Empulse and Splitgate both shut down development as devs pivot away from live-service shooters entirely
1047 Games has ended active development on both Empulse and Splitgate: Arena Reloaded, saying neither live-service shooter earns enough to cover dedicated-server costs. The games will remain playable through peer-to-peer servers, but players should not expect further updates; the decision also marks the studio’s move away from the live-service shooter model it has pursued for a decade.
Empulse launched earlier in 2026 as a Titanfall-inspired shooter, while Splitgate 2 was temporarily shut down after a difficult launch before returning as Arena Reloaded. Neither attracted a sustainable audience, with Arena Reloaded reportedly averaging fewer than 1,000 daily Steam players at the start of 2026; 1047 says its next project may differ substantially from its portal-shooter and mech-driving games.
- 1047 ends development on Empulse and Splitgate: Arena Reloaded.
- Both games remain playable via peer-to-peer servers.
- The studio is moving away from live-service shooters.
New here? Start with this
1047 Games is the studio behind Splitgate, a shooter series known for letting players create portals to move around arenas. It later developed Splitgate 2, which returned after a difficult launch as Splitgate: Arena Reloaded, and Empulse, a shooter featuring fast movement and mech driving.
Both games were designed as live-service shooters: games intended to keep running and receive updates after release. That model depends on maintaining enough players and income to support ongoing costs, including servers. 1047 says it is moving away from this approach as it considers what to make next.
The decision matters to players because the games are expected to remain playable through peer-to-peer connections, but will no longer receive updates. It also reflects the challenge of sustaining multiplayer games when their audiences are too small to cover the costs of operating them.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
These games retain dedicated communities, and rather than abandoning players, the studio could have explored sustainable alternatives such as reduced server infrastructure, crowdfunding, or community-operated servers. Shutting down established IPs damages player trust and squanders potential for future revitalisation. There is genuine value in supporting niche games beyond immediate profitability, and abandoning these players reflects a purely transactional approach that overlooks long-term community relationships and the studio's broader reputation.
The case against
Live-service games require expensive ongoing server maintenance that these titles no longer generate sufficient revenue to sustain. The studio must allocate resources responsibly to ensure its own financial viability and ability to fund future projects; continuing to operate at a loss is untenable. With player counts dropping below 1,000 daily users, the games lack an audience large enough to justify operational costs. Shutting down unsustainable operations and pivoting toward more promising projects represents the financially responsible decision necessary for the business to remain viable.