Former PlayStation CEO says he left Sony partially because of shift to live-service models

Cal Jeffrey

Posts: 4,447   +1,585
Staff member
Editor's take: As an old-school single-player gamer, I will never understand the allure of the live-service model. Between the cheaters, the nickel-and-diming microtransactions, and the toxic children you are forced to play with, I just don't see the value as a consumer. I'm in good company. Former PlayStation Boss doesn't get it either.

When Shawn Layden left Sony in 2019, it came as a shock to PlayStation fans. Layden had spent more than half of his life with the company (32 years), with the last few in upper executive positions, including president and CEO of SCEA and Chairman of Sony Worldwide Studios.

Layden's abrupt departure came just before the PlayStation 5's debut. At the time, there were rumblings of a dispute between him and SIE President Jim Ryan. Layden later dispelled the rumors, telling Bloomberg he had left out of exhaustion and felt it was just a good time to "put the pin" in it.

The former PlayStation boss recently sat down for an interview with Save State Plus (above) and said that aside from just being time, he disagreed with Sony's increasing focus on continuous monetization, including live-service gaming. Live-service games and subscription models were not a good fit for him.

"To be honest, you know, the company was making some strategic decisions about where they want to take the platform in the future with a heavy emphasis in games as a service, live-service gaming, subscription formulas, recurring revenue, whatnot, and that was kind of not my wheelhouse. I just make things like God of War and Spider-Man and Last of Us and Uncharted. Horizon. I didn't have the vision or the energy to try to, you know, take it to this this new area of live-service gaming so, all that considered, it seemed like a good time to step down after 32 years at Sony."

Long before the release of the PlayStation 5, Sony was moving its business model to focus more on live service games and subscriptions. Layden had a front-row seat to these changes, so he chose to leave right before all the major shifts in PlayStation Plus and first-party production started.

The fruits of this restructuring were a revamped multi-tiered PlayStation Plus that is doing well and multiplayer microtransactional games, which are hit-and-miss at best. Sony invested heavily in Concord, a phenomenal flop with a peak concurrent player count of 2,388. It was so bad that Sony delisted it less than two weeks after launch, making it the third fastest flop in live-service gaming history, according to DualShockers.

His revelation is not too surprising. Layden has openly criticized the general direction the games industry is headed. Last year at Gamescom, Layden noted that publishers have stopped focusing on making fun games and instead spend all their energy on monetization. He also believes that PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series consoles mark the last of the big leaps in console hardware.

That said, Layden and Sony hold no ill will. Layden had 30+ rewarding years with the company and left on good terms for greener pastures. Sony waved him farewell in 2019, saying, "His visionary leadership will be greatly missed. We wish him success in future endeavors and are deeply grateful for his years of service. Thanks for everything, Shawn!"

Permalink to story:

 
Let's be honest. We have examples of live-service games done well. I prefer them over games that seem to be pushed out unfinished every year or two to keep shareholders happy. I have a massive beef with EA/DICE, trust me.

All products and services come down to execution. His fears I feel are more about how he knew the industry would react, rather than what could happen if lead in the right direction. Toxic children? Mute. Report. Kick from party. Find a new server. This guy sounds like he hates online gaming as a whole. He was right to leave.
 
Let's be honest. We have examples of live-service games done well. I prefer them over games that seem to be pushed out unfinished every year or two to keep shareholders happy. I have a massive beef with EA/DICE, trust me.

All products and services come down to execution. His fears I feel are more about how he knew the industry would react, rather than what could happen if lead in the right direction. Toxic children? Mute. Report. Kick from party. Find a new server. This guy sounds like he hates online gaming as a whole. He was right to leave.

Maybe a lot of people don't have the time or energy to waste on being an unpaid moderator...ever think of that? Its great to be able to play with friends but not if it means being forced to put up with the dregs of humanity. Playing online is great, but not if its behind a recurring paywall where you have no control over the experience.
 
Intelligent gamers will agree with this position. The mass of the consumer base in the world has sort of a rotten edge to it. This is why the appeal should cater to the mass rather than the few for business strategy and to remain competitive in the business market with other gaming providers willing to accept this truth. However for the intelligent gamers, there is still retro gaming, adventure titles, experience replicas that are quite appealing which don't have betas being released with continuous changes and microtransactions. So leaving on this disagreement is likely due to bad fit. Intelligence, creativity, and productivity rarely enjoy the pace of mediocre production.
 
Back