Support NeoGAF

[Bojji]

You all have seen how making new unique single player games works out. Both forspoken and immortals. Fine good games in new worlds were ridiculed and failed.

There are still some wins in this category like lies of p. But it’s much much harder for genuine games to take off. While crap like palworld takes off in a day

Both of those games are average (I played first 2h of immortals and completed forspoken), if they were good or very good sales could be much better. You always have a gamble with new IPs, no matter if it's SP, MP or GaaS game.

 

[rofif]

Both of those games are average (I played first 2h of immortals and completed forspoken), if they were good or very good sales could be much better. You always have a gamble with new IPs, no matter if it's SP, MP or GaaS game.

Good games is not equal to good sales. We don't live in that perfect world.
Very often games that are bad sell great and otherwise.
Forspoken is better than average. Immortals maybe is so but still - we don't get games like that aymore.
Anyway - should not be studio killers.

 

[tomato shrub]

Glad i have Nintendo.

bruh, they released so many Switch games with literally 2 hours of content like Mario Soccer and Switch Sports, justifying them with "but in 6 months you'll get a new mode and a new character skin, which isn't really new, but was there on day1 in prior games".

 

[S0ULZB0URNE]

 

[gladdys]

90% fixing to lose money

 

[buenoblue]

I will play all games all the time forever

 

[Fabieter]

which isnt a full online only Live Service Game.

Whats the difference? Gaas is gaas.

 

[daclynk]

Splatoon series, mario kart, smash, animal crossing. Basically all their multiplayer stuff.

Those are not LIVE SERVICE games. these are games that can be played offline but add downloadabe content later.

 

[daclynk]

Whats the difference? Gaas is gaas.

Im talking about LIVE SERVICE Games. you know what i mean.

Edit: sorry for Double post

 

[yurinka]

Report: 95% of studios are working on or aim to release a live service game

Sign up for the GI Daily here to get the biggest news straight to your inbox A new report from Griffin Gaming Partners …

www.gamesindustry.biz

Three important things to notice:

1. The by far biggest group of developers are indies of less than 10 people, who in many cases don't have their own office and may not be counted here in this study. They don't have the infrastructure and money needed to make GaaS. 99% of these games are ignored / unkown by the forum.
2. The second biggest group of developers are mobile gaming developers, who all work on GaaS and most of them don't make console or PC. 99% of these games are ignored / unknown by the forum.
3. The third biggest group of developers are the ones who make work for hire, normally as outsourcing or contractors. They are support teams who help other games with the idea to get money to self finance their personal projects. GaaS, both if they are AAA or from mobile, are the games who need more content (mostly for post launch), so they are the most frequent client of these people. Many of these teams aren't known by the players even if they work in most of their favorite games.

Those are not LIVE SERVICE games. these are games that can be played offline but add downloadabe content later.

Yes, they are live service games: games designed to be supported with years of post launch content, and that in most cases use online multiplayer and such post launch content as retention technique to keep the player hooked. The Nintendo F2P games also are games as a service / live service games.

A few will succeed, a lot will fail.

Recipe for an industry crash. Watch so many studios close down.

Yes, some GaaS succeed and are hit and lot of them fail. Just like the non-GaaS games, as always happened.

The difference is that nowadays GaaS generate the majority of the game revenue and have the majority of players of the industry. And are the reason of why the industry has more players, developers, studios and games release, and generates more revenue than ever before.

There's no crash coming, all these numbers keep growing every year.

94% because concord was cancelled

Absolutely nothing leads to think it was cancelled. Totoki said they were working on all their remaining GaaS titles, and Concord was announced for 2024. If it didn't appear in the recent State of Play it's becuse it was focused on H1 2024 games and Concord pretty likely will release in 2024. If something, might be delayed to early 2025. But considering it's being developed by mostly ex-Destiny, Halo and CoD guys I'd bet it will be released in late 2024.

 

[DaGwaphics]

This is likely true, just because gaming is like looking through a telescope. It's a view of the past, though in this case it is just 5 or 6 years back to when games started development. Projects getting the green light today are probably less focused on that area, just because the market seems to have an instant negative reaction to most of these. At least outside the usual suspects and the occasional breakout hit. However, as long as all that money is sitting there, these companies are going to keep trying, no matter how many go up in flames.

 

[T-Cake]

I never thought I'd be asking for a Live Service Game but I think Sackboy would make a fantastic one - a clone of Fall Guys whereby you have obstacle courses, can get all sorts of costumes, etc. The recent Big Adventure game on PS5 shows Sumo Digital can make excellent levels.

