• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PlayStation: Our live-service games will target different genres, release schedules and audiences

Topher

Identifies as young
In under 18 months, PlayStation has announced three studio acquisitions all dedicated to live-service games.

It started with a big one in January last year – Destiny developer Bungie. It followed that with Haven Studios in March. And just last week it revealed it would be picking up Firewalk Studios.

It's all part of Sony's aim to broaden out from the single-player, narrative adventure games that it's best known for (although don't worry, they're still being made, too). In fact, the company says it has ten live-service games in the work.

Yet live-service games, typically, take up a huge amount of time and attention. Surely Sony can't expect all ten products to be successful? The cynic in me can't help but feel that the company is hedging its bets, knowing that the majority of those ten won't make it, but hoping one or two strike it big.

Yet PlayStation Studios head Hermen Hulst was keen to remind me that 'live-service' doesn't automatically mean the company is making ten Fortnites or Destinys.


"We understand the competitive environment that is out there, and the time investment from players that live services offer," Hulst tells us. "And we want to deliver the highest quality games.

"There is a risk that we talk about 'live service' in generic terms – as if it is a single genre, or even a single business model. PlayStation Studios are making a variety of games that could be referred to as 'live services', targeting different genres, different release schedules, and at different scales. We are also creating games for different audiences, and I take confidence from our track record in creating worlds and stories that PlayStation fans love."

"There is a risk that we talk about ‘live service' in generic terms – as if it is a single genre, or even a single business model"

Hulst is talking to us shortly after the news that it's acquiring Firewalk Studios. PlayStation announced it would be partnering with Firewalk on its first game back in April 2021. Yet, just like it did with Haven Studios last year, PlayStation has decided to acquire the team even before it's released a game.

"Every [studio] relationship has its own trajectory – in some cases we have worked with companies for many years as external partners before bringing them into SIE – in other instances an acquisition has come around more quickly," Hulst explains. "It depends on what the studio needs to grow and succeed, and what makes sense for both sides. We have been working closely with Firewalk for a while now – we have both really enjoyed that process, and we have incredible confidence in what they are creating. So this felt like a very natural step."

So what is it that PlayStation can offer? Tony Hsu, studio head at Firewalk, says the company has no plans to expand much beyond the 150 employees. But there are other benefits to being part of the PlayStation team.

"The priority for each studio is to deliver their own project – to make the best game that they can," Hulst continues.

"But PlayStation Studios works as a global network of studios and central technology and service teams. We work hard to offer an environment where teams can collaborate on anything they wish to – whether that is game design, audio, animation, or anything else. Live services bring new and complex challenges, so it's incredibly valuable to have individuals and teams who have been through those and can offer help and advice to others."


Of course one of those teams includes Bungie, which is significant because many of the founders of Firewalk are actually former Bungie employees. Tony Hsu was actually the general manager and senior vice president of Destiny at Activision.

"We have close personal and professional relationships with Bungie and are excited to be part of the same family"

"Within our team we have close personal and professional relationships with Bungie and are excited to be part of the same family of studios," Hsu says. "One of the benefits of becoming part of PlayStation Studios is having the opportunity to exchange knowledge with such an amazing network of development talent, including our friends and close neighbors in Bellevue and Seattle. We're excited to join them and PlayStation Studios teams like Haven Interactive in creating and advancing innovative multiplayer experiences."

An interesting side note on the game that Firewalk is making is that it's not technically going to be a PS5 exclusive, as the game is also being simultaneously developed for PC. It makes business sense to launch live-service titles across multiple platforms, as it gives the title a larger addressable market in which to build an audience. Is this an approach Sony might be making with all its service-based titles?

Hulst remains coy: "We have made significant progress delivering games on PC in recent years, so where it makes sense for the game and the studio, it's a great option to have. But it's a decision that we will make for each individual game."

Firewalk joining PlayStation means it bids farewell to ProbablyMonsters, which is a collective of AAA studios that was all about doing things differently. Harold Ryan, the CEO and president of the team, aimed to "create a workplace where developers can thrive and have life-long careers making games they love and are proud of."

"We'll continue to invest in building new AAA teams while improving the environment in which games are made"

The decision to sell Firewalk to PlayStation doesn't contradict that, Ryan tells us. He says that Hulst matches his own views in terms of building teams with a positive culture, while investing in new IPs.

