- Joined
- Jun 30, 2024
No, his answer is just an example of the motte-and-bailey rhetorical tactic. That semantic-shifting snake's claimed definition of "live service game" - the motte from which he aims to defend the concept - is a game that has any live-service component at all. The bailey - the concept that he's supporting through his verbal trickery - is the definition that everyone else normally uses: a game that is no longer playable at all when its live-service component shuts down. It's the second definition that's implied by the term "live service game" itself, since otherwise it wouldn't be a live-service game, but instead a "game with a live service part".I have a question to any developer Kiwi's, preferably ones that are quite knowledgeable about the game industry at large. Is there any truth to what this person is saying about the term 'live service'?
View attachment 7439735
View attachment 7439737