Why games-as-service suck, and Fortnite's bad example: (Gaming)

by cheapLEY , Tuesday, April 23, 2019, 18:19 (1829 days ago)

Colin Campbell published a story today over at Polygon. It is a look at development at Epic surrounding Fortnite.

It's not a surprising story. Fortnite became far more successful than anyone expected, and the developers working on it are working in a state of perpetual crunch to keep up, lest a brief lull in content sends players looking elsewhere.

I think it highlights the dangers of "games-as-service." I have certainly felt disappointed in Bungie's development pace, both in terms of patches and sandbox updates and in amount and pace of new content releases. Stories like this one really do make me take a step back and realize what I am asking for when I wish for more content and updates at a quicker pace.

More so, however, it really makes me question whether games-as-service is even a good model to be chasing in the first place. There's no denying its profitability, so there's also no surprise that it has become the de facto goal for publishers.

It makes me sad, though. Developers are stuck in a loop that seems inescapable. Players will always burn through content faster than developers can make it, and will always be unsatisfied by any amount of content.

I'm tempted to say that Epic should hire more developers, but there is certainly a point at which just throwing more people at the problem won't actually solve anything. But, also, at a certain point, Fortnite has become the primary example that many players hold up as "doing it right" in terms of content pace, and that seems dangerous for the industry as a whole. If the market leaders are in a state of perpetual crunch, competitors will surely have to do the same thing, and maybe even at a worse pace in attempts to keep up.