The video game industry touts games as a service as the next big thing in gaming. It seems like the industry is fixated on bringing live games into the limelight instead of creating completed titles upon launch. Although the idea of a game receiving new content every few weeks sounds marvelous on paper, it brings about too many issues that can kill a game before it has a chance to flourish.
Most modern games tend to introduce new content via DLC to keep players enthused well after release. This might seem like the blueprint most live service games follow, but it’s applied in a very different way.
Most DLC comes after developers deliver a finished product to consumers. These DLCs are usually less-importation continuations of the story or side quests meant to extend the game's lifespan. The games as a service model requires companies to continually add important story narratives, characters, side missions and more pertaining to key aspects of the overall experience. They are much more important than frivolous DLCs that aren't vital to the story or experience. Failing to implement essential add-ons promptly could send a live game into an early grave, something most completed titles don't have to worry about.
Since live games aren't completed products upon launch, many feel bare-bones or unfinished. The lack of content can turn off many gamers expecting more out of the product. Marvel's Avengers lost over 95% percent of its PC userbase shortly after launch due to its bare-bones nature. Launching a live service title with minimal content can drive it into the ground before it has a chance to prove itself.
Many live games bring about some of the most despised aspects of modern gaming. Microtransaction, loot boxes, and other monetization tactics plague many live games despite being disliked by most of the gaming community. Unfortunately, in-game monetization is at the heart of most live service titles. Some even make microtransactions feel necessary for keeping up with the rest of the game's player base. This sort of business model can only sustain itself for so long. Eventually, gamers will grow tired of the endless bombardment of microtransactions, causing them to move on to other less egregious titles. Games as a service might seem like a quick way to turn a profit, but it could be more detrimental to a company's reputation than they realize.
The games as a service blueprint is somewhat divisive in modern gaming. Some people enjoy the unconventional business model, while others view it as detrimental to consumers. Whether you agree with the blueprint or not, there's no denying its deeply anti-consumer structure. Pushing out incomplete, bare-bones titles full of egregious microtransaction isn't as sustainable as the industry might think. Most gamers would rather have completed titles with minimal microtransactions than half-baked games requiring unending updates. Although live games are becoming more apparent on contemporary hardware, some gamers believe it's just another fad that will eventually run its course.