A New Survey Indicates 70% Of Game Developers Aren’t So Sure About The Sustainability Of Live-Service Games
It mostly comes down to worries about losing player interest.
It may or may not be surprising to players to hear that a large portion of game developers have concerns about the whole "games as a live-service" thing. In fact, according to a recent survey, about 70% of developers have concerns about “live service” titles or online games that are continually updated and sell things to players.
The survey, conducted by Omida, interviewed 600 developers between February and March of this year and went with the majority of the developers’ definition of what a live-service game is. During the survey, they discovered that 70% of devs are worried about the sustainability of these games. The numbers were further broken down by how concerned the developers were, with 39% having mild concerns and 31% being “very concerned”. Twenty-nine percent of those interviewed either weren’t concerned or were on the fence about it.
According to the survey, first reported by Game Developer, 62% of devs are worried about players getting bored and moving on to other games, with 67% noting that keeping players engaged for the long term is difficult.
With these concerns looming over them, some developers are looking at the possibility of going back to paid DLC as their primary mode. About 30% of devs participating in the survey stated this.
It’s an interesting thing to see as a lot of companies have been leaning heavily into games as a live service recently. It doesn’t seem like a bad idea to spread things out a bit more. Ideally, developers should just do what’s right for the game they’re making rather than doing what everyone else is doing. Sure, certain things are popular, but it’s not like it’s difficult to flood a marketplace and squeeze yourself out.
About the Author
QuintLyn is a long-time lover of all things video game related will happily talk about them to anyone that will listen. She began writing about games for various gaming sites a little over ten years ago and has taken on various roles in the games community.
More Stories by QuintLyn BowersDiscussion (1)
Read Next
It’s a new way for the devs to tell stories.
You May Enjoy
Q4 financials will be hit by a cancelled project's prepaid royalty impairment.
Both a revamped zone and dungeon return to the MMORPG.
I'm very hopeful for this F2P Madden alternative, but I hate how the early access is monetized already.
Riot's Alpha Lab testing is already leading to changes.
Because most of these stupid braindead devs making P2W or that you need to literally live there to grind the @$!~ out of type of games.
Make game, where 100% of content is free with only cosmetics in shop and you will be successful. Examples: PUBG, Fortnite, R6 Siege, Hunt: Showdown, Rocket League and many more. These games are not making sequels every 2 year for 60$... they are updating their games with free content constantly.
Me personally playing Hunt: Showdown for 2 years already and never feel like I'm bored. Testing XDefiant also atm, and looking forward for this one. Deep Rock Galactic is also great example - Co-Op game that costs 4-5$ and has endless fun and content.
So to devs that moaning about player interest and risk - make good games you stupid !$!@s!