Xbox Co-Creator: Naughty Dog's Size Could Not Handle Live-Service Game

Laura Fryer, widely recognized as one of the original architects of the Xbox console and the founder of Microsoft Game Studios, has become a prominent voice on her YouTube channel, offering candid commentary on the gaming industry.

Her latest remarks target Naughty Dog and their abandoned live-service title inspired by The Last of Us. Fryer expressed bewilderment at the project's greenlighting, suggesting executive oversight was lacking in due diligence. She contends that a studio of Naughty Dog's scale would have been incapable of managing such a project while simultaneously developing their renowned single-player narratives. Therefore, she believes the cancellation was the correct course of action.

"I always return to the larger question of why they started this game in the first place. Where was the planning? Live service games are not a mystery. There is a wealth of data they could have looked at to understand what it would take to make this type of game. You have new maps. You have new modes, new weapons, new seasons, balance patches. It's an infinite treadmill. Any studio head could have done the math on what a team the size of Naughty Dog could realistically support. They could have seen very clearly that a team the size of Naughty Dog could never support a live-service game and all of their incredible cinematic solo games. It wasn't possible."

Despite these apparent oversights, development on the game persisted for seven years. Fryer credits Bungie's later analysis for finally illuminating the true demands of live-service models.

"But instead of doing that analysis, they went ahead and let the game move forward. They let it run for 7 years. Finally, Bungie was brought in to do an analysis in 2023, and their confrontation with reality about player retention and what it really takes is what finally convinced people that this could be a problem."

As previously reported, the game was reportedly 80% complete when it was canceled, a decision that significantly impacted the team and led to several departures. However, Fryer maintains this was the only sensible option, as continuing would have relegated Naughty Dog to a live-service support role.

"I've seen this play out many times before, where you have a studio that has already spent many years and millions of dollars, and they feel like they have to ship the game anyway, that they have no choice, even though they know the long-term live service support will be brutal. Then the game comes out half-baked, the team burns out on endless updates, and it usually ends badly."

Ultimately, Fryer views the cancellation as the right decision, given that the project should never have been approved initially. She believes it allows Naughty Dog to return to their strength: single-player narrative experiences.

"In my opinion, it was the right decision, even though it hurt the team that worked so hard on it. They chose to go back to what was the bread and butter of their studio, single-player narrative games."

Do you agree with Fryer's assessment?