3.4 Billion Dollars is Why Studios Love Live Service Games

How many Live Service Free to Play games can make this sort of financial claim? I had no idea this kind of money was generated. I'm not a fan of this type of game, nor do I like studios focusing on making games like this, but I can see why they do it. What do you think?
The Story: gamerant.com/apex-legends-rev...

[@neil_mch]

Greed, greed never changes.

[@thegamevault1970]

I can't blame them on this business model. It's not greedy as much as it is effective. Now Diablo IV with its high launch price, battle passes and expensive cosmetics as well as paid DLC now reflects a level of greed that does bother me.

[@bigbox1431]

Greedy CEOs making AAA single player games and no one cares.
Greedy CEOs making Live Service titles and people start fainting.

[@thegamevault1970]

It's like I said, I get why they do it. How could you not try to tap into that market for some of that cash?

[@Gameplay-3D]

Im just gonna throw my opinion out there. I think that spending money on cosmetics in general is just wrong. Why waste money on cosmetics when you could use that money to buy a whole other game. I never did understand it. And like you said if the company goes under or decides to shut it down then its gone. This is the same reason i was hesitant to buy any type of digital game in the first place. Imagine if for some reason steam just shuts down. I have many hundreds of dollars spent on steam games and it would be just gone.

[@thegamevault1970]

The larger my Library gets with Sony the more that question haunts me. It's not that Sony will disappear, but what if my account gets hacked or stolen or shut down because I say something that upsets the wrong people? I think the whole in game cosmetic thing kind of paved the way for NFTs. Boy did that fail.