"Firewalk joining the PlayStation Family is a step in our mission to bring new AAA game teams and new AAA IP to life and proof that by 'Uniting, Guiding and Empowering' talented teams with a focus on culture, we will succeed. We have two other announced teams and, of course, other unannounced projects in the works. In our goal to find the best path to market for all of our teams and games, we're on track for what we're trying to achieve with ProbablyMonsters."


He adds: "We will continue to invest in building new AAA development teams while improving the environment in which games are being made as we increase our positive impact in the industry."

Hsu concludes that leaving ProbablyMonsters and being part of PlayStation – a company it has been working with for over two years – won't change what the studio is all about.

"We've been fortunate to be able to establish our own independent culture and development philosophy, thanks in large part to the support of our partners, both at ProbablyMonsters and PlayStation," he says. "From the very beginning, Hermen and the entire leadership group at PlayStation have been fantastic advocates for our team, our culture, and our vision. Joining PlayStation Studios will only further empower our unique approach to making games."

 

Men_in_Boxes

Snake Oil Salesman
yes-im-so-excited.gif
 

tmlDan

Member
I am happy with this, they cant all be copy pastas of the current live service mega games. I love this type of experimentation, especially since live service tends to have a cheaper cost of entry (and likely f2P), it can only be good for consumers who wont waste money on games that may lose support
 

Topher

Identifies as young
I buy PlayStation for their big games. God of War, TLOU, Spider-man, Horizon, Ghost of Tsushima, etc. I have no problem with Sony branching out into "live service" (whatever that really means) as long as they keep making the great PlayStation games I've always loved. If they do that then I'll remain a PlayStation fan. If they don't then I will just sell my PlayStation and buy games elsewhere.

Awkward John Krasinski GIF by Saturday Night Live
 

TrueLegend

Member
Yeah this is why they will fail unless some magic happens because the reason fortnite is successful is because of the singular level of support that is unheard and unparallel in industry. I don't play fortnite but I have never seen any dev do so much for a game. They are giving their player everything from Superman to Aloy to straight up engine update.
 

Hunnybun

Member
I buy PlayStation for their big games. God of War, TLOU, Spider-man, Horizon, Ghost of Tsushima, etc. I have no problem with Sony branching out into "live service" (whatever that really means) as long as they keep making the great PlayStation games I've always loved. If they do that then I'll remain a PlayStation fan. If they don't then I will just sell my PlayStation and buy games elsewhere.

Awkward John Krasinski GIF by Saturday Night Live

Yeah me too, but I do wish there were more of them. What's the current run rate? Maybe 2 or 3 a year?

I'd be a happy gamer if they could put out maybe 5 a year instead.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
I buy PlayStation for their big games. God of War, TLOU, Spider-man, Horizon, Ghost of Tsushima, etc. I have no problem with Sony branching out into "live service" (whatever that really means) as long as they keep making the great PlayStation games I've always loved. If they do that then I'll remain a PlayStation fan. If they don't then I will just sell my PlayStation and buy games elsewhere.

Awkward John Krasinski GIF by Saturday Night Live
My thoughts exactly.
 

Fbh

Gold Member
It's GAAS design 101 for big publishers: Release a ton of crap and hope some of it makes it big.

Personally I'm interested in seeing what they'll do on the PVP front. GaaS can be decent for PVP, it means constant support, new modes, big updated, etc and it all gets financed by people buying skins.
GaaS for everything else sucks. I don't want to play repetitive missions to grind for color coded loot


I can't wait for the live service games tbh. More video games and less movies please.
kratos-kratos-fortnite.gif


Ahh yes, so much better than that annoying regular God of War
 

HTK

Banned
Fucking hate this live service push by Sony. It's trend chasing and nothing else. It's not why I bought a PS5.
I'm excited for Sony to make more online based games.

They haven't really done much of them since the PS3 era. Its all been single player and that's great but we need some more variety. I want a Sony made multiplayer shooter or a competitive shooter or something along those lines.
 

Mr Hyde

Member
I'm excited for Sony to make more online based games.

They haven't really done much of them since the PS3 era

And it failed spectacularly and made their portfolio of games look weaker and more bland. I'm guessing this will too. Stick to your strengths.
 

