While not the technical aspect, Hippy has said some stuff on Twitter about it recently; it essentially boils down to return on investment for using time/resources etc being put on it rather than other content, with how things currently are at Bungie it's going to be significantly harder to justify player housing over other paid things like Frontiers/Episode content. [quote]Oh man, soooo many devs wanted this when I was there. It’s be so dope but phewwwwww would a lot of things need to change in the game and resource-wise internally to make that happen with the ROI at a level that would mark it as a beneficial inclusion. The dreaaaaam[/quote] [quote]Return of Interest. Basically, it's much profit/value you’re getting compared to what you spent. It’s like asking, "Was this worth the money and effort we put into it?" You calculate ROI by taking the profit or benefit gained from something, subtracting the cost of investment, and dividing that by the cost again. Live-service games have an entirely different level of complexity because you're not dealing with 1-2 Target Audiences, you're dealing with an ever-evolving mashup of 7-13. The more complicated (re: graphics, story immersion, continuation) the more complicated, the more complicated the more risk, the more risk the tighter LT gets on scope, the tighter LT gets on scope allows for bad actors that only care about the bottom line and not the craft of creating entire worlds via entertainment thus leading to where we currently are in the state of AAA games.[/quote] [quote]Yes, player interest is a massive component. Unfortunately though - with the listed process - that's not the only component. I always joke that live-service is the final Bloodborne boss of games. It's complicated as hell and it can change on a dime but restructuring doesn't have that same turnaround time. In the age of instant gratification, studios MUST make the decision, then stand by the decision, on if they are the trendsetter or the trendsettee. Both have equal value but both require very different structure. Make the decision and then stand by it. That's why "shaking things up" has a lot more risk in live-service and why that expectation has to be set early on. Warframe is a PHENEMENAL example of this. They have a very collaboratively relationship with the leadership teams from everything I've seen. My interview with them was one of the most positive experiences I've had in games. It's open but more importantly, it's not afraid to take risks if there is enough passion behind it. This is also how Bungie has been off and on. Bungie has taking massive risks since the start of their Chicago days. Sometimes they pay off and sometimes they don't but now, in today's climate, that risk is harder to justify, especially as we continue to see the integrity of games leadership continue to decline. It's also why so many devs rally behind Larian Studios leadership. They one among a few that are setting the standard on crafting amazing experiences without sacrificing your people or your vision for it.[/quote]