I’m really frustrated with how almost every new game these days is being forced into this “live service” model. It seems like no matter what type of game you want to play—whether it’s an RPG, shooter, or even something traditionally single-player—you’re stuck with always-online requirements. And for what? It adds nothing to the experience for most players and, if anything, it makes the game worse.
Take Fallout 76, for example. You can’t play it offline, period. You’re expected to pay $100 a year for a subscription to play by yourself, but even then, you’re still online, and any slight hiccup in your internet connection—or their terrible servers—means you get kicked off. It’s absurd. Fallout has always been a solo game experience, but now we’re locked into an online system no one wanted. Who actually benefits from this? Not the players, that’s for sure.
Another perfect example is Once Human. This is a game that could have been incredible, but instead, it’s trapped in the live service model from the start. I’m sitting there playing, and there’s no one around. So why am I online? Why can’t I just enjoy the game offline? It’s not like I’m asking to avoid multiplayer altogether—just give players the option! If I want to jump into a server and play with others, fine. But the fact that I’m forced to connect even for big chunks of the game that should be playable offline just feels unnecessary.
One of the worst offenders in recent memory is Temtem. It’s like they tried to make a multiplayer Pokémon and failed miserably. The game is fully online, yet it’s a ghost town. Steam shows fewer than 100 players on at any given time, but they still force everyone to play online. And one day, the servers will go offline entirely, and what happens to your game then? It’s completely gone, and so is your money. It feels like a scam.
The worst part is, nobody seems to be fighting against this trend except for the EU. They’re already working on passing laws that would require games to be playable offline if the servers get shut down. Imagine that! A game company actually having to care about whether you can play the game you paid for after it’s abandoned. It’s crazy to me that this isn’t already standard everywhere. The fact that we even need a law to ensure you can still enjoy your purchase after the servers are gone is telling.
It’s just sad to see so many great games ruined by forced online connectivity. Live service works for some titles, but not everything needs to be connected 24/7. Developers need to wake up and realize that players want the choice, not a one-size-fits-all approach that makes everything worse in the long run.
deleted by creator
Steam is literally constantly doing showcase events for different genres of small games.
Literally on the front page right now there’s a turn-based RPG showcase. OP seems wilfully ignorant.
Very little on my Steam page is. This is just one data point but still it suggests their suggestion algorithm somewhat works for this.
Just an observation on that specific thing not a disagreement with the problem. Live service is trash and needs to go away if it’s not an exclusively multiplayer game.
I’m pretty dialed into indie games. What kind of games do you like? I might be able to recommend some. I get most of my indie recommendations through word of mouth or curators.
The steam store page has an algorithm tuned to your preferences. If you’ve already been playing a lot of live service games, then it assumes you must like them. Once you start showing an interest in other games, you can probably just cruise through your discovery queue.
To skip the algorithm, you can try looking at the steam store web page in a private / incognito window. But if most of the money makers are live service or free-to-play then that may just be the default offering.
Steam does an indie show case almost every week, to the point it’s almost annoying. Idk how you’ve apparently missed every single one of them
That’s not my experience with steam at all. Only one or two options of the steam store tend to show AAA games over indie games. If you browse by category or using the dynamic recommendation you’ll see plenty of good games.
Look at what pirate repackers like fitgirl and dodi are putting out. They have a much lower throughput and often focus on popular indie or small studio titles.
Lemmy, friends, YouTube, websearch.
It’s mostly just finding some reviews/word of mouth sources that you trust and which align with your tastes.
On the review side of things Second Wind covers a decent spread of indie games. I also occasionally see some new stuff from streamers, but that’s more of a toss up since there’s a lot of sponsored coverage.
I think this may be algorithmic. Like steam gives suggestions based on what you have already purchased, and what other people who purchased the same games also like. Additionally it’ll tell you what your friends are playing if you friend them on steam. This sort of gives everyone a different picture of steam suggestions that is tailored to them. It might be a good idea to find older non-live service games you like, add them to a new profile or wishlist, and then see what new information pops up for you.
It is algorithmic, for sure. I’ve played so many live games… TF2, Overwatch, Dota, etc. Now it thinks it’s all that I want lmao
If people stop paying for them they will go away