Warablo

Member
Depends on what they mean by live service, because I think they could still make some good single player/co-op live service games that are good.
 
Last edited:

splattered

Member
I buy PlayStation for their big games. God of War, TLOU, Spider-man, Horizon, Ghost of Tsushima, etc. I have no problem with Sony branching out into "live service" (whatever that really means) as long as they keep making the great PlayStation games I've always loved. If they do that then I'll remain a PlayStation fan. If they don't then I will just sell my PlayStation and buy games elsewhere.

Awkward John Krasinski GIF by Saturday Night Live

That's why i play on more than just Playstation. Or Xbox. Or Switch.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Depends on what they mean by live service, because I think they could still make some good single player/co-op live service games that are good.
This is true. MLB The Show is considered live service now with the Diamond Dynasty mode that is the game's bread and butter, but it still retains all the great single player modes and traditional online play outside of that.

GT7 is another example of them doing live service correctly as well.
 

GHG

Gold Member
Fucking hate this live service push by Sony. It's trend chasing and nothing else. It's not why I bought a PS5.

Exactly my thoughts as well. Would much rather they throw all of their resources at creating high quality single player experiences.

I don't get what they are going for, as if there aren't already a ton of live service games out there, most of which are already avialble on PlayStation.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Exactly my thoughts as well. Would much rather they throw all of their resources at creating high quality single player experiences.

I don't get what they are going for, as if there aren't already a ton of live service games out there, most of which are already avialble on PlayStation.
Maybe they felt more pressure due to the consolidation race?

Also, of they create at least one addictive banger they can have on multiple platforms, that is more revenue for them.
 
Last edited:

GHG

Gold Member
Maybe they felt more pressure due to the consolidation race?

I think that's most likely to be the truth really. They wanted to start making their own live service stuff to reduce risk.

What I'm hoping is that they've just put Bungie on it and will leave most of the other studios to do what they've always done.
 

HTK

Banned
And it failed spectacularly and made their portfolio of games look weaker and more bland. I'm guessing this will too. Stick to your strengths.
They need to create meaningful multiplayer experiences, and they've acquired studios to do that. This will not take away from their current strengths of delivering single player games.
 

Calverz

Member
I'm excited for Sony to make more online based games.

They haven't really done much of them since the PS3 era. Its all been single player and that's great but we need some more variety. I want a Sony made multiplayer shooter or a competitive shooter or something along those lines.
The Office Thank You GIF
 
  • Praise the Sun
Reactions: HTK

ReBurn

Gold Member
Exactly my thoughts as well. Would much rather they throw all of their resources at creating high quality single player experiences.

I don't get what they are going for, as if there aren't already a ton of live service games out there, most of which are already avialble on PlayStation.
They're going for a recurring revenue model to increase cash flow to subsidize the high quality single player experience pipeline. With game development costs rising and timelines lengthening its getting harder for a lot of companies to justify $100 million+ and half a decade or more of investment in a single title when there's no guarantee it will hit and recoup the investment from one time sales. Good live service games bring in constant cash flow that can make the investment less risky.
 

Clear

CliffyB's Cock Holster
Yeah, I think the problem is mainly that there have been too many "bad" live-service games that its tainted as a branding. Which is really a shame as the basic idea of offering ongoing support and expansion is perfectly fine.

The real issue is nickel-and-diming and excessively drawn out or delayed rollouts of actually meaningful new content.
 

SoraNoKuni

Member
I can't wait for the live service games tbh. More video games and less movies please.
Yeah, so much better than HZD,GOW,GOT,Insomniac games.
Come on, that narrative is from PS3 era, games are evolving and you can have great cinematography alongside great gameplay.
 

GHG

Gold Member
They're going for a recurring revenue model to increase cash flow to subsidize the high quality single player experience pipeline. With game development costs rising and timelines lengthening its getting harder for a lot of companies to justify $100 million+ and half a decade or more of investment in a single title when there's no guarantee it will hit and recoup the investment from one time sales. Good live service games bring in constant cash flow that can make the investment less risky.

I get that, but it seems everyone is chasing the same golden goose. Most people only play one or two live service games and that's it, those games will take up all of their time and a large proportion of their monetary investment in the hobby. Those games are "sticky" and getting people to switch over to new/different live service games is no easy task. Very few live service games are successful and the reality is that very few can be for reasons aforementioned.

