Confirmed: We need live service games

It's time to admit it. Without live service games, there is no future for video games. It'd be, legitimately, over.

Schizophrenic Conspiracy Theorist Shirt $21.68

Homeless People Are Sexy Shirt $21.68

Schizophrenic Conspiracy Theorist Shirt $21.68

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Source here:
    https://insider-gaming.com/future-of-gaming-live-service/

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I'm sure they'd all love an infinite money generator to support their other failed endeavors like Square Enix has with FF14. However, they can frick off. Make good games and garner a cult fan base instead like Fromsoft or Nintendo. Short term profit chasing is killing tons of companies in every industry, it's okay if the damn line stays even or goes back down if it shoots back up later because you have a long term plan.

    Fricking CEOs sit in these damn jobs for 3 to 5 years, maximize profits, then go to a better paying job at a bigger company while often leaving the company they were at in shambles because they were merely using it to pad their numbers. Everyone is out for themselves now that the smaller studios have mostly been bought up and all the old guard that were there from the start were either laid off or left. People with business degrees should not be running gaming corporations.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Short term profit chasing is killing tons of companies in every industry,
      But that's just one-off single player games. It take no work to shit one out and then move onto the next one.

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >It's time to admit it. Without live service games, there is no future for video games
    Good this fricking industry need a crash right now.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I'm doing my part by only buying singleplayer games. I moved my hobby mainly from gaming to reading and writing, now. Way cheaper too.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I think the takeaway here is there’s more demand for games that don’t have an end, people like the social aspect of always online and companies love them since it curbs piracy while giving them more money over time. Less demand for one and done games and while pc has a mod scene that can keep a game alive well beyond it’s shelf life they can’t ignore the big console markets influence that can’t rely on a third party to keep a game on life support.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I've been doing my part since 2000. 100% physical only, and no live services slop.

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    If live service games are required for this industry to prosper then a line has clearly been crossed and the industry should be put down like the diseased animal it has become.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This, there's literally more than enough free games and those not free are being reverse-engineered like Mario 64 and Zelda titles so they can legally be played and distributed for free.

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >the future of gaming hinges on live services titles
    No, no. It's the future of *AAA* gaming that hinges on live service titles. The rest of the industry isn't a bloated mismanaged disaster that needs a constant influx of cash just to be able to pay 5000 diversity hires that fill HR and middle management positions. The bros in their basements are doing just fine.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Why you gotta make everything racist

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Because I'm racist.

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Good.

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I hope every game developer, journalist, executive, creative or localiser who works in a team larger than 10 people gets their throat slit by Ham Ass. I want it to be over.

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Do these game devs realize that there's only enough room for so many Live service games? People don't have infinite time or money. Only one or two big Live service games are going to be active at any given time.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >People don't have infinite time or money.
      If you said this in any business meeting they would fire you on the spot.
      You're correct, but they don't like that. They must always be pursuing MORE. They all support this psychotic idea of infinite growth.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Either that or they'd shoot me down by saying "We just need to become THAT big cultural phenomenon so we get all the money!" They're seriously out of touch.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It's so fricking wild because we've been through this already with MMOs. The literal exact same scenario, the fricking mobile market blinded them and they think they can have another gold rush like that again but they can't. Hundreds of WoW killers, yet what remains? FF14 that needed 2nd chance to even take off? Everything else other than fricking Everquest is f2p and the other big MMO is Old School Runescape which predates WoW.

      The gaming industry is so greedy and stupid that it deserves to crash.

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >66% of all studies questioned agreed that live service games are 'necessary' for long-term title success
    Could anyone explain to me what's wrong with just finishing a game? Play it to completion, maybe replay it in a year or so, and then let it rest?

    Also I'd like a list of those studios, so I can try to avoid their dreck as much as possible.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They don't get money out of those people replaying games. That's the problem. They look at it as lost sales.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        And I'm guessing that "let the devs make a new game after this one, that you can then sell to the customers who enjoyed their previous work" is not an acceptable idea?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Think of it like this anon.

          SSX 3 is one of the most fun and replayable games ever created. Any day of the week and whatever mood I'm in, I can pop this game in, that I bought one time for, at the time, $49.99 maximum. Multiple characters and filled to the brim with boards, jackets, shoes and other unlockables. All achievable by playing the game and nothing more (unless you also count cheat codes). After all of the these years, it's still a game I can sink many hours into. Notice the problem? I only paid for this game ONE TIME and have years and years of investment.

