• BiggestBulb@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I agree, and I think we’re actually just saying the same thing - the managers and stuff at (insert big name console manufacturer here) saw the loss by server money (which is, yes, very little money in the grand scheme) and then decided “let’s purge that cost too and get 500000% profit on that section as well”. Hence, the current state of affairs.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I really don’t think the cost of running it was even considered. It’s just an excuse some people make to justify paying for it. I’ve never seen anything from MS or Sony saying it. It has nothing to do with it. It’s just an extra thing they can charge for. The fact some people do try to justify it with “server costs” is sad. Every multiplayer game should be a subscription if that were the case, since they need to pay for their servers, but people wouldn’t make an excuse for them. The fact the console users want to justify using a console sucks.

      • devious@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        excuse some people make to justify paying for it

        console users want to justify using a console

        Well that escalated quickly.

        • Cethin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I should clarify: console users want to justify paying for a service that shouldn’t be required to pay for (a second time). It’s just that using a console requires it (unless you play single-player only), so it ruins the whole console, in my opinion.