Which is better between classic premium games which are sold already complete and at full price and games which instead continue to evolve over time with a live service model?
Speaking to PC Gamer, the CEO of Theorycraft Games and former executive producer of Halo: Reach and Destiny, Joe Tungstated that the traditional method of purchasing video games causes developers to make decisions that are not “in the best interests” of players.
The words of the Halo and Destiny producer on live services
“I always felt like, with the $60 box video game model, I had to make decisions that weren’t in the best interests of the players,” Tung said.
“The thinking was, ‘How can we sell the most copies in the first 48 hours?’ One of the huge strengths of the games-as-a-service model is that you can deal with it in the long term, you can think long term and prioritize what’s best for the player, and how that overlaps with what’s best for the company. I think that makes for much, much, much better decisions overall.”
According to him, the developers were forced to create fake trailers to cause excitement around the game and sell more at launch, since that’s all that mattered. With live service games, however, it is possible to communicate with players, evolving the game honestly after launch. For this reason it is a better model for both developers and players.
You what do you think of his words?
Among the live service games coming this year are names like Concord, which is likely hoping to replicate the results of Helldivers 2.
