There has been a debate about whether live service games like Marathon hurt or help the industry, and Troy Baker has a pretty straightforward view of the whole situation. Marathon is just one of the latest games to be thrust into the spotlight for live services, being one of the more recent releases, but Sony's push for more games like this instead of single-player projects has left many gamers feeling jaded. I'll admit that I'm one of the many who have been disappointed by the live-service formula, but Troy Baker's words have me rethinking a few things.
The live service discussion reached a new high just recently with Bungie ending Destiny 2 and to lay off a significant number of its developers. Destiny 2 has faced many problems over the years, with one of the main critics being that the content was becoming outdated. Seeing Destiny 2 coming to an end is incredibly sad, but at least it had a solid nine-year run that many live service (and even non-live service) games get to have. There are probably a variety of reasons why industry people are still trying to keep live service gaming alive, and Troy Baker believes part of it has to do with companies wanting to keep employees on the payroll as long as possible.
Troy Baker's take on Gaming's Live-Service problem is a reminder that it's a symptom of a much bigger problem
As game development becomes more expensive and original single-player games become a bigger risk to invest in, studios and executives must find ways to retain employees long-term instead of game-by-game. Game development often requires a mix of full-time and contract employees working together, and it can be difficult to justify keeping people on board when there is a lull in project creation. Troy Baker had a fascinating point of view to share with Insider Gaming when it comes to the current state of the industry:
Where the industry is… It's trying to find ways to stay sustainable. I think it's a false conflation to think that everyone is these greedy fat cats with Scrooge McDuck money, and they're just swimming through their money. That is not true. Everyone has a financial and a moral responsibility to keep the people on their payroll gainfully employed as much as possible and to actively try to do so. If that means live service play is how they try to do it, then so be it. We see that model shift.
Find all 10 pairs
Start
Find all 10 pairs
Regular Cover ArtClean Cover Art
When it comes to big companies like Sony or Xbox, it's incredibly easy to point to greed as the sole reason for the push service. Of course, there are probably some situations where that really is the case, but this Troy Baker interview shows how it's not always that simple. Rather than seeing live service games as a way to simply extract more money from players, Baker sees it more as a way to keep developers busy for the long term.
Everyone has a financial and a moral responsibility to keep the people on their payroll as gainfully employed as possible…
It's not easy to create a hugely successful live service game, but it pays off in a huge way if the game can resonate with the audience. Games like Fortnite has been leading the live service charge for nearly a decade now. However, the game has recently started to face its own player retention issues. Fans are losing interest in battle royale games, and while it's not the only type of live service game out there, it's another clear example of how the tide seems to be turning against this model.
Baker's words now make the decline in interest in live services sound scary instead of something to be excited about. It puts into perspective how many more gaming jobs will be lost if live service titles continue to fall out of favor. The recent mass layoffs at Xbox weren't related to live service projects, but the staggering number of employees let go continues a sad trend of large companies cutting thousands of jobs. Unfortunately, many now see layoffs from the gaming industry as inevitable, and live service can actually help keep jobs intact; at least a little longer.
The gaming industry does not have to choose a side
Both single player story driven games and live service titles can live in harmony and both are deeply beneficial to the industry. When studios shut down or games are cancelled, it can be easy to point the finger at a central figure. It's actually much more complicated, though. Although managers may be the easiest to blame, the fact is no one working in the gaming industry wants it to fail. Everyone is trying to succeed in one way or another, and there are some business leaders who find that the key to nurturing live service projects.
The only way out is through
Every industry goes through highs and lows, and it can be difficult to remain optimistic about the future of gaming. With rumors of the PS6 costing over $1,000 and news of Sony shutting down disc production after 2028, I and many others are having a hard time shaking the feeling that the industry we've loved for so many years is slipping away. It is important to remember that these are growing pains. The decisions made to steer the industry into the future may not always sound promising, but gaming companies want a healthy environment to work in as much as customers do.
So this era of gaming hopefully takes both companies and players into a much stronger and healthier era. The supply issues caused by the covid-19 pandemic threw a huge wrench into what this console generation could have been, and the next chapter could be a chance for newfound excitement. Sony's live service plans have struggled to take off, but upcoming projects like Horizon Hunters Gathering and Fairgame$ will hopefully help retain its developers for years to come, while large single player games have just as much room to thrive.
It's impossible to predict the future of the industry, but Troy Baker makes a good point. Live service does not always have a foundation based on greed. The model gives developers the chance to potentially have years worth of work to look forward to, and that's a pretty big upside in an industry that's been sailing in troubled waters of late.
- Released
-
March 5, 2026
- ESRB
-
Teen/animated blood, language, violence, in-game purchases, user interaction