That's why we've seen so many spectacular high profile failures over the last decade or so, and that's not to mention the games that have come along and done well initially only to flame out.

The risks are clear to see in this market segment, and if they are going to use some of their existing high profile IP then there is also reputational risk. Even though I personally loved it, look at the damage GT Sport did to the IP at the time. Modern live service games are not cheap to make and they also require a lot of ongoing investment. So it's not as straightforward or low risk as people like to make out.
 
Last edited:

Mr Hyde

Member
They need to create meaningful multiplayer experiences, and they've acquired studios to do that. This will not take away from their current strengths of delivering single player games.

Let's hope that's the case going forward. But I can't help but feel, Sony is going to burn their fingers with this major push for GaaS. We just have to wait and see.
 

Roxkis_ii

Member
The idea of live service games doesn't really get me excited. Live service games live off their populations, so I know free to play is the most likely out come with everything that entails.

Maybe with Bungie in the building, they can do a free to play hybrid. Give you some basic access to get a feel for the game and charge you past a certain point.


I starting to miss when multi player came part of single player games. All gaming with none of the psychological tricks to get you into the shop or spending on a battle pass.
 
I'm curious how Sony does the live service thing. They've always been weak in this department, but I'd love to see them put out some MP bangers. As long as they are F2P or part of PS Plus, I'll try them out.
 

sono

Gold Member
I played Destiny (1) for months. When it first came out I thought it was awesome. But as Improgreaawd and could not level up anymore it felt unfinished story
Then Destiny 2 came out and it took everything I built up. It killed it for me. Will they all be like this
 

sachos

Member
As long as they keep their core single player experiences intact it should be fine and offer some variety. If they start shifting entirely to GAAS i think they've lost it and don't understand why so many people choose them in the first place.
 

feynoob

Banned
Exactly my thoughts as well. Would much rather they throw all of their resources at creating high quality single player experiences.

I don't get what they are going for, as if there aren't already a ton of live service games out there, most of which are already avialble on PlayStation.
Game development cost is higher these days.
According to the report, AAA games that are greenlit now with potential releases in 2024 or 2025 typically receive development budgets of $200 million or higher — Call of Duty has already surpassed $300 million in development costs alone, and the next Grand Theft Auto title will likely require a development budget of $250 million or more. When considering marketing costs, this number can jump to over $1 billion across a franchise, with one large studio reporting that a major franchise's development cost $660 million and marketing cost nearly $550 million.

These costs demonstrate a significant increase from five years ago, when most AAA games had budgets between $50 and $150 million.
https://www.ign.com/articles/major-publishers-report-aaa-franchises-can-cost-over-a-billion-to-make

Sony games are already high quality.
https://gameranx.com/updates/id/464...-ragnarok-cost-a-massive-200-million-to-make/
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/hori...oduce-according-to-dutch-documentary.1652873/

That is the current cost. Future cost will be expensive as hell
 

Fbh

Gold Member

Lol.
To an extent it's actually impressive how Fortnite has made so many IP owners become less strict with how their characters are portrayed. You always hear stories about companies being very protective of their characters, you hear about how much oversight they have in things like Smashbros to ensure the representation of the character is "on brand" or how it has always made the creation of "X vs Y" type fighting games hard.

Then comes Fortnite with the big bucks and it's like "yeah sure, whatever, let him do a stupid dance and take a selfie with a phone, it's ok".
 
I think where Sony is going with their 10 Live Service games is trying to secure their own "Fortnite/Minecraft/Roblox" game that rakes in over a billion dollars a year so that it can finance even more AAA tentpole games we all know and love.

It's about mitigating the risks of those big AAA releases; similar to how big AAA releases financed AA and B-tier games back in the day. That's the platform model they're gunning for.

If they can have 1x uber successful billion-dollar live service franchise, together with 3-4 successful to middling success live service games, it provides scope to expand their core teams working on AAA tentpoles to be able to take more risks on those types of games that Playstation fans all know and love.

That's what I hope they're planning for at least.
 

Unknown?

Member
Good! I don't want them doing live games that are all shooters! Hopefully they have a platformer in there as well!
 
Top Bottom