Analysts Anticipate a Tougher Year for Live Service As Sony Aims to Infiltrate Sector

What's next? They predict that GTA will sell well again this year?

Said it before and I’ll say it again, with the news of the Last of Us multiplayer title being cancelled, I think Sony will gradually cancel their upcoming live service titles and reprioritise their single player focus.

There are around 2 big gaas games, huuuge competition

@itsfoz It's been a quiet year for Sony, and next year looks empty as well. Such a shame what could've been better years with a few more titles if they hadn't made this sudden change. It just feels like a very expensive experiment gone wrong. Oh well, we will never know.

There are way to many games. And people who play these most of the time don't have a lot time to play different games.

Most live service games are crap. Some aren’t. But to be a success requires more marketing savvy than it does a great game.

@Octane
That’s a matter of perspective. To me it seemed like a busy year. With PSVR2 dominating most of my time up until the portal released, which has now seen me playing a lot more games away from home and in bed. I think I’ve gamed more this year than in many a year, all on PlayStation systems.

First party releases may be a bit quite, but they are always a tiny fraction of releases and, honestly, I don’t care for most of them usually.

@itsfoz Companies should learn that you don't have put all of your eggs in one basket. I don't mind some lifeservice games but if they make one everything need to be a liveservice. There is room for different kinds of games.

I think it’s highly unlikely that Sony can make a game on the same level as genshin or honkai. They should have just stuck to what they do best instead of wasting recourses and money. Must be the reason why Jim Ryan left.

@Grimwood Horizon online and Marathon come to mind.

@thefourfoldroot1 I'm sorry but:
1- The topic is about software, not hardware
2- Yes, first party releases might be a small fraction of total releases, but they rank among the best selling and most played games. Not just that, having first party games is like having salt in chips. Salt might comprise just 0.001% of the total weight of chips, but remove it and most people wouldn't enjoy having chips. Just like that.

@Resurrected-X460
Well, you stated it has been a quiet year for Sony. Sony releasing two new platforms and working on getting a load of games to PSVR2 (including a couple they made themselves), I wouldn’t call quiet.

In terms of software, it’s relative to the time one has to play, but I haven’t been short. And, as I say, I don’t care for much of Sonys first party output outside of R&C, GT, and maybe Horizon.

Over saturation becoming an issue, already is with the same ***** constantly coming out year in year out. From openworld bore fests, to Metroidvania clones.

@Axelay71 tell me about it. I am beyond tired of open world and live service games. Lately I have replaying old PS3 and PS2 games and I'm having a blast.

Sammy has another subtle attempt at pushing Gacha-crack. Well done, class act pimping. Apropos, I wonder what will become of Haven, now that Jim Ryan invests all his time into his cats...

@themightyant absolutely spot on with Hyper-focus on first party and the deluge of quality games from elsewhere. It's like when you read comments on 2024's upcoming games and people go 'Oh nothing on there for me' and I just end up thinking 'what is wrong with you, are you even into gaming as a hobby?'

My backlog has ballooned because I decided to jump on Baldur's Gate 3, that one game has swallowed two months of my gaming time.

And now we have the tsunami of chonky games for Feb/March looming over us.

Last of Us would been the only live service I would have tried. No interest in the rest.

It doesn't take an analyst to realise the blindingly obvious fact that people only have a finite amount of time. The industry will never be able to sustain more than a handful of big live service games

How much do analysts get paid? Not like we saw this one coming.

@Msw7089 totally agree mate, play more retro than modern stuff. It's a shame the tech is amazing but the games are mostly crap. Always catering for the usual crowd.

@Pikki but why can’t both multiplayer and single player co-exist in one game like back in the day ? seems like the only game that still does this (that’s not dead/dormant) is COD.

