I'm confused about what GaaS are

[AdropOFvenom]

Generally speaking, it's a business model where there is significant post-launch content as a means of getting a player to keep returning to the game. Moreso then just one DLC drop at some point, on a more recurring basis then that.

Sometimes it's free, like Nintendo has done with Splatoon 2 and ARMS. Like Splatoon's Splatfests and occasional new levels are quintessential GaaS stuff. It's a reason to keep coming back to the game you probably would've moved on from otherwise.

But that's also the minority.

Publishers generally use the GaaS model to get people to continue interacting with a game in order to sell DLC or Microtransations. Sometimes the model itself is just DLC, where the new content drops are just behind a paywall. Like well, basically every Destiny expansion. That's what people criticize it for, is when it's just used as a scheme to bilk more money out of you.

 

[John Rabbit]

Multi-quote doesn't seem to work on phones, but thanks for all the replies everyone I definitely understand the subject better, and I will watch your video Minako.

So it's safe to say that Online/MP games with with loot boxes/gachapons are considered GaaS, but not all games that follow GaaS have loot boxes?

Click to shrink...

Loot boxes are one way to extend the monetization (people paying money into) of a game beyond the initial purchase. Micro-transactions are another (loot boxes are one type of micro-transaction). Regular DLC releases is another. Content additions (new characters, levels, etc, which may or may not be charged for) is another.

 

[spam musubi]

No, Splatoon 2, is absolutely NOT a quntessential GAAS, it is incredibly unique. This is absurd level false equivelancy, or are you prepared to try and prove that other AAA publishers utilize the same monetization business model as splatoon 2?

Click to shrink...

GaaS isn't just about monetization. It seems like you're really upset about loot boxes and are generalizing to the service model. I think taking a step back and trying to participate in the conversation in a less adversarial fashion would be good for you and the thread.

 

[Cocolina]

I thought it means exactly the same as SaaS. Externally controlled games that you usually pay a subscription for.

 

[TheChungusAmongUs]

Games that are designed to keep a player playing for a longer time period. This is usually done by having a slew of content added later that is technically free but can be bought, or a combination of both free and paid content.

That way they have a better chance of making more than the base price of a game from a consumer.

But the simple addition of Microtransaction and lootboxes =/= GaaS.

 

[fantasyGG]

To give some example, some of the games like DotA2, LoL and MMORPGs are using GaaS model.

 

[Mona]

Correction. They are games that keep you spending money beyond the initial purchase.

Click to shrink...

i understand that distinction, but im not sure i agree that a game needs to keep you spending money to be considered GaaS

simply getting you to come back to be a productive member of the community, your presence making the experience better for other people is important too, im sure Lawbreakers would kill for people to come back simply for that, no payment required

you can make companies money without directly giving it to them, like my example before, Lawbreakers would be making much more money if people were simply there to ensure a stable community for other potential buyers/players

i think GaaS is a way to help ensure expanded revenue, but i dont think it IS monetization itself

EDIT: maybe im just splitting hairs

 

[Rizific]

ive also been wondering this very thing. and judging by the posts in this therad, it seems that many other are also confused about exactly what GaaS means. seems like by some people's definition, any game that gets future dlc content (expansion?) is considered GaaS? i dont agree with that.

 

[4859]

GaaS isn't just about monetization. It seems like you're really upset about loot boxes and are generalizing to the service model. I think taking a step back and trying to participate in the conversation in a less adversarial fashion would be good for you and the thread.

Click to shrink...

They are exactly about monetization, that was literally the shareholder pitch ABOUT games as a service, continued monetization with extremely little overhead. Loot boxes are just a very obvious example. Or, in marketing speak, "recurring investments".

https://ubistatic19-a.akamaihd.net/...7slidesfinal_tcm99-290722_tcm99-196733-32.pdf

Perhaps you could try not removing all context and nuance from what people say. Its almost as if, bad faith garbage arguments piss people off.

 

[SweetBellic]

Its games that aren't supposed have an ending. The monetization schemes are seperate from this idea. Most modern multiplayer games are GaaS. Like LoL is a game as a service, it doesn't have an ending and keeps adding content.

Click to shrink...