          Now imagine if you only had 4 characters to play as instead of 10 (not counting the 9 you can have with cheat codes). Imagine if, instead of in-game currency to buy gear and accessories, you can use real life money? Better yet, make it so it would take you years of playing the game to get certain accessories and gear (which will be drip fed to you over the years anyway) but give the option to pay as low as $0.99 for items or just $19.99 for the really good stuff instead. Imagine if you could sell characters that should have already been there from the start to people who buy the game. Imagine that instead of having all 3 peaks unlockable, they are delivered in seasons. So at launch, you have Peak 1, maybe 2 years later you get Peak 2, and maybe 2 years after you get Peak 3. Each peak being $20 each! Then you get the option to ride down from the top of Peak 3 down to Peak 1 as a separate mode call "Ridin Down The Mountain" for only $10.00!
          >But just Peak 1 would be boring
          No it wouldn't! That's where the online multiplayer aspect comes on! Play at any time with your friends or with people at random. You can talk to them too since you can hang out in lobbies and smack talk before a race at the starting gates. Even throw a little trash talk if you get close to a racer you're about to pass up. You can go for a race, check out the halfpipe, and maybe more. AND the studios get continuous money!

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Almost forgot. Imaging paying just $2 for each of the uber tricks per character. And paying just $4 for their unique uber tricks! Wouldn't this be a great idea? I sure think so!

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Now you're thinking like a sociopathic MBA! All you need is a degree and some connections and a C-suite is waiting for you!

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          But then they have to make a new game, and that takes effort. The goal is to get the maximum revenue while putting in the minimum effort.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Look at CoD and any annual success story, people like what they know. Less want a new game and more of the same so if you can get that one game that ticks all your boxes you are set for years.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Triple AAA are throwing massive amounts of money into AAA projects so unless they are massive successes, then there's no point in making them when succesfull live service games can do the same with much less money and much less effort.

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    OH YEAH
    MORE LIVE SERVICE
    GIVE ME MORE MORE MORE

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Deez ganes really do b livin doh

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    go back to #gamergate with your commie bullshit 'journalism'

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Then I hope gaming dies.

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I think some live service games, to be specific Genshin and Fortnite, hugely exemplify the benefits of the nature of live service but people refuse to acknowledge it because their target playerbase has other priorities and their detracts are too hung up on the negatives.

    >Fortnite is written off because of its popularity and young playerbase, among a few other things like unnattractive tryhard PvP build mechanics. However they have continously pumped new maps, mechanics, vehicles, content etc and kept the game fresh and relevant for a decade.
    >Genshin is the same but written off because of its over aggressive monetization and ANIME aesthetic. Its disgusting playerbase doesn't help attract new players, but the game has gotten so expansive in terms of the map, mechanics, voiced story, etc. and long that its mindboggling its only halfway done.
    You will never see B2P games with a FRACTION of the content these two games offer by the time they shut down.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You failed to acknowledge that most live service games are complete dog shit to play and just want to be low effort pay to win scams.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Can’t really say genshin is pay to win when it’s a single player game at its core with tons of quests, even if it’s a lot of reading. It doesn’t bombard you with a gacha banner when you play the game, you have to seek it out AFTER you play enough to unlock it

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Can’t really say genshin is pay to win when it’s a single player game at its core with tons of quests, even if it’s a lot of reading
          Anon, reading comprehension.
          >You failed to acknowledge that MOST live service games are complete dog shit
          Most means the grand majority. You then turned around and said BUT THIS ONE.
          WE KNOW. The problem is for every BUT THIS ONE we have 1000 pay to win scams.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >content
      Good thing quality is the only thing that has ever mattered, alongside gameplay of course.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The problem is that people only have room for 1 or maybe 2 of those games. It's the World of Warcraft conundrum. How do you dethrone a game with 8 years of content that people have sank countless hours and lots of money into? You are directly fighting for peoples time and for live service games like Suicide Squad Or Babylon's Fall that aren't free, good luck even getting someone to try it out.

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >95% of studios and devs are working on live service games
    >0% of gamers want live service games
    What's going on here? I know CEOs are out of touch, but just how many bankruptcies and studio closures and ACKs do they need to get the message?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Correction. 0% of terminally online video game forum dwellers want this. The large majority of regular, normal people with friends and lives like the idea of live service games since, let's be honest, these are just video games.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Regular, normal people with friends and lives are even less likely to have the time to invest in endless live service games.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The point of these live service games is to steal more and more money from 1% of people who download them, they're always terminally online dwellers.

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >the future of gaming hinges on always-online shit with battlepasses and limited time content that just... die off and become completely unplayable once people move on to something else

    Was the person who wrote this fricking moronic?

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Isn't this exactly like the MMO rush? Every publisher was eager to find their own WoW with infinite money. In the end they realized if you're not first, you're too late.
    It's just this generation's rush, they'll be a new one next generation.

