• fishos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    I mean, as it stands now, there’s no gameplay other than “build up base”, “collect all monsters” and “level up”. End game is non-existent. It needs something more or it absolutely will die. There’s been a million open world survival games that have come and gone for the same reason. This very well could just be a flash in the pan, largely held up by hype more than anything.

    • Kaldo@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      You are right, but is it any different for games like Ark, Conan, VRising, Rust or any other sandbox builder focused on multiplayer? It’s always just a farm-build-collect-repeat cycle. It’s why I get bored of them easily at least, the only games in that genre that can usually keep my attention are Factorio and Valheim.

    • ampersandrew@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      I can’t think of a game that I’ve played and enjoyed that had an “end game” except rolling credits, and that’s totally fine. Flashes in the pan are totally fine. The game can’t “die” as long as a single person wants to play it, because it’s playable regardless of the presence of the company’s servers.

      • fishos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        OMG, stfu. No one is talking about “you’re still alive as long as someone remembers your name” type bullshit. We mean an active and engaged player base. That’s what a games “death” refers to. You are being incredibly obtuse.