@thefourfoldroot1

1. Escape From Tarkov
2. GTA5 Online
3. League of Legends
4. Valorant
5. Minecraft
6. Fortnite
7. Warzone
8. Dota
9. Counter-Strike
10. World of Warcraft
11. Team fight Tactics
12. Apex Legends
13. Lethal Company
14. Deep Rock Galatic
15. Genshin lmpact
16. The Finals
17. Naraka Bladepoint
18. Monster Hunter World
19.Warframe

So much for “most live service games are crap” 💀💀

@nomither6
You seem to be confusing the concepts of “most” and “all”. The list you gave (even if we are to presume all of these are objectively good, which is highly debatable) is by no means “most” of what is available.

@thefourfoldroot1 there’s more good, or better yet , “successful” , live service games than bad. i don’t know where yall are getting that most but a few of them are bad

@nomither6
I think your perception is just off. Globally speaking, across all devices, live service games are being closed down left, right, and centre. The few successful ones are far outweighed by the failures. Not strictly what I was talking about though (there have been some good ones close down and bad ones succeed). Live service as a business model usually leads games to be bad more often than not.

@nomither6 @thefourfoldroot1 Most games in general are bad. There are a few good games that release in every year by comparison. Stating that live service games specifically are bad may not be true.

Steam recently announced that 10000 games (of all kinds) were released on Steam last year. How many of those are actually good? How many of those did well commercially?

Plus we've all seen the dumps of games that release every week on PSN and elsewhere. I can guarantee you that most people aren't paying attention to most of those games.

I hope it crashes and burns The only game of this type that's remotely interesting is the Horizon MMO other than that Playstation built it's house on quality timeless single player games. Granted I'd like them to diversify the genres a little bit like with some horror, more platfomers and some character action games but all this live service crap needs to go it's a poison on the industry and I don't want to see PlayStation ruined by persuing it especially when the bubble is already bursting

@themightyant Yeah the “60 per cent of playtime is dominated by just 19 titles” statement is a little confusing to me, as to whether it’s playtime for all games or just live service. I even went to the original article to try to find out more about that statistic. In the article (which this statement is just a smidgen of the total content, which is several rapid fire predictions from an array of analysts) Wijman doesn’t expound or back up the statement, but does add “75% of playtime is from the top 33 games”. So from that I’m assuming this means all games, since I can’t think of 33 live service games.

If the “60% playtime from 19 games” includes all comers, then it would be interesting to see how many of those 19 are live service and how many are traditional single or multiplayer without service elements. For example, I could see large popular time sinks Elden Ring, Baldur’s Gate, or Witcher 3 maybe being in there, just by virtue of people dumping hundreds of hours into them and replaying them several times. I know they still are dwarfed by the thousands of hours people spend in Minecraft, Roblox, Fortnite, FIFA, Madden, GTA Online, or Warzone, but it would be interesting to see the breakdown.

And there’s also a difference between profitability and playtime, although I know both metrics are important, it seems like playtime is only part of the the equation.

Still, like you say, the lopsided playtime stats is sad to me, with such a wealth of variety out there. Over the last several years since PlayStation has been able to give us our personal stats, I don’t think I’ve ever spent more than 150 hours on any one game. And I think that one was Persona 5. 😅

Oh, gee, who could've predicted this? Certainly not Jimbo, hyuck!!!

Ironically, the 2 cancelled Live Service games (that we know of) could've been the most successful. I know many here would have played Factions 2 and the the Spider-Verse one from Insomniac would've been incredible, but here's to more Single Player games that in about 5-10 years time, these same people will complain about getting stale

@thefourfoldroot1 and what about games like Forspoken that are single player and failed? People keep pretending only live service games can fail.

@Mintie @themightyant @thefourfoldroot1 I think it comes down to why you buy a system.

If you buy solely for exclusives because you'd rather play multiplatform games elsewhere, 1st party droughts are devastating even if the 3rd party lineup is strong. 3rd party exclusives are mostly timed when not using 1st party IP nowadays so you have the option to wait and it may end up on your platform of choice.

But if you really like the ecosystem such that you'll happily use it for 3rd party games, there's a very good chance that while 1st party droughts may be disappointing you'll easily find 3rd party games if there's a strong 3rd party lineup and probably have a backlog too which can fill in the gaps.

