And 95% of them will fail.Over 500 Studios Are Working On Live-Service Games
New survey shows we'll be getting a lot more always-online shooters and RPGs in the futurekotaku.com
Still, that 95% number seems suspect. 537 participants surveyed, but what mix? If it's all AAA publishers and mobile, then yeah, I could see how you could end up with 95% working on live service games. Whereas if most of them are indies, you'd likely get a very different result. But that all depends on how they defined live service to begin with.
Like this, for example. 'Regular update cadences' is how they define live service? If so, patches are also updates, is a game that gets regular patches live service? Are MK1 or SF6 live service because they regularly get new characters and costumes added? If so, then yes, the vast majority of games being developed are live service, but the term is also so broad as to be essentially meaningless.the study said:Live Service Dominance: 65% of studios actively work on and 30% plan to release regular update cadences for their games, highlighting the industry's shift towards a live service era.
And also, '95% of studios are working on live service games' is not the same as '95% of games being developed are live service'. EA and Bandai Namco are mentioned as some of the studios surveyed, but those are AAA publishers with several studios under them, at least one of which is likely to have a live service project going. Doesn't mean almost all of them are, or that they don't have other projects in the pipeline that aren't live service.
Should also be noted the study was conducted by a venture capital firm, and a specialist fund for AI and live service development. Not exactly neutral parties.