Let’s talk about Live Service Games

Microtransactions, expansion packs, battle passes, and loot boxes are at the core of pretty much every game being developed currently. As time has evolved, the focus on milking the most money from players has become the center point for many developers. What used to be something you could unlock in-game or through cheat menus is now a monetized feature that's pushed front and center every time you log on. In a time where there are literally thousands of new games being released every year, creators are doing anything they can to keep you locked in and engaged in their ecosystem. With the promise of constant seasonal content and the fear of missing out on limited-time items, they want to give you as many incentives as possible to stay connected to their product as a constant cash flow.

Titles that embrace this system fall under the category of "Live Service" or "Games as a Service". One of the initial models of this was way back with early MMOs: pay a monthly subscription after your initial purchase to keep playing. Simple enough. Over time, as that model grew, map packs were introduced into FPS titles. Cosmetic outfits and equipment were introduced, giving the art team continued work after the initial project was finished. Then came the launch of Fortnite, which became a global phenomenon, and the mass introduction of seasonal battle passes. A limited-time ladder of unlockable cosmetics and in-game currency to continue investing in their item shop was grabbing people by the masses. With so many games offering this model, how does one pick and choose who they dedicate their time and money to? Gaming already is an expensive hobby to be apart of both in time and money. Console and PC prices, the cost of games and hardware, plus juggling multiple games and an ever-growing backlog, become problems for many people. Add multiple battle passes to the mixture, and you have an ever-growing pit that's hard to climb out of. I personally struggle to keep up with Sea of Thieves and occasional Fortnite seasons, plus other new releases and backlog titles.

This hill that many developers want to conquer and get as many people onto is a worry but an understandable hurdle they'd want to pass. Do you throw all you have at the board, hoping you have the next smash hit like Fortnite, with a chance that it will be dead on launch? While most live service models are additive, there are a few cases where they become predatory on the playerbase, like options such as level skips, battle pass tier skips, or, in the case of full-priced $70 games like Diablo 4, spending almost $20 on armor for your horse. We've seen almost every major developer dip their hands in one way or another, most notably on Xbox with Sea of Thieves and The Master Chief Collection, to varying levels of success. This is why it wasn't super surprising to see Playstation reveal their initial slate of live service titles last month at their Summer Showcase.

We've previously known about The Last of Us Factions, which, for better or for worse, has already been scaled back from initial plans. After the showcase, we now have Helldivers 2, FairGame$, Concord, and the revival of Marathon from Bungie all in the near future. At first, it's exciting to get a new wave of titles from Playstation developers, but then you realize all of these titles will be struggling to fight for your time and essentially cannibalizing each other's playerbase while pushing microtransactions. Add in the most successful titles in this space already, like CoD, GTA, Fortnite, and Apex Legends, and you have an ever-dwindling chance to become the next successful breakout hit. There's more on the horizon with a handful of leaked or rumored live service titles; this is clearly just the start of Playstation's next focus. The company, which is critically praised and looked at as a leader in single-player narrative stories, is putting a large stake in an unexplored market.

It's worth watching how the industry shifts to adapt live service going forward. While the gaming industry is growing, there's eventually going to be a point where there aren't enough players to keep live service titles up and running. In the past year or two alone, we've seen the likes of Knockout City, Rumbleverse, and even Apex Mobile all shut down for the devs to move into a more sustainable model and projects. Personally, I'm fine with games as a service. At the end of the day, gaming is a multi-billion dollar industry, and money needs to come from somewhere, but it only takes so long before the market becomes saturated with certain endeavors and people quickly start having ill-will towards it. What are your thoughts on games as a service, live service games, or what you'd like to see done differently? Let us know down below, and until next time, happy gaming!