@Shad361
Nobody has pretended that. But failure for a single player and live service game is very different because the latter gets shut down and is unplayable. They literally fail to exist, even after you have bought them. Not such a big deal if a single player game doesn’t sell as much. Not from a user perspective.

"60 per cent of playtime is dominated by just 19 titles"
Of the entire market or just the live service part? Also, are they counting titles individually, ie MW2 and MW3 get their own entry, or are they grouping by franchise? Are they counting gachas as live service too?

I don't doubt the market is dominated by just a handful of titles, but a little clarification on the methodology used is needed.

@Grumblevolcano even if people play their third party games on a different system, they still look at a varied exciting list of multiplatform titles and go 'Nah, it all looks like *****', and it'll be because they only play specific franchises

@thefourfoldroot1 But in terms of PS5 games, the only new game this year was Spider-Man. And MLB, but that an annual game, and it doesn't even come to Europe, so I'm not counting it. Usually, they have 3-4 games a year.

@Octane
Well I’ve spent an insane amount of time on GT7 VR and Horizon Call of the Mountain was memorable, so that’s my two. Don’t care about Spiderman or MLB.

Not interested

@thefourfoldroot1 i ageee with the other guy , he made a good point. to me , it seems like you’re just being biased and tunnel visioning live service games when all games , more than not, fail . plenty upon plenty of indie garbage and single players fail , irregardless of whether they’re still playable or not - when live service games shut down , most people stopped playing them anyway but go ahead and exaggerate about the super tiny 1% that still did play it.

also , don’t you only play single players ? so why do you care ?

@themightyant they haven’t delivered on the mediocre ps5 yet . the ps5 doesn’t hold a candle to previous playstations at all , this console feels like the xbox one

@nomither6
Of course he’s correct. It’s a rather obvious point that single player games fail too. But they still exist. When a live service game that has promised ongoing support (and often taken your money for useless tat) shuts down after6 months that’s a completely different thing. But where is all this talk of exaggeration coming from? All I said was:

“ Most live service games are crap. Some aren’t. But to be a success requires more marketing savvy than it does a great game.”

And it’s true. Most are crappy vampiric mobile gatcha / gambling games that try to gradually drain dry the vulnerable to stay alive. They thankfully fail in high proportion. You get a few that can deliver some type of enjoyment to those who enjoy doing the same thing over and over again in an endless sandbox of mediocrity. Those would be the ones mentioned in the article of attaining 60% of the “players” time (and which usually require being a social hangout to retain engagement rather than great mechanics).

For that reason, yes,I almost exclusively play non GAAS games.

@themightyant If the stat is 60% of time spent with live service is from 19 specific games, then that’s less concerning than if it’s 60% of time spent with any and all video gaming is from only 19 games.

I suppose there’s some grayness to what even constitutes a “live service game” to begin with. I consider anything that has content added routinely after release to be “live service”. So No Man’s Sky would definitely qualify, for example, as would Assassin’s Creed Valhalla. Heck, even Marvel’s Spider-Man was live service because it had a roadmap of post-launch DLC.

I think if the game only has one expansion then I’d probably not call it “live service”. So God of War Ragnarok, for example, or Returnal. They had one free DLC and then that’s all, so it’s not like there ongoing support. But if there’s a post-launch roadmap, or regular updates with added or changed content, then that’s live service (GT7, Street Fighter 6, etc)

I guess the point is, we probably need better nomenclature and definitions. We often see people dump on live service but what they really mean to criticize is the games which are ongoing with predatory fees and charges, or games that are incomplete and rely on updates to string people along.

@thefourfoldroot1 now you’re strawmanning by using mobile games , jesus . go ahead , don’t let me stop your irrational hate crusade for online games that you don’t even play to know , and has zero effect on you whatsoever to even care about.

but that still won’t stop the piles of trash single player & indie games that come out either.

@nomither6
Maybe you should actually read the article (or at least the headline) before saying

“ now you’re strawmanning by using mobile games , jesus ”

From the article:

“ Tom Wijman from firm Newzoo has hinted he expects a downturn in live service game development as the market reaches saturation point.”