 

[Bartski]

 

[Jen_yakzua]

Those are not LIVE SERVICE games. these are games that can be played offline but add downloadabe content later.

These are indeed live service games so I mortal Kombat 1 and street fighter 6 , plus if foam stars is gaas then so is splatoon 2

 

[hemo memo]

This industry needs another crash that take GaaS and AAAA titles with it.

 

[Zannegan]

I never thought I'd be asking for a Live Service Game but I think Sackboy would make a fantastic one - a clone of Fall Guys whereby you have obstacle courses, can get all sorts of costumes, etc. The recent Big Adventure game on PS5 shows Sumo Digital can make excellent levels.

Someone at Sony just spit their drink on their monitor and spilled fries all over the floor in their rush to get this greenlit. Perfect fit for the IP, especially if you let players design the courses.

 

[Bojji]

Good games is not equal to good sales. We don't live in that perfect world.
Very often games that are bad sell great and otherwise.
Forspoken is better than average. Immortals maybe is so but still - we don't get games like that aymore.
Anyway - should not be studio killers.

I know but good game will at least get people talking about it so it can get popular eventually, this happened with demon souls. I agree that forspoken was good, something like 7/10 (and dlc was even better) but critics didn't agree with us and game will be "average" till the end of time in the eyes of most people.

 

[rofif]

I know but good game will at least get people talking about it so it can get popular eventually, this happened with demon souls. I agree that forspoken was good, something like 7/10 (and dlc was even better) but critics didn't agree with us and game will be "average" till the end of time in the eyes of most people.

Surprisingly, we totally agree lol.

 

[daclynk]

Whats the difference? Gaas is gaas.

to my understading Live Service Games are only online F2P only games, whereas game as a service are games that dont need online requirement to play.
Someone correct me if im wrong.

 

[Dr. Samuel Hayden]

Crash now please

 

[akaFullmetal]

Most of these will fail. How much does it cost to run a GAAS compared to traditional games?

 

[Meicyn]

Good games is not equal to good sales. We don't live in that perfect world.
Very often games that are bad sell great and otherwise.
Forspoken is better than average. Immortals maybe is so but still - we don't get games like that aymore.
Anyway - should not be studio killers.

Square Enix has quite a few underperforming titles lately, but the company is still doing fine. Why?

GAAS. Final Fantasy XIV is helping bankroll a lot of single player titles. When you have a golden goose, you can afford to take more creative risks than you normally would.

Like most things in life, a healthy balance is good.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

to my understading Live Service Games are only online F2P only games, whereas game as a service are games that dont need online requirement to play.
Someone correct me if im wrong.

There's really no set definition. I've read that the phrase GAAS got such a bad rap online that companies tried to shift the lexicon to Live Service. That didn't seem to work.

I think most people would agree that Live Service / GAAS are any games that continually get supported post launch. That's a vague definition so it invites debate / discussion.

 

[captainpat]

The title's kind of click-bait honestly

The survey defines live services as any regular update cadence planned for a game.

This is a very broad interpretation of what a live service game is

 

[daclynk]

There's really no set definition. I've read that the phrase GAAS got such a bad rap online that companies tried to shift the lexicon to Live Service. That didn't seem to work.

I think most people would agree that Live Service / GAAS are any games that continually get supported post launch. That's a vague definition so it invites debate / discussion.

So what are F2P online only games then

 

[Thick Thighs Save Lives]

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Does GaaS really represent stability?

They're more stable in 2 important ways...

1. Reoccurring revenue is much safer than going dry for 6 years while you work on your next game.

2. It allows developers to build considerably larger, more complex games. The old model forced companies to throw everything in the trash and start over. GAAS allows developers to build 10+ years on foundations.

It's like forcing NASA to scrap everything once a decade vs allowing them to continually build on their foundations. If we want to explore the last frontier...it's going to require GAAS/Live Service...not the old model.

You can look at failures of many GaaS titles over last few years. At least with SP games players can finish them and play between GaaS games “dailies” , but with additional live titles those time slots are already taken.

The problem with this line of thinking is that no one benefits from "finishing games". The devs+pubs don't recieve any more income if you finish a game or don't. Their barometer for success is strictly up front sales.

I guess we shall see, but I can’t help but think that this is somewhat of a foolhardy endeavor for a lot of studios.

This discussion is interesting because there's two clear groups that have formed.

People with expertise and skin in the game (developers & publishers) who show us they believe the GAAS market is still growing.

People who play single player games and want there to be a GAAS bubble / GAAS saturation point.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

So what is F2P online only games?

They're GAAS / Live Service.

