The Undead Grip of Live Service Games: Exploring the Insatiable Hunger for Player Engagement

In a world where video game development costs have skyrocketed, publishers are increasingly turning to live service models to bridge the gap between their financial aspirations and players' willingness to pay upfront. This shift has transformed the gaming landscape, with blockbuster titles now embracing a perpetual, evolving nature that seeks to keep players engaged indefinitely. However, this strategy has not come without its challenges, as the industry grapples with the implications of this business model and its impact on the player experience.

Feeding the Insatiable Appetite of Live Service Games

The Rise of Live Service Dominance

The live service model has become the industry's go-to strategy, with major publishers like EA and Activision experiencing significant growth in the past decade by embracing this approach. The allure of ongoing monetization and player engagement has led to a proliferation of live service games, from the early days of MMOs and the rise of free-to-play mobile titles to the current wave of "triple-A" releases. This shift has been driven by the need to offset the escalating costs of game development, as well as the desire to maintain a steady stream of revenue beyond the initial purchase.

The Undead Nature of Live Service Games

Live service games, in their essence, are akin to the undead – they seek to prolong their existence by devouring the time and attention of players. Unlike traditional "buy once, play forever" games, these titles are designed to evolve and expand indefinitely, with regular updates, new content, and a constant stream of in-game purchases. This perpetual nature, while enticing for publishers, can be exhausting for players, as the experience becomes defined by an ongoing interaction with a product that is always in flux.

The Zombified Live Service Titles

At the lower end of the live service spectrum, we find the "zombified" games – cheaply produced, often free-to-play titles that rely heavily on progression systems and microtransactions to keep players engaged. These games prioritize the acquisition of gear and the incremental improvement of stats, as the promise of "more stuff" is the simplest way to maintain a steady flow of player activity. However, this approach often results in a game that lacks true purpose or structure, as the endless grind becomes the primary focus.

The Vampiric Live Service Titles

In contrast, the "vampiric" live service games are the debonair, premium productions that initially captivate players with their narratives and production values. These titles may offer the illusion of a traditional single-player experience, but the live service element prevents them from providing the closure and catharsis that stories typically offer. Instead, these games continually layer on new content and narrative threads, seducing players with the promise of deeper mysteries and unresolved plot points, all while keeping them tethered to the game's perpetual cycle.

Subverting the Live Service Paradigm: The Case of Helldivers 2

Amidst the sea of live service games, Helldivers 2 stands out as a title that both epitomizes and subverts the genre's conventions. The game's clever satire turns the live service framework on its head, casting players as cannon fodder in a "managed democracy" that both rewards and mistrusts their actions. By making the live service elements a running gag, Helldivers 2 manages to shield players from the self-disgust that can come with being lured back to the "charnelpiles" of its virtual world, time and time again.

The Existential Crisis of the Triple-A Industry

The live service model has not been without its challenges, as evidenced by the recent struggles of high-profile titles like Rocksteady's Suicide Squad and Sony's Concord. These failures, amplified by the wider fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on the gaming industry, have led some publishers to hedge their bets, while others continue to push forward with live service development. The industry's reliance on this business model is being tested, and the long-term sustainability of the live service approach is increasingly called into question.

The Need for a Redistribution of Power and Resources

As the live service model continues to evolve, it's important to recognize that these games are the creations of thousands of people, many of whom may care deeply about their design. When live service games fail, it's not just the products that crumble, but the livelihoods of those who worked on them. Any shift away from the live service paradigm must be part of a broader redistribution of power and resources within the industry, rather than a series of mass layoffs and "strategic realignments" that leave the executives and wealthiest investors unscathed.In the end, the rise of live service games has transformed the gaming landscape, blurring the lines between entertainment and commerce. As the industry grapples with the implications of this business model, it's crucial to consider the impact on both players and the people who create these experiences. The future of gaming may lie in finding a balance between the desires of publishers and the needs of the players, while ensuring that the creative and economic rewards are more equitably distributed.