And yet, ironically, have an expiration date considering GaaS fade into oblivion once the servers stop running. No one will be playing Destiny 2 thirty years form now, but people will still be able to play SMB. Go figure.

 

[Cocolina]

They are exactly about monetization, that was literally the shareholder pitch ABOUT games as a service, continued monetization with extremely little overhead. Loot boxes are just a very obvious example.

https://ubistatic19-a.akamaihd.net/...7slidesfinal_tcm99-290722_tcm99-196733-32.pdf

Perhaps you could try not removing all context and nuance from what people say.

Click to shrink...

Yeh of course it's about money. Chunking up bits of a product, taking full control of how it's delivered to the customer, restricting it's access and then asking customers to contractually pay over a period of time is the business model. And it's very rewarding.

 

[Sinneslöschen]

ive also been wondering this very thing. and judging by the posts in this therad, it seems that many other are also confused about exactly what GaaS means. seems like by some people's definition, any game that gets future dlc content (expansion?) is considered GaaS? i dont agree with that.

Click to shrink...

Agreed, it is about the monetization model. Not the support model. Otherwise we have to consider the original Unreal Tournament a GaaS because they released regular free map packs and patches.

 

[4859]

Yeh of course it's about money. Chunking up bits of a product, taking full control of how it's delivered to the customer, restricting it's access and then asking customers to contractually pay over a period of time is the business model. And it's very rewarding.

Click to shrink...

But eventually, its going to even out, eventually, gob sucking vulgar amounts of money is going to even out, and be considered a baseline, the new normal. When that happens, raking in vulgar amounts of cash consistently will, once again, not be enough, because the name of the game is year on year growth. And so it will be time for a new scam.

Keep in mind people, this happened literally all over the course of one single console generation and its transition. This is unprecedented, and not normal.

 

[Ethical Hedonism]

A way to get more money out of your pocket while segmenting content delivery.

 

[jett]

Anything with a continued and consistent stream of online play, support/patches and DLC/microstransactions. That's what GaaS is to me.

 

[Cocolina]

But eventually, its going to even out, eventually, gob sucking vulgar amounts of money is going to even out, and be considered a baseline, the new normal. When that happens, raking in vulgar amounts of cash consistently will, once again, not be enough, because the name of the game is year on year growth. And so it will be time for a new scam.

Keep in mind people, this happened literally all over the course of one single console generation and its transition. This is unprecedented, and not normal.

Click to shrink...

The only thing that'll give is the quality of the content as that becomes the aspect companies can compromise on. That's nothing a bit of marketing can't fix.

 

[SlothmanAllen]

A service is something that is rendered for a fee. Viewing games as a service means that monetization is built into the gameplay loop in some manner. So games like Destiny are designed so that they keep you engaged long enough for the next content patch - which generally costs money -.

 

[Deleted member 5727]

Strictly speaking, it's anything that extends the life of a game beyond what is offered for $60 at release. So, it could be additional paid content, loot boxes, MTs, DLC, etc. Anything beyond that initial release, for which a fee is charged.

I had a long talk over at the previous site about this. It is my belief that the term "GaaS" is ambiguous, because it can encompass so many different types of games. I think it's helpful to make a distinction between:

1. GaaS games, like Destiny, Overwatch, CoD, GTA -- games built largely around the idea of offering additional "service" (products) over time, well beyond the initial release/$60.

2. Games with GaaS elements, such as Horizon, Witcher, etc.. These games offer additional content (DLC) that falls under the GaaS umbrella definition, but they do not have GaaS as a primary focus.

 

[4859]

The only thing that'll give is the quality of the content as that becomes the aspect companies can compromise on. That's nothing a bit of marketing can't fix.

Click to shrink...

Thats always an immediate standby, good old corner cutting, reducing cost to increase profit. But I'm sure they can get real creative. Like having entry fees for big online tournament events.

 

[Ex Lion Tamer]

Splatoon 2 feels like a GAAS. But its all free. And amazing. The format can work really well when its not exploitative. All of the clothing options, weapons updates, maps , splatfests etc. help make the game feel like a community with events.

