Companies need to be profitable, so they all look toward new avenues to increase revenue…but what happens when everyone wants the same piece of live service the pie?
95.
What’s the significance of that number, you ask? We’ll talk about it in a moment, but we need to talk about the large, dollar covered elephant in the room: live service gaming. If the phrase elicited an eye roll, a pang of anxiety or a small sigh, you aren’t alone. So many games have found a way to implement a facet of live service feature into their game. And with it, gamer sentiment seems to be swaying towards the slightly jaded attitude on the matter.
So, what’s our friend, “95” have to do with it?
That’s the percentage of how many game studios who either have or are planning to launch a live service game. Even large companies today, like Warner Bros., have determined each of their games will have some form of live service features, as written by PCGamer. Given the success of games like Fortnite and Destiny 2, everyone wants a piece of the live service pie…but when it is too much? How can we find a balance between too many and just enough live service games? It’s a growing issue among the gaming community, and the fact that a singular phrase has a near automatic negative connotation should be a red flag.
What’s “Live Service” Gaming?
Well, when simply put, “live service” gaming is a model of gaming business where a game receives continual updates, content and features. And these can be free or paid content, all up to the devs or parent companies. They come in a variety of ways such as:
- Expansions
- Free characters/heroes/maps
- Battle passes
- Seasons every few months
- Various forms of microtransactions (MTX)
When done right in a business-sense, live service gaming can be a cash cow. Fornite is probably the biggest and most successful example of a live service game done right.
And no, this isn’t a puff piece about how much the world loves Fornite.
When you have a playerbase of 500 million players as of March 2023, and on average, about 70% of those player have bought something…that’s a lot. How much, you ask? Well, on average, those players spent about $85.00 each.
That’s $29.75 billion spent on Fortnite. On FORTNITE. ALONE.
That’s why you began to see battle/season passes implemented everywhere. Seasons of content have become normal in games like Mortal Kombat, Halo, and Forza. Games who traditionally relied on downloadable content (DLC) now had another way to deliver more content through this Games as a Service (GaaS) model. Of course companies want to and need to be profitable; but at what expense?
I’m Tired, Boss
If you feel Gaas-ed out, you’re not alone – I’ll join you on that mindset. The fatigue of every game becoming a live service game is real. It doesn’t help that it’s made its way into game which didn’t really have live service feature before like Diablo, Mortal Kombat and, though it’s had live service feature for awhile now, Call of Duty. These types of games are designed to consume as much of your gaming attention as possible. So it almost feels like a marathon that you can duck in and out of, but you keep going with it. Now imagine running between 4-6 different marathons constantly, and that’s what the industry is trending towards.
Games like Destiny 2 want to keep their playerbase engaged. And the hardcore fans are more than happy to do so, which is awesome, I genuinely love it for them.
But the others are left with the option of playing Destiny to grind for a cosmetic on a pass that expire in a week or trying a new game release. When the time crunch hits on games, it hits hard and is inevitable when many games give you the sense of FOMO. Destiny also had the gall to put whole storylines of content in their “vault,” barring players from playing critical parts of the base game campaign. Because there was simply now too much content for the game to manage appropriately.
Personally, because I’m a big Mortal Kombat fan, I think the seasons model is neat and drives player engagement…but I’ve got things to do. I’ve got a family, a job, other games to play/review/write about. I absolutely want those character skins, but I don’t have the time to grind out hours for it. And that’s just one game. Now imagine someone who plays Call of Duty AND Fortnite AND Mortal Kombat AND Apex Legends, and that’s a full time job itself; it doesn’t even include any single-player experiences they’re missing out or trying to cram in between matches.
Or, look at Concord, what will live in infamy as one of the worst AAA releases of all time for awhile. A hero shooter, while always neat in concept, has been done a dozen times over with all sorts of gimmicks. Adding a $40 price point didn’t help Concord when you have Overwatch 2 and Apex Legends in the same space, both being free for players. Add this with relatively average gameplay and design, and it was doomed. This demonstrates that live service games need that something to draw players in and cannot afford to be anything less than great. There must be a draw, whether it be vast amounts of content, FOMO over skins in an established playerbase, etc. Without these incentives, players have way too many options to gravitate towards which capitalize on their limited time.
Live service gaming is actually a fantastic idea on paper and should benefit gamers. Constant new content, new ways to play, new features or game modes; at times, it can be a positive model in gaming.
I Feel the Good in You, the Conflict…
With live service gaming, the influx of new content can be great when done right. Ideally, quality should be over quantity. While gamers and consumers are used to consuming sheer amounts of content, companies need to refocus on quality. If you’re going to put out seasonal content, entice me on why. Don’t instill FOMO, but make it a compelling case for me to spent my limited free time on your game instead of another run of Astro Bot.
When games start to put the player experience first, it makes them feel important and their time/money respected. When there’s finite amount of time in the day, these are real factors to consider.
A battle pass that takes me two hours to grind a level or two for an emblem? Hell no.
Maybe it’s time for a shift back to singular experiences. God of War (2018) and Ragnarok, Elden Ring, Astro Bot, Final Fantasy XVI, Super Mario Wonder. Each of these games never relied on utilizing a live service feature outside of additional DLC content. The respective developers crafted immersive and memorable experiences which led to great financial success for each game (though official verdict is still out on Astro Bot at this time). It shows that companies can make their money through these types of games and without alienating games with another game to grind endlessly on.
It also respects gamers’ time too. Life happens, and we shouldn’t feel pressured to complete a checklist to get that one weapon accessory just because it’ll disappear in three days. Say what you will about the game, Halo Infinite has a great model for their battle passes – they don’t expire. It’s consumer-friendly by understanding time constraints, you can toggle between which passes to work on, AND the company received their extra money. This is complete conjecture, but I’d imagine companies haven’t picked up on this because they rely on a little bit of fear of missing out on skins, weapons, etc. It’s sad, but possibly true (or not, I don’t know).
You Ranted a Bit, But Now What?
It’s hard to imagine a world where you have infinite amounts of time to play any game you want. Very, very few people have that luxury, and I do envy them a little for it. However, when every game turns into a power grab for the most valuable resource, your time, the fun dampens a bit.
Sure, I feel like a bit of an old man yelling at the clouds about this, but when it’s affecting the industry in such a vast way, it needs to be at least noted or discussed. Especially in a hobby I/we are so impassioned about. This live service trend – it’s here to stay, whether we like it or not. But what can we do about it? Here’s a few things to keep in mind or what you can do when it comes to live service games:
- Be selective about what live service games you support and observe their practices.
- Be aware of types of live service activities and which ones respect your time vs. ones which seemingly waste it.
- Support games which are more focused experiences and don’t intend to have the longest legs in the race.
- Choose with your wallet. It’s not a vote for or against a game, but you CAN choose your experience in a game or choose another game outright.
What are your thoughts on live service games? Should they expand even further, or should devs scale back on their live service offerings? Hit us up on X or leave a comment below to chat about it!
