you can still play. The seemless coop mod for example does that.

    • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      The key difference being you paid for the game…. This is a free game… totally different scenarios. So yes I will downvote you for completely missing the point of the discussion and ranting on about something totally irrelevant.

      How does a company keep paying for servers and content when they don’t charge for the game or anything else….? With proper MTXs….

      • the_q@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        I didn’t miss the point. You’re talking about free games that live on mtx and ads… That’s the problem. There shouldn’t be games that function that way, and the fact that you’re using that as some gotcha talking point just proves how normalized they are. They’re predatory.

        • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          17
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          It’s another unrelated market, mobile games can’t charge $80 for a game. People don’t even like paying $10. That style of developing is barely affordable nowadays as well for pc/console anyways, but that’s another argument and not relevant to this one.

          You are comparing apples to oranges. And there’s nothing predatory when it’s done correctly, but there’s also some people who just see the devil in everything, lien you apparently.