Should all sports games jump to a live service model?

[Kane99]

We already have yearly releases of most sports games, from Madden, NBA 2K, FIFA etc. All of these games tend to come out yearly and don't usually change much of anything. All the while, each of these games have their own live service thing. Madden has Ultimate Team, which is kinda like a live service thing where you can pick up packs of cards to gain players, so on. I think NBA 2K has a system like this with their MyPlayer or MyCareer modes. 

With the news that Konami stopped doing a yearly release plan for their soccer games, it made me wonder why more sports games don't just do this. Release one singular game, and update that sucker every so often. All of these live service games live for years like this, and I don't imagine most sports games need yearly releases anyway. Patch those games every so often and make money off of adding team uniforms or random stadiums. Give gamers fun stuff to mess around with. 

I just think it's time for sports games to adapt and stop with the yearly release BS, because it's clear that there is no innovation when they keep doing these yearly releases. 

[Shortie]

I couldn't agree more with you. One game that comes to mind mainly because my kids play it and always want the newest one every year is FIFA. I know that this year was the last Fifa and things are changing next year from what they told me but over the years it's been a brand-new game with barely any changes, and you are basically paying retail price for a game you already have with a few updates, and it seems crazy. Having one base game release and then firing out patches for new updates would definitely be the way to go and I really feel it's time for them to adapt. Unfortunately, I feel like some game developers just get greedy and will continue with the yearly releases which is a shame.

[Shagger]

I've been saying the same thing for years, but there's no way they will actually do it. Partly because contracts from the NHL, FIFA or whatever sports body they're in contract with probably call for yearly releases, but mostly because idiots still buy the game year on year, happily getting fleeced every time. Not to mention all the bullshit one would associate with a live service game is already there, so why not charge the cost of a brand new game year on year top of it all?

[Shortie]

16 minutes ago, Shagger said:

I've been saying the same thing for years, but there's no way they will actually do it. Partly because contracts from the NHL, FIFA or whatever sports body they're in contract with probably call for yearly releases, but mostly because idiots still buy the game year on year, happily getting fleeced every time. Not to mention all the bullshit one would associate with a live service game is already there, so why not charge the cost of a brand new game year on year top of it all?

I couldn't agree more with the people will still buy it year in and year out. I know myself I have done but that has been because my kids play it and I purchase it for them. Many will complain but because that is what they do and they release the game yearly, they are going to want to play it and their only option is to purchase it because what other choice do they have? I would say the best way to get them to release updates over a brand-new game at retail price would be to just not bother purchasing but that would have to get everyone on board and that would be the difficult part.

[Empire]

Path of exile, warframe, wow and most other mmorpgs at least in their prime theres plenty of good "live service" examples, they just never called it that. Its what these big publishers are trying to replicate but failing.

[Smokey]

I think this is a good idea. Every sports game is a yearly release, with minimal updates, mostly just roster changes and very small 'improvements'. Definitely doesn't deserve the $70 price tag each year.  I tend to skip 2 to 3 years between buying an NHL game for this reason.  A live-service model with just 1 game per sport, might be a better way of doing things and maybe charge $20 for a roster update each 'season'. 

[Kane99]

On 11/29/2022 at 4:41 PM, Shagger said:

I've been saying the same thing for years, but there's no way they will actually do it. Partly because contracts from the NHL, FIFA or whatever sports body they're in contract with probably call for yearly releases, but mostly because idiots still buy the game year on year, happily getting fleeced every time. Not to mention all the bullshit one would associate with a live service game is already there, so why not charge the cost of a brand new game year on year top of it all?

They could solve it by releasing something like a battle pass, that way they can be appeased. The only issue I'd see there, is finding content to include in each battle pass or lets say season pass. I can't imagine you can do much with a sports game, but maybe I'm wrong. I figure cool uniforms, custom teams, stadiums, and rosters could be a start. But no clue what else they could do. Maybe new game modes as well. 

I just think that having it be one release with a season pass every year, or every few months will help. And if it's just one game over years, they can make proper changes and improve upon the game instead of releasing the same game every year. 

On top of it, I bet they'd make even more money this way. So it's kinda a win-win for them. 

[Moonface]

I wish sports games only had periodic releases when it comes time to update the overall engine/gameplay so much that a new release is warranted. Instead, most of the time they're done yearly to update the rosters and the most barebones "upgrades" get done because of a lack of time. I don't know if any others do this, but I detest the 2K WWE games because when the next game releases, they kill the servers for the current title, removing all online play and CAW sharing. If you want to use any of that stuff, you have to buy the game ASAP or you're going to miss out on it.

Unfortunately, another problem for games like WWE is licensing. Just look at the disaster that was WWE 2K22; a large number of wrestlers made for the game had to be removed because WWE released them while that game was in development. Now imagine how bad that could be if a game like that is supported for a 3+ year period; if you remove wrestlers from the game because they left the company, that's going to cause backlash. If you leave them in, there's licensing issues and remedying that means a lot of money, likely more than it's worth. Although that said, I don't know how it works when it comes to digital storefronts continuing to sell older WWE titles. My guess is if a wrestler leaves after the release there's some sort of grace period for the game, similar to titles like Forza that eventually get pulled from digital storefronts when the car licenses expire. But if the game is actively being supported, it might be a different story.

[Justin11]

It could work that way but I don't think that would be as profitable to the game company as to when you have an entirely new game out on a yearly basis.

Though I Know some are just repetitive with nothing new added to it but these game companies are all in this for profit.

[Scorpion]

You make a great point! A singular, updated sports game could save money and time while encouraging creativity in content. Let's innovate!