  18. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The future of American AAA companies satisfying investors who expect perpetual growth hinges on live service games.
    Asia and East Europe is still making good non live service games

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      If they desire and expect perpetual growth, why aren't they using proven writers who have a proven purchasing audience?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >harley queen
      im not playing this shit but cmon guys you're embarassing yourselves

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      look at that homie! LOLLLL
      LOLOLOLOOOOOlLOlololol

  19. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Words can't express how happy I am the entire anglosphere industry is going under.

  20. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    For all the shittalking that live service games invite upon themselves gachaslop is the only thing I've enjoyed these past several years. Everything else is pozzed propaganda slop.

  21. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Not my problem, burn everything to the ground.

  22. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    If this is legitimately what investors think after 95% of their live-service attempts folding prematurely then they deserve fricking lolcow status. The crash really is imminent now, holy shit.

  23. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >live service games are 'necessary' for long-term title success.
    you fricking cucks don't like it but for games to be updated year after year people need to get paid to do it.
    either accept live service as the default or stop expecting games to get post-release updates.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Or just release a good complete game from the get-go, lmao.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Or maybe just release functional and content complete games then move to work on other games after launch.

        How about you don't take away completed parts of the game just to sell them separately, you blackest gorilla.

        >"""complete games"""
        The base live games without all those post-release updates are the "complete" games you morons apparently don't even know you're asking for. That's all you'll get for $70.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Bait or moron. Tons of games launch with game changing bugs, or barebones content which makes devs have to “finish” the game over the course of several months. kys

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Or maybe just release functional and content complete games then move to work on other games after launch.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      How about you don't take away completed parts of the game just to sell them separately, you blackest gorilla.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      ::points at Factorio and Wube::
      Yet somehow they are doing fine without live service scumbaggery and are running the tightest bug-squashing and QoL-patching operation I have personally *ever* seen in the entire industry.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      or, hear me out
      second game

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >stop expecting games to get post-release updates.
      Deal, I accept those terms. Release a fricking standalone sequel instead.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Cool. They do just that. It sells fine for the first week or two, then cools off, Steam play counts are in the toilet months after, and the game doesnt get a follow up because "the people have spoken". Now what?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >it sells fine
          great, now do it again

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Make games that aren't FOTM bullshit, problem solved.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >either accept live service as the default or stop expecting games to get post-release updates.
      So accept a lowering of standards? Sweet, I hope the market crashes and they all lose their jobs, and go back to making my burgers.

  24. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Live service games go lights out after like 6 months.
    How can be necessary a "live service" that more often than not ends up being "dead and not serving"? The industry thrived without that being standard or even existing at all.

  25. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >you need live-service!
    >meanwhile Palworld and Lethal Company have already made more money than most live service games ever will with straight-up sales

  26. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They will beg me for death.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They would be fricked if it was actually ruled illegal to brick games like they're doing but I doubt the law will ever be that consumer friendly

  27. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Without live service games, there is no future for video games.
    The only thing there'd be no future for is AAA-slop that needs big-dick hollywood budgets to fill up its sandbox with soulless trash.
    Normal games that actually focus on being a game rather than an interactive Ubisoft-towers set-piece movie, don't really have this problem.
    At all.

  28. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    How many live service games can coexist before everyone fricks off for good? Most people won't have the time for more than one, at best for a second game. And if it turns into a job without pay, they will drop it and never come back either.
    Sounds like an already oversaturated market.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      At this point they are more insane than gays trying to find the next crypto that can replace Bitcoin.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      How many streaming services can your average Joe fit into his spending money? Turns out it a lot more than people expected.

  29. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Griffin Gaming Partners
    I assume the CEO's name is Peter?

  30. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What if instead they stopped dropping multiple millions of dollars into development and advertising, and tightened their schedules so that games come out in at least 5 year intervals?

  31. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >implying there will be no people willing to defy this fate
    Have more faith in gamer-kind

  32. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Then gaming deserves to die. The digital cloud live service future is a dystopian nightmare and gaming would be better off dead

  33. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Ah yes, that's exactly what gayming needs— temporary shitty experiences that you can't ever play again if it loses too many players (shekelberg and his suit pals shut down the game because it only has a million players instead of the promised 1million 100 players according to the data, this is resulting in 0.01% less sales)

    I ain't buying. All I want, is a gaming crash.

  34. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >We need live service games

  35. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Single handedly proves your entire understanding of the industry is incorrect

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      BG3 proved that staying in Early Access forever and getting money and reviews up front that way, then later "releasing" the game is the way to do it.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >BG3 proved that staying in Early Access forever and getting money and reviews up front that way, then later "releasing" the game is the way to do it.
        AKA the live service model.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Baldur's gate 3 is still getting patches and getting worked on since it's incomplete. It's literally a live service game by all definitions.

