How does a game die? Most game's barely live to begin with. Countless titles barely garnering 100 players, fading into obscurity the very next week. For the bigger singeplayer titles, many still have their player base erode away eventually. There might be a stalwart few still dedicated to the game, but for all intents and purposes the community has died. The most lasting of their kind often stay popular either through player innovation through challenges like speedrunning and modding such as with Skyrim's community. Tetris, a classic game and personal favorite, is kept alive over the years by player's attempts to delve further into the game, to beat highscores and reach further killscreens. The most notable news in the community is when someone learns a method to use the controller faster so that they might be able to beat the last record holder. The game's that last longest either have such an addictive and high glass ceiling gameplay loop like tetris, or have such a creative and open ended landscape that allows for deep player innovation and customization like skyrim. These games live and die based on the player. That is not necessarily the case for other game types though.

Multiplayer game's have a variety of ways to last, but also a deep well of ways to be killed. Most multiplayer game's rely on player vs player innovation. Whoever comes up with the best strategy, whoever can pull off the better combo, whoever has better aim. Their core gameplay loop is based around player innovation just like singleplayer games, but even more directly. For most multiplayer games there is no major modding community. For competitive games there might not even be a singleplayer mode to speed run. They live and die off their player base. Some live far longer than expected, Super Smash Bros. Melee still has an active competitive scene 23 years after its release, and with multiple sequels to compete against at that. An incredibly high skill ceiling along with innovation in playstyle has kept it's player base alive and kicking(among other attacks) far longer than one might expect. But, sorry I'm off topic, I've been talking too much about how these game's survive. I've yet to tell you the worst way a game dies. When it's killed off.

Overwatch was a revolutionary game at it's release. A character focused, first person shooter, with dozens of interesting unique mechanics for each character, and a colorful unique world that had the player base begging for deeper lore. They were in a position to take the world by storm, and for many years they did. Millions of concurrent players, a whole esports league with dedicated fans, and unique constantly shifting metas that changed with every single patch or character addition. With a dev team constantly adding new game modes, characters, maps, and just content in general to bring players new and old into the fray, you could never have imagined the game's downfall. Until it felt inevitable. Update's came fewer and farther in between, the changes were either of minimal importance or so significant they set the meta in stone, characters and maps became a rarity as they focused on the next big thing, Overwatch 2! The supposed saving grace! Sure their original heavily adored and cherished game was stagnating and dying out as the live service aspect of it started to feel less live, but hey, we'd be getting a singleplayer campaign, and character trees, and new gamemodes and maps! Except that wasn't all true either. It debuted with no singleplayer campaign or character trees, or any of the unique systems expected. In fact, many aspects of the original game that added flavor and excitement had been removed. The lootbox system allowing players to gradually get nearly any cosmetic in the game had been replaced with a battlepass, another excuse to garner money from players. It even impacted the gameplay itself, with new characters being unlocked far faster for people who paid for the battlepass, allowing access to the, usually highly imbalanced and broken new characters, faster for those willing to shell out the funds. Things like medals, match achievement cards, and being “on fire” when a player performs well, had all been removed as well. The charm and freedom of the game had been sucked out to make more room for corporate greed. Multiple small scandals occurred around their shop and battlepass system. The singleplayer campaign attempt was a glorified copy of their previous special event systems, with no major upgrades or changes, horrible AI, and a severe drought of variety in terms of content. Certain top executives and shareholders were trying to milk the player base for all they could. Live service had changed from actually improving and adding to the game, to merely adding new cosmetics to the battlepass and store. Overwatch and it's potentially beautiful legacy, had been killed. That's not to say there are no more players. With some changes, such as the removal of certain upper management, the acquisition by microsoft, and the public revelation of other scandals within Activision, there has been some small resurgence of Overwatch two, especially with every release of actual new content such as new Heroes. What Overwatch was, died. But it's remnants live on in a variety of ways. Swallowed up and rebirthed into something new.

The Overwatch E-Sports League understandably crumbled during the collapse of Overwatch. The professional players started migrating either back to mainstays like CSGO, or moving onto newer games. One of the most popular games post fall of Overwatch, being Valorant. It's had a titanic rise in the gaming scene, combining unique hero abilities similar to Overwatch, with the base gunplay reminiscent of CSGO. It is by no means a perfect game, it too utilizes a battlepass of cosmetics, but there is no gameplay advantage to be found there. It might not have every feature players are begging for cough a replay system cough but it has kept updating with new maps, new gamemodes occasionally, and new agents to play as. There has been no major stagnation or overly obnoxious recycling of content. People can pay to unlock these agents faster, and although not a system I believe in, there is no betrayal of expectations. There was never a promise it would be different for this game, there was never a prior status quo for them to disrupt. The key difference is that there was no direct betrayal of player expectations and promises. For a Live Service Game(LSG), Valorant is the safe middle of the pack. Updating and changing, but sticking to it's core systems and gameplay. Never experimenting too far, nor stagnating, not innocent of greedy tactics and excessively expensive cosmetics, but upfront, consistent, and honest about it, without letting it majorly affect the game's community. 

