You’ve mentioned that for live service games, the team has content they’re working on for the next 2-3 patches/months. So suppose the game launched and the next 2 patches that were in the pipeline were applied and all 3 received negative feedback and negative internal metrics. What happens to the 3rd patch that was already being worked on? Is it still pushed out based on the vision prior to the negative metrics or has it already been modified based on the metrics?
It doesn’t (or at least shouldn’t) work like that. That would basically mean we were asleep at the wheel for roughly six months of live service (launch + 3 months for patch 1 + 3 months for patch 2). Let’s get into it a bit more.
Whenever a content update goes live (including launch), everything behind it in the pipe moves forward one step. When the game launches, the game goes from being on deck (testing for stability, cert, etc.) to live. Update 1 goes from production to on deck (testing). Update 2 goes from preproduction to production. Update 3 goes from ideation to preproduction. Update 4 enters ideation. Then, when Update 1 goes live, Update 2 goes to on deck. Update 3 goes to production, Update 4 goes to preproduction, and Update 5 enters ideation. This continues on, while a separate team may be working on a parallel project like an expansion to the game with its own delivery schedule in addition to the content updates.
In your hypothetical example, if parts of Update X are not well received, it is likely too late for Update X+1 to receive significant changes since it is on deck and doing its testing/cert period. However, Update X+2 is still in production and Update X+3 is in preproduction. These updates are still quite malleable and can be changed based on the real time feedback and user research we get from the live game. We can, for example, fast track content that was supposed to be in Update X+3 and move it up to Update X+2, or pull content out of Update X+2 and shelve it while we improve it. Features can get moved to the upcoming expansion or brought into the content updates from the expansion. There’s a lot of room for us to make changes two or more patches out, and any live service game is keeping constant watch on their players and what they are doing because the game’s survival depends on it.
Launch is different, though. Launch is the real make-or-break for live service games because that’s where our audience usually peaks. If we can’t hit and retain critical mass for sustainability, any queued content updates won’t matter – the game won’t be able to sustain itself because it won’t have enough players and we won’t have the resources to try to get more. Content updates rarely pull in new players, they serve to retain existing players and entice lapsed players. Without enough players to retain and entice to return, any live service game is doomed.
[Join us on Discord] and/or [Support us on Patreon]
Got a burning question you want answered?
- Short questions: Ask a Game Dev on Twitter
- Short questions: Ask a Game Dev on BlueSky
- Long questions: Ask a Game Dev on Tumblr
- Frequent Questions: The FAQ