 

[PSqueak]

Games as a service is a business model in which instead of the game being a finite iteration, the game keeps getting updated without you having to pay for those updates (but likely has monetized elements) it's also most likely an online game or a game that requires you to be online to access said content, "it's a service" because you don't expect it to end and have to get the next iteration, there is no, for example, "Internet 2" you have to pay for and get separately from the regular internet, because internet is a service you get.

It's the same principle applied to games.

No one expects Team Fortress 3 to ever come out, TF2 will just continue to evolve and getting new updates, same for League of Legends, Overwatch, Heroes of the Storm, HotS, they're games that wont end, just keep getting updates, in essence, they're like the internet analogy.

 

[Deleted member 9486]

Monetized games designed to keep people playing long term.

These can range from F2P games chasing whales, or just games that will get regular paid map packs etc. for a couple years or more (rather than the typical year of support for a CoD etc.).

Most commonly in the console space it's a mix of the two. Things like Overwatch or Halo 5 where map, mode and character updates are "free" as the game is monetized through microtransactions. But also stuff like Street Fighter 5 which puts out character packs yearly while being able to unlock some in game.

In short, the monetization is the key factor. Publishers love them as they fund development and get a long-term revenue stream if it succeeds. Vs. some one and done game that sells most copies the first few months and makes little revenue after that.

In short it's a service as it's kind of like paying for a subscription, but only certain people (who choose to buy DLC, loot crates etc.) are paying as subscription based games tend to fail at high rates with tons of bombs for every FFXIV—much less every WoW.

 

[Kin5290]

Games as a service means that you are paying ongoing for the service - and if the service ends - so does the game.

So World of Warcraft, Guild Wars 2, Majestic etc...


I think people are misusing the term for games like Overwatch - which are just games with additional content (sometimes free - sometimes not). But that's hardly the definition of a service.

Click to shrink...

GaaS doesn't have anything to do specifically with a constant revenue stream. World of Warcraft is a GaaS not because of the monthly fee that it charges, but because of the constant, deliberately paced rollout of new content and features that are released week by week and month by month. It's a fine balance between keeping people sticking around for new content while not releasing all of your new content at once so that binge players don't consume it all and then leave.

That service can then be monetized in various ways, be they a monthly fee like WoW, or microtransactions for new outfits like Assassins Creed or Overwatch. There's a reason why newer games like the MMO-lite Destiny and Assassins Creed Origins have publicly released schedules for additional content. They are all hallmarks of GaaS.

 

[808s & Villainy]

Games as a service are games maintained and updated repeatedly, so they're like a service, like a restaurant if you will. Something new is added and you keep coming back for that service, that feeling.

Click to shrink...

This. Any other definition that tries to more narrowly define it is mistaken

 

[Weebos]

Games as a service are games maintained and updated repeatedly, so they're like a service, like a restaurant if you will. Something new is added and you keep coming back for that service, that feeling.

Click to shrink...

This is a pretty succinct description.

Note that there is no requirement for additional purchases for "Games as a service". Games like Splatoon 1 and 2 are considered "Games as a service" despite having no paid DLC. The idea is keep player engagement high and consistent for a long period of time.

"Games as a service" doesn't apply to just any old game that gets a few DLC packs.

 

[John Rabbit]

Strictly speaking, it's anything that extends the life of a game beyond what is offered for $60 at release. So, it could be additional paid content, loot boxes, MTs, DLC, etc. Anything beyond that initial release, for which a fee is charged.

Click to shrink...

Strictly speaking this isn't totally correct. In both GaaS and SaaS scenarios (especially SaaS) there is often no initial purchase beyond the first payment on a subscription.

 

[Zoid]

Game as a service means that it is less about the value you get out of just dropping 60 dollars on their game and how much you end up spending within their game's ecosystem.

Example: Hellblade is an old shool style game, you spend the money and you get the complete package.

Battlefront 2 is a game as a service, you buy the game but it's built so you want to spend a little extra here and there on lootboxes and tons of DLC.

Click to shrink...

Battlefront 2's DLC is entirely free and the lootboxes don't have anything you can't earn by playing the game. But yes, they are there to fund future content and provide players the choice to progress a little faster.

 

[Deleted member 9486]

GaaS doesn't have anything to do specifically with a constant revenue stream. World of Warcraft is a GaaS not because of the monthly fee that it charges, but because of the constant, deliberately paced rollout of new content and features that are released week by week and month by month. It's a fine balance between keeping people sticking around for new content while not releasing all of your new content at once so that binge players don't consume it all and then leave.