On the most extreme but surprisingly stable side of the spectrum, there is Fortnite. It too received some of the playerbase and professionals from the collapse of Overwatch, bringing them into the folds of the Jack of all Trades, Master of a few, ever shifting eldritch abomination of a game. Fortnite in many ways succeeds in what Overwatch wanted to get from being a Live Service game. It may be constantly shifting and changing to the point of absurdity, just recently shifting from a greek god theme, to now adding the characters and bending of Avatar The Last Airbender. It has a thriving battlepass and store(with no gameplay impact), with each battlepass contributing to the purchase and sometimes fully covering the cost of the next one. Fortnite has also had some of the most massive E-sport events in recent years, with millions of dollars on the line. Fortnite has a throw everything at the wall and see what sticks. It has adopted mechanics and cosmetics from a massive variety of modern media, it has countless gamemodes some of which are barely played and others which are constantly running, it has a decently high skill ceiling in it's main gunplay, and each new mechanic or tool is a new means of adaptation and innovation from the player base. 

It's admittedly, absolutely terrifying. It is also the rational evolution of live service games. Gaming has always been a fast paced environment, but now general players, professionals, and public interest jumps from one live service game to the next. Each game having their own cycle of life, death, and rebirth with new additions or tournaments bringing interest back. This is the Ouroboros of the gaming industry. The question is, what does this mean for the future of gaming.

The idea of LSGs or Games as a Service(GaaS) has admittedly, been around for some time already. This model was realized years ago with the development of MMORPGs(Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games) like World Of Warcraft, RuneScape, and plenty others. The jump from MMORPGs and the like to skill based or tactical shooters, in relation to LSGs and GaaS, is a more modern event. No more waiting for the next Call of Duty or Halo in a year, get your fix of competitive multiplayer fighting only a month or two away. Constantly. Don't like what they did in Overwatch 2? Try out Valorant. Bored there? Jump to Fortnite. Oh look something interesting's happening this month back with Overwatch. With the cycling of attention, players, and professionals from one to the next, there is admittedly the social fear of us drowning ourselves in methods of distraction. Constantly finding the next eye-catching, attention-span-of-a-goldfish-keeping, bright and colorful next update. 

It's easy to be pessimistic about these games and their cycle. But these games can, do, and will die in a more real and permanent way. There is only so much content that can be added before there is too much bloat. Too many mechanics, characters, and variety before it is impossible for modern players to keep up. Fortnite tries their best to reduce this by swapping out mechanics and items from one season to the next and keeping only what make sense. This however is only a temporary solution. Studios stall, creativity wanes. Each Live Service Game gradually stagnates. Popularity only lasts so long. Eventually, even if they manage to keep up the unique and interesting updates, a different game comes along eventually. Takes their place in the cycle pushing out the previous game. Valorant's a relative newcomer to the field. What will happen when the next Valorant comes out. Or the one after that. There is only so much attention to give in the world. 

The Ouroboros comes out different each time. Not necessarily stronger, but stranger. Each game something slightly newer, slightly better hopefully. I am not trying to paint these LSGs as evil. Nor the cycle of players as something to be demeaned. This cycle keeps the energy of gaming alive, it is what keeps these pro events and teams going. That obsessiveness to compete, to fight and grow and change in these ever evolving arenas whether as a professional, or as a kid dreaming of being one. Esports has been relying on this cycle to grow, allowing for this dream and the excitement it brings to continue for millions of people. There is value to be found in that, drive we should nurture and direction to give. But that's the important part. The difficult part. As we cycle through these games, as we let our attention shift, we need to be conscious of what we support. It is easy to get pulled in by the newest exciting update, but we can't let ourselves fall into encouraging overtly greedy, dishonest, or morally bankrupt studios and practices. If we do, we only reinforce that, we only let the communities and games we love fall even further into disrepair. This beautiful terrifying ever changing amalgamation of games is only made of what we look at. The currency of the modern age has for some time now been attention. Spend it wisely.