He wasn’t referring to just PlayStation games. In fact PlayStation games are a minute fraction of said saturation.

You seem to have a bee in your bonnet and a chip on your shoulder. You should get that looked at.

@thefourfoldroot1 agree to disagree , we both clearly got two different perspectives . i don’t think im wrong here & neither do you .

Not personally a big fan of live service games. Do not find them very attractive. That said I can see that there is big market for them in places such as India and China for exemple to name a few.

Trends go too quick, but first party ones I think aren't ideal sure they get more of the money but is a cut that big of a deal when it's multiplatform and your the platform most people acknowledge is the one most are going to? Like come on. Let alone GT7 keeps getting updates. Sea of Thieves does it's job.

Owning it yourself doesn't make it better other than oh we get more of the money, wow great observation right. If literally has the look, gameplay, world, themes, atmosphere and more that is convincing enough. Why would customers care if it's exclusively on PS platforms and has lacking appeal of the world/gameplay/selling point of updates/roadmap, whatever characters, whatever cool aspects of it. They seem to forget that part a lot. The Devs know, the business heads seem to not realise that.

Just because Isekai still exists 10 years later doesn't mean all the good ideas have or haven't gone and it won't last forever and the stupid ones are convincing but is it like old Isekai not in the slightest none back then were as stupid of spinning up ideas as they are now of desperation.

Gameplay wise something has to give, licenses have to give, updates/world changes have to give.

Whether a battle royale, varied multiplayer modes type/whatever particular direction it has to stand out of multiplayer ideas or a game that's singleplayer but has a focus of such service levels.

The ones that push the hardest (aka many quick and smart crossovers, compelling varied content to change it up) while a challenge. Shows which ones know how to go about it and games taking way too long to even get started just are too late already.

The ones that have succeeded still will, or they will fade out as audiences get bored/look for something else or go back to whatever else gaming or not they were doing.

Could Sony pull a MAG again? Probably not. A Twisted Metal (vehicular combat return like other sci-fi racers have where Sony pushed WipEout to mobile because reasons after Omega Collection to branch out but also kill it off quick because where is most of their audience/competition hmm not mobile that's for sure even if some exist there on mobile it was too crowded with other games let alone the console revival of the sci-fi racer games).

Let alone Nintendo went you know how to bring back F Zero (even though Mario Kart has taken many aspects that set F Zero apart and outsells it because of character appeal/name even though F Zero is the more gamer heavy, ohhhhh I see why even besides the sci-fi/differences it has compared to more weapon/kart racer sci-fi racers too or mode differences) by making it a low cost effort of the SNES original and updating it. Is there nostalgia yes, is there a new audience yes, is it easy to expand on yes. Will Sony do such a thing at a small scale? I doubt it even though it would be effective to do so and easy to kill off just as quickly if it flops.

Sony needs to remember small games exist too and small projects are cheaper, sometimes well appreciated by audiences and low budget. They have audiences it's just they want 'big' and well big takes too long/is too risky. No WipEout fans really cared when they knew or knew about WipEout Rush. I mean better idle games exist and better manager games exist console or mobile likely or can have it in Gran Turismo games of old even with B Spec.

But they can sit in that mindset all they want while I buy up their legacy popular and niche IPs from PS1-3/PSP/Vita then first and third parties on those consoles.

Which we have been telling them ever since the announcement.
This was a poisoned present Ryan left behind. Let's hope there is a course correction. They wasted so much money on that bungie aquisition too.

Sony should focus on single player games again and just search partners for live service games. Genshin impact and honkai rail star is a great catch for sony, a successful (console) exclusive games that's only available on playstation.

Oversaturation really only becomes an issue when your live service game is a copy paste of the other mega hits. It would be foolish to think another cookie cutter battle royal can compete with fortnite, COD, apex, etc.

An innovative live service can absolutely succeed. I think the Finals is a decent example of bringing a fresh enough idea while sharing some similarities to the others.

Good thing about having kids is you don't see the need to pay more money to get yelled at by a bunch of teenagers.