One study confirms that the trend continues to focus on developing video games as long-term services

We constantly hear news about layoffs and cutbacks due to the situation in the video game industry. In part, this may be reading too much, but there is a study that backs this up The trend continues to focus on developing video games as long-term services. Something that is very much at odds with what we see in many of those games that, in less than a year, the servers close or become a wasteland for those who remain.

According to this study, Published by Griffing Gaming Partners, 95% of studies Developers are working to create or support a live service game in some way. So, They surveyed 537 studies Dealing with a series of topics related to development issues, obtaining results that may be more or less surprising.

One report indicates that the trend continues to focus on developing video games as services rather than closed products

This study confirms that the trend continues to focus on developing video games as long-term services, and in fact 66% of these studies believe it is necessary to do it this way. They connect or associate the concept of games as a service, or a live service, with the potential for its long-term success. To do this, in case anyone does not understand the concept implied by this term, report A game is defined as a live service like any product with a regular update rate planned for the game.

At the end of The report was publishedIn the conclusions, we evaluate how these type of models and beliefs impact the future and longevity of the video game industry. He concluded that 77% Studies have confirmed this Game development cost There is a noticeable increase. he 65% this Actively working on new products Which would be associated with this business model. he 88% Actively involved in research among possible New tools To apply it to your future projects.

It is interesting how you can see that the economic balance of development is what can harm the product concept the most. Believing that offering more content, in planned, phased developments that pare down each stage and produce different content that can generate long-term income, can be a good thing. A problem when the product does not have enough result In the initial stage of publishing or launching the game. It is true that sometimes some products manage to maintain themselves and even get better results over time. But the important point of this report is that This statistical balance related to projects is not evaluated to the same extent That really works, from everything that sees the light.

This report focuses on assessing what studios are facing, as we find developers talking about data engineering, Directly serving players' expectations and demands for more cross-platform gaming. Furthermore, it can be seen that as technology becomes more complex, testing becomes increasingly difficult, resulting in many games undergoing automated testing processes. But games as a service are, in many cases, the type of product that is difficult to maintain as a revenue generator. According to Sasha Shams, from Riot Games, the cycles that this type of product is exposed to are always the same. The first thing would be Building trust in players through streaming content, Which must arrive periodically and continuously. The game must be maintained with updates that modify the experience and meet community requirements. This generates, in general, constant pressure on studying, which may be greater or less, but You must consistently meet the player's expectations. It is known that you have to deal with this delicate balance that updates entail, because One mistake can interrupt the entire experience.

Here we can remember a little and note that there are many games that have succeeded and remained a great source of income for their studios. However, when evaluating this aspect, we must be responsible for what the studies seek to find. However, there are very few games with a longevity that have achieved sustained success. Even the biggest games struggled a lot to achieve some stability. Determination and perseverance have allowed games like Sea of ​​​​Thieves or The Elder Scrolls Online to achieve a certain stability. But it's something they haven't achieved like Fornite, which has managed to maintain its success for years, or the recent case of Palworld, which doesn't know how far it will go.

The biggest nonsense arises when it seems to try to instill that the business model in a video game is this. It's as if the traditional game model should be replaced at the beginning and end, without being linked to a dynamic experience that is updated. This basically supports the theory Non-multiplayer game and multiplayer game respectively.The truth is that asking the question that narrative games, without multiplayer, are incomplete and doomed, is perhaps more troubling than the number of studios that fail because they can't make their projects profitable.

What do you think the future of video game development should be?Should they all be products that offer a long-term experience with updates and paid content?