That service can then be monetized in various ways, be they a monthly fee like WoW, or microtransactions for new outfits like Assassins Creed or Overwatch. There's a reason why newer games like the MMO-lite Destiny and Assassins Creed Origins have publicly released schedules for additional content. They are all hallmarks of GaaS.

Click to shrink...

It's both together in my use of the word. There has to be new content coming AND it has to be monetized some how.

Service to me implies continually paying to get more "service"--with service being content in this case.

For instance I don't consider Splatoon 1 or 2 to be GaaS even though the steadily add content as there is no monetization at all. There's no real label for that as very few games provide meaningful post launch content without either microtransactions supporting it or as paid DLC packs.

 

[ImperatorPat]

I had this discussion with someone and it seemed to end up that games as a Service are any games that receive post launch support whether free or paid. So something like Starcraft 1 is a GaaS because it got free maps through the battle.net website and also a paid expansion, Brood War.

Under this definition almost all games released today are GaaS which does make the term somewhat meaningless. The only non GaaS game would be one that is launched and never gets any patches or expansions or DLC, such as Wii games or games on previous non-internet connected consoles like the Genesis, N64, etc. (was sonic 3 a GaaS because you could buy a physical expansion for it which patched in Knuckles?)

I've also seen the term used in a different way such as hoping a game becomes a "Service game" where it would no longer receive paid updates of any kind over a period of many years, an example of this would be TF2 where all updates are added to TF2 rather than being rolled up into a paid sequel Team Fortress 3, and so on.

 

[conman]

It's a business ideal that has yet to be fulfilled. The idea isn't just that you would create a game that would continue to receive developer support and continue to make money through various forms of monetization (DLC, in-game purchases, subscriptions, etc.). It's also that, like Netflix or Hulu, it would be a one-stop shop for all of a consumer's gaming needs. One game to rule them all...

Invariably this falls apart because technology changes too much or people's tastes change too much or whatever. Nothing lasts forever.

 

[Ocean]

Games as a Service is a term that makes sense when you consider it means "as opposed to Games as a Product".

The implication is you're not paying for a fixed one-off experience (like buying Ocarina of Time or something), but rather a game that will keep evolving over time and offering new things to do (and new things to pay for) over a given timeline.

 

[Arthands]

ive also been wondering this very thing. and judging by the posts in this therad, it seems that many other are also confused about exactly what GaaS means. seems like by some people's definition, any game that gets future dlc content (expansion?) is considered GaaS? i dont agree with that.

Click to shrink...

There's no black and white definition on GaaS. It operate more like a scale. Generally speaking if a game is designed to have constant updates repeatedly to keep things fresh and make the player keep playing then it is GaaS.

 

[scrubadam]

Its more a service to the publisher/developer no? Its a buzz word to mean a way to suck as much money out of our customers on this one game. At least to me.

They want the game to be something you keep coming back to you, investing time, and hopefully eventually more and more money. Like your phone service, or cable service.

 

[SaintBowWow]

GaaS are NOT any game that receives post-launch support. If a game comes out and the developer is planning two DLC releases within a year before they move onto the next project, it is not a game as a service.

GaaS are specifically games like Overwatch where development is planned to continue indefinitely until it's just not profitable to continue. Developers are continuing to work on the game post-launch just as much as they were when developing the game and are frequently fine tuning it and working on entirely new models that weren't even planned at launch.

 

[Deleted member 5727]

I had this discussion with someone and it seemed to end up that games as a Service are any games that receive post launch support whether free or paid. So something like Starcraft 1 is a GaaS because it got free maps through the battle.net website and also a paid expansion, Brood War.

Under this definition almost all games released today are GaaS which does make the term somewhat meaningless.

Click to shrink...

Right, which is why I'd advocate a distinction between "GaaS games" and "games with GaaS elements."

 

[Alek]

I always consider them as games designed for players to 'live in'.

Games with a persistent reason to come back. Splatoon is GaaS, Destiny 4 is GaaS, Overwatch is GaaS. Games intent on integrating with your everyday life.