  36. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What's wild to me is no developer actually wants to put the work in to have a real live service game. At launch it'll need to have over 100 hours of content and a release schedule of new content every 3 months at least without ever missing a deadline. Problem is when these games come out they have 10 hour campaigns and a giant 'COMING SOON' screen talking about end game content that'll be out 8 months from launch.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      this
      the initial scale needed to actually sustain is vast— unless of course the game has an immediate catch or quirk to it (which won't happen, because they're creatively bankrupt) so all of their live-only efforts get wasted when the playercount dwindles within the first two weeks. This has happened time and time, over and over again, yet they keep on insisting it'll work this time.

  37. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >We must make games a service
    >Service costs balloon
    >People stop buying
    >Support for game gets pulled and company goes under
    BROS, WHY DID YOU KILL VIDEOGAMES. THIS IS YOUR FAULT CONSOOMER!

  38. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I'm looking fowards to see AAA titles try to cannibalize each other and for once they have to try how to atract more customers than the other company instead of just pander to whatever political view they want.

  39. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    LIVE SERVICE GAMES SUCK
    NO UPDATES
    GAMING SAVED

  40. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  41. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    lol it's the total opposite, the market can only support a few live service titles because the actual amount of player attention and money that's available is much more limited. Consumers will converge around a few uber popular titles and the rest will be left in the dust. If anything this oversaturation means you should probably target players with games that only require limited investment in money and attention in between rounds of whatever GaaS horseshit they're playing.

    The gold rush for infinite money cheat live service shit is going to kill so many studios it's unreal.

  42. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Again, I will reiterate once again that the survey in question defined "live service" games as games with regular updates. By that clearly misleading definition as laid out by the survey, Baldur's Gate 3 is a "live service" game because it's being regularly patched.

    >what does this mean, anon with an above-fifth-grade reading and comprehension level?

    What this means is that the survey was written/described in bad faith, either intentionally or out of ignorance. Obviously a "live service" game as we know it is an always-online constantly-monetized planned-obsolescence piece of shit, but the morons who did the survey completely bungled their work by mislabling things leading to morons on Ganker (like you!) being preyed on, once again, by shitty journalism.

    Don't fall for this trite. Be better. Think critically. Read, homie.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Again, I will reiterate once again that the survey in question defined "live service" games as games with regular updates. By that clearly misleading definition as laid out by the survey, Baldur's Gate 3 is a "live service" game because it's being regularly patched.
      That is the literal definition of the term, you moron. And yes, BG3 is also a live service game.

  43. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why not downscale the clear bloat AAA games are suffering from and go back to smaller projects and teams of passionate developers?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Because AAA studios are all beholden to suits that don't care about games. They care about profits, big profits, and ever more profits.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Passionate devs
      No one can be passionate about a 60+ hour work week

  44. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    A world free of video game distractions or a world full of shekel vacuuming schemes, man this is a tough choice.

  45. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    And even with this people will still pretend that capitalism is a good thing

  46. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Without live service games, me and my moronic investor buddies wouldn't be in this industry
    ftfy

  47. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Vidya has no future without GaaS? Good. Let it come. Let it happen. I'm ready. Let this festering fricking corpse rot entirely.

  48. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Gamers say they hate live service games and yet dont support companies that dont release any live service games like Ubisoft and Sony.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The thing is, you can only "support" those kinds of games for so much before well runs dry and you hit a point where you've reached all the people you're going to reach in sales. When you take into account what it takes to make a game today (especially one captivating enough that millions will want to buy it) and how much that costs to do, the stories of games needing to sell tens of millions just to break even make perfect sense. It's why it's unfeasible to do only this without having live service games at all. Saying "just make a good game" reeks of someone who has, at best, an elementary understanding of how things work in the industry now compared to what it was decades ago. I'm no expert either, but if people seriously can't understand why live service games are needed, even if we don't care for them, especially when we are still buying these games new for just $70 (which really is very cheap for how much money and resources go into these games), they are either very willfully or unintentionally ignorant.

  49. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Even Nintendo runs the biggest live service games on the planet. I don't see the problem here. It's a necessary evil to have your game company exist with a secure means of revenue while you get to make games the developer wants to make without the reality of going bankrupt with every game release.

  50. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Infinite growth is not possible even in a digital product format only bound by development creativity and technological limitations. The crash is coming and has been long overdue. Stagnation must be cleansed for newer things to come.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Console and PC gaming may be crashing but mobile gaming is sustainable and is thriving right now.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *