If there’s one thing that rustles my jimmies is that new games will sometimes put on an always online experience even when it is single player.
Why the hell do firms do this? What, to make you purchase a copy of the sequel of that game? They surely realise that putting a single player game or any game in general on life support through live services is stupid and makes their public optics look like shit to the consumer.
I bought your game, do not expect me to pay up extra or care about your baked in battle pass crap nor the sale your putting out for that gold skin costume.
The moment Bethesda were selling HORSE ARMOR in a single player RPG (Oblivion) it was all over from the start…
TLDR - Modern AAA sucks ass with only a few gems between.
I don’t really have an opinion either way for “always online” but live service (games as a service) makes me actively avoid that shit.
It’s perfectly fine to “finish” a game (maybe after a year or two) and move on to making the next. You don’t need to have a 10 year plan to try and keep it relevant.