In general, MMOs already had this for a long time, but now MMO mechanics are transitioning to other genres. In MMOs it was never referred to as GaaS, because it was just the way things were done.

That relates back to what I said at the start, MMOs were always designed as games for players to 'live in', to come back to every day. Often they'd be the only game that players would play - modern games are looking to take those mechanics, the ones that kept players coming back persistently, and harness them to make their games more addictive. In general this is quite a logical step forward and reflects a transition of business model from a) making lots of small games, cashing in, making a sequel to b) making a smaller number of bigger games, packing them with content and maximising ROI.

Right, which is why I'd advocate a distinction between "GaaS games" and "games with GaaS elements."

Click to shrink...

I don't think games like Starcraft 1 are gas, just because they had extra maps. The intent of GaaS is to absolutely minimise churn rate, with features, and content, all the while retaining their consumers.

So GaaS needs

Primary: A PERSISTENT incentive to return on a DAILY basis (dev running GaaS models are looking at daily retention and churn, not
Secondary: A business model where the developer is significantly increasing their ROI by retaining players beyond the initial sale

If you were inclined, you could call GaaS without the secondary motivation benevolent GaaS, or something like that. GaaS games tend to make or break based on how they handle that secondary objective, Splatoon handles it well, so it's viewed as ethical, benevolent, Shadow of Mordor handles it poorly, so it's seen as greedy, exploitative. I think there's a good middle ground where you can maximise ROI, without harming your brand.

 

[Valhalla_Nights]

Final Fantasy 15

I always consider them as games designed for players to 'live in'.

Games with a persistent reason to come back. Splatoon is GaaS, Destiny 4 is GaaS, Overwatch is GaaS. Games intent on integrating with your everyday life.

In general, MMOs already had this for a long time, but now MMO mechanics are transitioning to other genres. In MMOs it was never referred to as GaaS, because it was just the way things were done.

That relates back to what I said at the start, MMOs were always designed as games for players to 'live in', to come back to every day. Often they'd be the only game that players would play - modern games are looking to take those mechanics, the ones that kept players coming back persistently, and harness them to make their games more addictive. In general this is quite a logical step forward and reflects a transition of business model from a) making lots of small games, cashing in, making a sequel to b) making a smaller number of bigger games, packing them with content and maximising ROI.



I don't think games like Starcraft 1 are gas, just because they had extra maps. The intent of GaaS is to absolutely minimise churn rate, with features, and content, all the while retaining their consumers.

So GaaS needs

Primary: A PERSISTENT incentive to return on a DAILY basis (dev running GaaS models are looking at daily retention and churn, not
Secondary: A business model where the developer is significantly increasing their ROI by retaining players beyond the initial sale

If you were inclined, you could call GaaS without the secondary motivation benevolent GaaS, or something like that. GaaS games tend to make or break based on how they handle that secondary objective, Splatoon handles it well, so it's viewed as ethical, benevolent, Shadow of Mordor handles it poorly, so it's seen as greedy, exploitative. I think there's a good middle ground where you can maximise ROI, without harming your brand.

Click to shrink...

Splatoon isnt a GAAS because its not selling you DLC or microtransactions

 

[potatohead]

Neither does the OP and that is why they are asking.

Click to shrink...

Yes I get that but again explain why you think halo 1 is gaas or essentially why is halo 1 different from all the games around it when it really isn't

I'm not trying to be mean or anything but just even thinking about it a little bit why is halo 1 singled out confusing to me because it has online? Just a little more thought by the op should really answer this question and that is learning

 

[GodofWine]

Non F2P GaaS have really just become incomplete games shipped in chunks that when combined cost way more than the whole game would have cost. Like, all games now are shipped at less than 100% (and 100% is usually a moving target that the devs never reach as they add new stuff), but games labeled GaaS are the ones that feel really incomplete, or are purposely sold in chunks.


I feel like Warframe is once again the best example of a GaaS done correctly, and its free, and completely playable for free. WoT, War Thunder, both good GaaS, supported by fair F2P models. Destiny, isn't a GaaS to me. Its just a full priced game with full priced DLC that will be obsoleted by Destiny 2, 3, 4, etc.

 

[_Ryo_]

FFXV.