 

[Yoda]

Market really isn't big enough to support that. Most of going to be disappointed.

 

[AV]

7 years.

 

[Hudo]

I find that quote a bit weird... because he was also the main reason why the Ford Motor Company did not release any successor model to the Model T for a very long-ass time, putting the whole company at risk while Dodge and General Motors were beginning to close in as consumers looked to them instead. And even though his son Edsel and his team did almost all of the work on the Model A, Henry was still the one claiming credit for it.

 

[adamsapple]

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

I find that quote a bit weird... because he was also the main reason why the Ford Motor Company did not release any successor model to the Model T for a very long-ass time, putting the whole company at risk while Dodge and General Motors were beginning to close in as consumers looked to them instead. And even though his son Edsel and his team did almost all of the work on the Model A, Henry was still the one claiming credit for it.

I don't think that is relevant to the quote though. There is an extreme conservatism in online gaming communities where people generally only want slightly better versions of games they love. The history of gaming is filled with creative leaps that do wonders.

That's all the quote was addressing.

Josh Sawyer has lost relevance in the industry over the last 20+ years. His non competitive games are now buoyed by a giant mommy corporation. He knows, whether subconsciously or not, that Live Service games and the public, have passed him by. Resentment, in Tweet form.

 

[Zelduh]

So tired of live service/games as a service shit

 

[Fabieter]

to my understading Live Service Games are only online F2P only games, whereas game as a service are games that dont need online requirement to play.
Someone correct me if im wrong.

Well maybe iam wrong but for its all the same. I would call the last few assassin's creed gaas/live service although its a buy to play Single player game. So if 95% of devs say they want gaas it could mean all kind of things.

Most big pc games/pubs mostly make gaas games and people are fine with that.

Valve, riot, blizzard are basically gaas exclusive devs. I prefer sp one and done overall but the gaas thing is overhated, it's completely fine when done right.

 

[Shake Your Rump]

“Among the surveyors, 66% agreed that live services are necessary for long-term title success”

First of all, what is “long term success”? I mean, people are still paying real money to play games like Starfox, Super Mario World, Legend of Dragoon, Symphony of the Night, etc. These games are up to 35 years old, with absolutely no updates or add-ons, and still highly desirable and earning money.

Look at a modern game like Tales of Arise. It had no DLC planned, delivered a complete experience, and sold a hojillion copies.

I’d argue that the opposite happened: the live service model discouraged publishers from delivering complete games. Instead they trickle out the minimum necessary, post a “roadmap”, and hope for the best.

 

[daclynk]

They're GAAS / Live Service.

So what are Nintendo's Online Only F2P games then?

 

[Danjin44]

My guess is majority of them are western games and they are shooters.

 

[Fabieter]

So what are Nintendo's Online Only F2P games then?

What about it. Its the same?

 

[daclynk]

What about it. Its the same?

Name them? im waiting. Coz they dont have any F2P online only games. so no they are not doing it.

 

[Fabieter]

Name them? im waiting. Coz they dont have any F2P online only games. so no they are not doing it.

Pokemon unite for once. Well but like I said the b2p game can also be gaas/service games.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

I don't think that is relevant to the quote though. There is an extreme conservatism in online gaming communities where people generally only want slightly better versions of games they love. The history of gaming is filled with creative leaps that do wonders.

That's all the quote was addressing.


Josh Sawyer has lost relevance in the industry over the last 20+ years. His non competitive games are now buoyed by a giant mommy corporation. He knows, whether subconsciously or not, that Live Service games and the public, have passed him by. Resentment, in Tweet form.

Looking at Sawyer's wiki, he was part of Fallout Vegas which had 5 expansions in a year.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Looking at Sawyer's wiki, he was part of Fallout Vegas which had 5 expansions in a year.

Came out on 2010, well before the tectonic plates (Live Service) in the industry shifted. His games since then have gotten less and less vital.

He's a writer. He hates seeing gameplay centric games explode in popularity. He wants to bring back the old ways.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Came out on 2010, well before the tectonic plates (Live Service) in the industry shifted. His games since then have gotten less and less vital.

He's a writer. He hates seeing gameplay centric games explode in popularity. He wants to bring back the old ways.

Yup.

Reminds me of office life. Everyone in marketing is so grandiose telling a story about how their new products are the best stuff ever. Through the moon projections and the best quality ever. If this was 7-8 years ago, they'd rule the roost and anything they say gets green lit by execs.

