Single-Player Games Deserve More Than Just Lip Service

The notion that single-player games are dying has been greatly exaggerated. Despite numerous attempts to declare their demise, single-player games continue to thrive. The rise of online games, massively multiplayer games, live service games, and the metaverse has not led to the downfall of single-player games. Instead, these new forms of gaming have coexisted alongside single-player games, each with their own unique strengths and weaknesses. The CEOs of major game companies are often forced to walk a tightrope, attempting to appease both their investors and single-player game enthusiasts. Electronic Arts CEO Andrew Wilson recently faced this challenge, responding to a question about single-player games by discussing the importance of online communities before acknowledging the value of single-player experiences. This delicate balancing act is necessary because Wilson must reassure single-player game fans that EA still cares about their interests while also convincing investors that the company is committed to the more profitable live service games sector. The reality is that live service games offer higher returns on investment, making it difficult for companies like EA to prioritize single-player game development. However, there is still a significant market for single-player games, and some companies may choose to focus on this area. The future of gaming may see a divide between companies that specialize in live services and those that focus on single-player games. While live service games offer higher rewards, they also come with higher risks. In contrast, single-player games provide a more stable and predictable business model. As the gaming industry continues to evolve, it's likely that companies will need to choose which path to follow, and the verbal gymnastics of CEOs trying to appease both sides may become a thing of the past.