The Great Gaming Divide: What Players Want vs. What Publishers Make
A recent industry survey has highlighted a frustrating contradiction in the video game world. While the majority of players express a clear preference for single-player experiences, major publishers continue to pour resources into multiplayer live service games. This disconnect has left many gamers, like reader Gamborne, feeling ignored by the very companies that should be catering to them.
The feature, published on November 22, 2025, points to an interview with the boss of IO Interactive as a key insight. It was suggested that publishers are obsessed with creating the games they want to be hits, rather than listening to what their audience actually desires.
The Indie Revolution and Publisher Stagnation
Big companies are making fewer single-player titles than ever, constantly rolling the dice on live service games in the hope of a massive payday. The reader argues that the notion these corporations are creating art or care about anything beyond profit is laughable.
In stark contrast, the rise of indie gaming demonstrates a different path to success. Indie developers keep prices low and make games people genuinely want to play. More importantly, they often create from a place of passion, not just for profit. This passion is reflected in the industry's highest accolades; almost all nominations for Game of the Year at The Game Awards are from indie studios or smaller publishers like IO Interactive.
Major publishers like EA, Take-Two, and Ubisoft are criticised for their reliance on bloated, $300 million projects that take a decade to develop. While games like Battlefield 6 and the anticipated GTA 6 still generate interest, the reader contends these giants are no longer the heart of the industry. They are stuck in a cycle of sequels, with Activision's singular focus on Call Of Duty cited as a risky strategy.
The Financial Incentive Behind Multiplayer Push
So why do publishers persist with this strategy? The answer is simple: money. Multiplayer games are far more lucrative. If a player enjoys a multiplayer title, they often encourage friends to buy it too. Furthermore, the integration of microtransactions, DLC, and cosmetics generates infinitely more revenue than a single-player game that might be played once and sold on.
Publishers, therefore, have a vested interest in convincing us to want these types of games. Video game trends, the reader argues, are not always set by gamers but by corporate business plans.
The piece ends with a call to action. Gamers are urged to break away from the tracks laid by big publishers and embrace indie creators. By choosing not to buy the latest annual sequel, consumers can send a powerful message. As consumers we have the power over publishers, it should be us they're trying to please, not themselves. The reader expresses hope that this could be the year that balance of power begins to shift.
