God Of War live-service cancellation is an example of a growing games industry problem

raf grassetti
Share this Article:

The cancellation of a God Of War live-service spin-off is a sign of how the constant pursuit of bigger games is creating a more polarised industry.


Despite having one of the most recognisable names in gaming attached to it, a live-service spin-off based on God Of War has reportedly been cancelled by Sony. Itā€™s one of two major projects cancelled by the firm; the reported God Of War spin-off was in the works at Bluepoint Games, while another, untitled game was in development at Bend Studio.

According to Bloomberg, which broke the news, neither studio will close in the wake of the cancellations, though it seems almost certain that job losses will follow.

The news comes only a few months after the debacle surrounding Concord, a hero shooter which burned through a reported budget of $400m during its development. Intended to be a rival to the likes of Apex Legends or Overwatch, Concordā€™s launch was instead deemed such a disaster that Sony stepped in and cancelled the game only a few weeks after its August 2024 launch.

By October, the studio behind Concord, Firewalk, had been closed down, while physical copies of the game were withdrawn from sale.

It was a marked contrast from the previous year, when Sony was so bullish about live-service games ā€“ that is, titles that keep players engrossed through regular ā€˜seasonsā€™ of campaigns. In November 2023, Sony boss Hiroki Totoki said that Sony had no fewer than 12 live-service games in development, and that six of them would be released by 2025ā€™s financial year.

ā€œMid-to-long term,ā€ he said at the time, ā€œwe want to push this kind of service, and thatā€™s the unchanged policy of the company.ā€

Although Sony has enjoyed some success in the live-service sector ā€“ Helldivers 2 has found itself a loyal and appreciative audience ā€“ the expensive failure of Concord does appear to have made the company reassess its strategy somewhat. That it would take the step of cancelling a game based on God Of War ā€“ along with The Last Of Us and Uncharted, one of the biggest names in its portfolio ā€“ certainly suggests that it wasnā€™t confident about the spin-offā€™s chances.

concord game
RIP Concord (2024-2024). Credit: Sony.

Over the past year or so, other major videogame companies have also had their fingers burned by expensive, always-online games; Sega cancelled the sci-fi shooter Hyenas before it was officially released. Warner Bros faced a multi-million dollar loss when players failed to flock to the DC-themed live-service action title, Suicide Squad: Kill The Justice League.

As the aforementioned Helldivers 2 and Overwatch prove, itā€™s possible to make live-service games that players enjoy and turn a profit. But the sector is also risky and, as so many firms have discovered, expensive when things go wrong. Although not a live-service game as such, multiplayer shooter Redfall suffered through a pricey and difficult development; the game was a critical disappointment, and its studio ā€“ Arkane Austin ā€“ was subsequently closed by Microsoft.

The irony is that companies like Sony and Warner Bros are chasing the live-service pot of gold because theyā€™re constantly looking for the big score ā€“ a title that can justify its existence by attracting a user base that returns month after month, providing a steady stream of post-launch revenue.

Read more: Concord | Sony hero shooter studioā€™s closure highlights the risks of live-service games

In a paradox worthy of Catch-22, such titles cost huge amounts of money to develop, and yet more money to maintain afterwards; all those new maps, emotes and skins have to be designed by somebody.

Live-service games (or Games as a Service to use one of its other names) are therefore a solution that also happens to perpetuate a much-talked-about problem in the videogame industry: development is expensive, and becoming increasingly so.

GTA 6
GTA 6: coming to a console near you for a mere $100. Reportedly. Credit: Take-Two.

One of the more recent potential solutions to the rising cost of game development, at least according to one analyst, is to raise the price of games to $100, or about £80. Itā€™s a detail that emerged in a report published by Matthew Ball, analyst at firm Epyllion, in which it suggested thereā€™s widespread ā€˜hopeā€™ in the industry that publisher Take-Two will set a precedent by selling GTA 6 for that sum later this year. The argument being that if $100 becomes the new standard for so-called triple-A releases, then developers will be able to offset their growing costs.

In a further irony, raising the asking price for games will only perpetuate the same climate that caused games like Concord and Suicide Squad: Kill The Justice League to fail so dramatically.

Live-service games like Overwatch demand that players spend a large chunk of their spare time immersed in them ā€“ to keep their skills sharp enough to compete in-game and to justify the cost of a subscription. As a result, it becomes increasingly difficult and costly to make games that can directly compete for those playersā€™ attention ā€“ as Sony and Warner Bros have since learned.

Raising the cost of games creates a similar problem, but from a financial angle. If the price of games keeps going up, then gamers will simply buy fewer of them, and play their favourites for longer. Thatā€™s fine for the makers of GTA 6 ā€“ one of the biggest entertainment properties in the world. For the makers of most other games, itā€™s bad news. Players are already notoriously choosy about what theyā€™ll spend full-price money on; jacking up prices will only heighten the situation.

suicide squad kill the justice league live service
Suicide Squad: Kill The Justice League ā€“ arguably the brownest of live-service games. Credit: Warner Interactive.

In other words, the videogame industryā€™s polarisation is remarkably reflective of the broader social landscape. Just as cash has been concentrated in the hands of a tiny group of billionaires, while living standards fall for the other 99 percent, the games industry is also becoming clustered around a comparatively small collection of companies and brands.

Videogamingā€™s biggest publishers are also motivated in the same way as our planetā€™s super rich. Although the cost of making games has risen ā€“ partly due to a dogged pursuit of ever larger maps and something called ā€˜photorealismā€™ ā€“ those rises are partly self-set. Nintendo has repeatedly proven that game doesnā€™t have to be photoreal to be a hit; countless indie titles have demonstrated that a game doesnā€™t have to be a vast sandbox to capture imaginations. Just look at Vampire Survivors.

Instead, major publishers continue to look for bigger numbers to make their balance sheets look impressive, to placate their investors, and to justify their increasingly huge executive bonuses. As long as companies continue with this mindset, games will continue to get bigger, more expensive ā€“ and more disastrous when things fail to pan out.

Share this Article:

Related Stories

More like this