The Era of Enduring Games: Adapting to a New Reality

At what point does a game become "retro"? To address this question, we need to define what "retro" means. For the purpose of this discussion, let's consider a retro game as one that, although fondly remembered, has fallen outside the realm of contemporary gaming, becoming more of a historical curiosity than a competitive entertainment product. Many gamers nostalgically recall their favorite games from the 8- and 16-bit eras or the original PlayStation, occasionally revisiting them. However, these games are not expected to compete with modern releases or be judged by the same standards. We acknowledge that they belong to a bygone era. The question remains: how long does it take for a game to become retro? The answer varies depending on individual perspectives and factors. Historically, console hardware generations provided a clear distinction, with each new generation rendering the previous one obsolete. The introduction of the PlayStation, for example, made 2D games seem outdated, while the PS2's improved visuals made PS1 games appear antiquated. This line of thinking now seems outdated. We are in the fourth year of the PS5's lifespan, and the idea that a PS4 game could be considered retro is perplexing. Most PS3 and Xbox 360 games are still considered contemporary, especially with the help of backwards compatibility systems. To find games that are truly "old," we need to go back to the PS2 era. If this assertion raises an eyebrow, consider the data from Newzoo's recent report, which showed that the top ten most-played games in 2023 had an average age of over seven years. On PC, the average age was nearly ten years. This shift in the gaming industry is significant. For decades, the industry was driven by novelty, with games having a short lifespan and being quickly replaced by new releases. However, games now have longer lifespans, and the horizon for player interest is broader. Many games have long tails, and while technological progress continues, many aspects of game visuals have become "good enough," allowing players to consider older titles as still contemporary. The potential in this transition is enormous. Games businesses have long sought a long tail for their products, and now it exists for some games. However, this shift has not been without challenges. The "Stop Killing Games" campaign highlights the issue of publishers disabling games when they shut down online or live service components, leaving consumers without access to content they have paid for. Publishers have a different perspective, particularly those without a long-term successful game. They worry that their existing games will cannibalize sales of new releases, leading to a scramble to extract revenue from older games. This has resulted in some success stories, but also many failures, with games being tied to online servers and becoming unplayable when they fail. The "Stop Killing Games" campaign argues that publishers should preserve consumers' access to offline or peer-to-peer multiplayer content. This is a sympathetic position, considering consumers' perception of the value of older games. The issue is exacerbated by the fact that many games being shut down are still considered modern and contemporary by players. Regulators are taking notice of the issue of companies shutting down products without consumer consent. While it is generally permitted if the product relies on online servers, it becomes a more complex issue if the product could work without those servers. The games industry is at a crossroads, with some companies creating perennial products and others treating their output as disposable. The era of old games being swept away by technological progress is over. Games will continue to evolve, but the industry must adapt to a new reality where games have longer lifespans and remain accessible to audiences. This requires a transition in business models, creating new opportunities but also requiring publishers to accept that some products will not generate revenue after the initial sale. Every medium has made peace with this concept, from books to music to television. The games industry must do the same, recognizing the value of a strong back catalogue and the prestige it brings, even if it is not directly monetizable. The industry's failure to preserve its creative history is a concern that has been ignored at management levels, but deliberately making contemporary products inaccessible is a significant escalation that may attract regulatory attention.