Then my department got involved, fought the garbage projections, showed top management how many stinker products get launched for years losing money or getting discontinued every year or two due to bad sales, and suddenly every marketing manager is nervous presenting their PPTs because they know it'll get debated. They get up in front of a room and say this new product should be $5M. Then one of us would go over historicals and say no prdoucts ever in that category has even come close to that, where the avg product is lets say $3M. So where the hell is $5M coming from? Dead silence. Never mind hearing a pin drop. You could hear an atom hit the floor.

Since then our finance department isn't even allowed a lot of the time to join in the prelim meetings. LOL. But thats ok. Because management comes to us anyway asking to see what our realistic projections are compared to their behind closed door estimates. Not much has changed. They still got giant forecasts that are almost never hit, but its a lot more reasonable now. And overall company projections go by our finance department estimates after we reconvene with sales team what can be reasonably achieved.

Storytellers people are fine. But the meat and potatoes are always more important.

 

[ZoukGalaxy]

And 95% of them will miserably fail, they should make a band.

 

[StereoVsn]

They're more stable in 2 important ways...

1. Reoccurring revenue is much safer than going dry for 6 years while you work on your next game.

2. It allows developers to build considerably larger, more complex games. The old model forced companies to throw everything in the trash and start over. GAAS allows developers to build 10+ years on foundations.

It's like forcing NASA to scrap everything once a decade vs allowing them to continually build on their foundations. If we want to explore the last frontier...it's going to require GAAS/Live Service...not the old model.

The problem with this line of thinking is that no one benefits from "finishing games". The devs+pubs don't recieve any more income if you finish a game or don't. Their barometer for success is strictly up front sales.


This discussion is interesting because there's two clear groups that have formed.

People with expertise and skin in the game (developers & publishers) who show us they believe the GAAS market is still growing.

People who play single player games and want there to be a GAAS bubble / GAAS saturation point.

Yes, in theory GaaS titles are more stable. The problem with that is that it has to be a successful GaaS title. Most of them fail, sometimes spectacularly.

Just recently we have had a multitude crash and burn, even before release for some of them. Naughty Dog, Sega, Square Enix, BioWare, Arcane, and many more recently either had major GaaS titles cancelled or had them crash. WB is about to have another one.

Many of these took years and years of development to the tune of hundreds of millions $.

So yeah, about that stability…. Again, if successful then sure, it will bring a lot of revenue, but if not you are looking at many years and a lot of money lost. And vast majority of them will fail because people can only play one or two at a time.

 

[JimRyanGOAT]

Live Service can be amazing if done right


But not all games need to go this route, a series like The Sims would greatly benefit from this

Its the current execution and greed that has most gamers understandably worried

But every once in a while you get gems that last 10+ years

 

[Jibran#one]

Live service is a commitment
Most of the people can't play even 2 of these
For example
Diablo 4
If I really want to make a new charecter every season and take it to 100 that's a huge time commitment and for a guy like me with 2 kids that's the only time I will have .

 

[Dr.Morris79]

Good for them. After hearing the Crew is shutting down, they can all eat a big bag of dicks. Sideways.

Total waste of money.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Yes, in theory GaaS titles are more stable. The problem with that is that it has to be a successful GaaS title. Most of them fail, sometimes spectacularly.

Most games fail...GAAS or not.

Just recently we have had a multitude crash and burn, even before release for some of them. Naughty Dog, Sega, Square Enix, BioWare, Arcane, and many more recently either had major GaaS titles cancelled or had them crash. WB is about to have another one.

Games get cancelled while in development all the time. Non GAAS games fail all the time too.

What you're witnessing is an industry obsessed with a narrative (GAAS is luck, GAAS is sAtUrAtEd). They'll collect anecdotal examples to support that narrative. They'll then feed that narrative to an audience hungry for that specific narrative.

You're so not recognizing the instability of AAA. Spiderman 2 needs to sell 7.2 million copies to break even. Days Gone sold 8 million copies and was considered a disappointment. AAA is built on quicksand at the moment. That's why you're seeing so many jump ship.

Many of these took years and years of development to the tune of hundreds of millions $.

Long term GAAS support only happens when the publisher has a high degree of certainty their investments are worth it. That's far more preferable to "Let's spend hundreds of millions on big game for 6+ years and hope it makes its money back far in the future. "

So yeah, about that stability…. Again, if successful then sure, it will bring a lot of revenue, but if not you are looking at many years and a lot of money lost. And vast majority of them will fail because people can only play one or two at a time.

Again, most games fail...GAAS or not.

Why most video games aren't profitable

Only 20 percent of all video games that make it to store shelves are profitable. Don Reisinger thinks he knows why.

www.cnet.com