Now that it has moved away from the gray area, this billion-dollar market segment is becoming increasingly promising.

2025 is shaping up to be a banner year for interactive live-action games.

First, *The Dating Game* (later renamed *Emotional Fraud Prevention Simulator*) burst onto the scene, sweeping away last year’s market slump with 1.1 million copies sold in its first month and setting a strong precedent for domestic interactive live-action games. Subsequently, *Prosperous Realm* stood out from the crowd thanks to the first-mover advantage of its large-scale production, with 1 million copies sold across all platforms continuing the previous momentum.Furthermore, *Oh No! I’m Surrounded by Beauties 2* and *Beautiful Lady, Please Don’t Disturb My Cultivation* followed closely behind, with both sales and critical acclaim validated by the market. Looking ahead, *Gazing Northward*, produced by Emperor Jin—director of *The Invisible Guardian*—is already gearing up and poised for release.

Last year, I pointed out that thanks to the massive success of *Oh No! I’m Surrounded by Beauties*, the market size for interactive live-action games had already surpassed 100 million yuan. After a year of sluggish performance, the overall market this year has clearly taken another leap forward.

The frequent emergence of hit titles indicates that the overall market is booming and the user base has reached a high level of maturity.This is indeed reflected in this year’s more detailed category data. Tea House specifically dug into the relevant data for live-action interactive cinematic games on Steam for this year (October 2024 to October 2025) and found that the number of such titles this year has reached a staggering 58—a significant increase of 12 compared to last year’s 42.

There are 50 games with over 100 reviews, 24 with over 500, 12 with over 1,000, and 5 with over 2,000. Among them, *The Pickup Artist* has the most reviews, with 47,432.

In addition, this year’s interactive live-action games have exhibited another notable trend: whereas last year’s offerings were dominated by dating sims (with some borderline content), this year’s market has seen a veritable explosion of genres. Beyond the currently popular historical costume themes, genres such as crime investigation, horror, suspense, science fiction, and comedy—which were previously uncommon—have also made frequent appearances in this year’s market.

What’s even more interesting is that in the top 10 domestic game sales chart released in the middle of this year, live-action interactive games accounted for three spots, clearly demonstrating that this thriving trend is more than just a fleeting phenomenon. All signs point to the fact that domestic live-action interactive games may be entering a new era.

To be honest, if this were last year, I would have been extremely pessimistic about the future prospects of this market.As the cold, hard data from last year clearly shows, the emergence of a single massive hit led many to mistakenly believe that interactive live-action dating games were the next big trend in the domestic gaming industry, prompting a flood of developers to rush into this niche. The problem, however, is that this has always been a relatively niche game genre, and the generally low pricing strategy means that only explosive sales—the kind that break through to a wider audience—can potentially yield the so-called high returns.

As a result, the state of the market last year was such that while there was a flood of interactive live-action games and videos marketed as "dating sims," their quality varied widely. Most titles sold only a few thousand to ten thousand copies, and not a single title emerged as a true blockbuster. Even "Wan Dan" itself failed to recapture its former glory.

So, what exactly is the market for interactive live-action games like, and where is this genre headed in the future?Teahouse specifically interviewed several industry veterans, including Emperor Jin, director of *The Invisible Guardian*; Jin Yecheng, partner at Genki Capital; and Dong Keke, head of publishing at Shenjiang Kunyu Studio. Together, they analyzed the development trajectory of live-action interactive cinema-games from the perspectives of product development, distribution, and investment, in an effort to explore the future of this emerging domestic genre.

01

What kind of market is this?

Emperor Jin told me that, in his view, interactive live-action games currently constitute a niche subgenre within the single-player game sector, and therefore their player base is relatively small compared to other game genres. However, he also believes that with the continuous emergence of high-quality content, these games may demonstrate greater market potential in the near future.

Given that *The Invisible Guardian* remains a benchmark title in the live-action interactive gaming genre, they have concluded that products in this field require creators to deliver better game content, more meticulously crafted scripts, and more refined gameplay mechanics to players. In turn, players are willing to pay for high-quality products and choose the best ones available, which ultimately has the potential to foster a virtuous cycle in the market.

Looking at the market’s overall development, he divided it into three iterations. Interestingly, in his view, each of these eras was pretty “awful.”

Version 1.0 marked the era of "Invisible Guardian," setting a truly unprecedented precedent. Yet precisely because it was so exceptional, he believes that Version 1.0 was, in fact, a rather difficult era. The reason is simple: even the original team might not be able to recreate such a successful product, let alone other development teams.

The end result was that, with that benchmark set, other developers looked at it and concluded that the market was too difficult, too niche, and simply unviable—to the point that, for years afterward, the live-action interactive gaming market remained “unusually quiet.”

Version 2.0 marks the era of "Wan Dang Mei Nu." There is no doubt that "Wan Dang Mei Nu" has achieved tremendous commercial success, but it has also led to significant misperceptions in the market’s overall outlook. Emperor Jin believes that dating sims are a niche category within interactive live-action games, but they by no means represent the entirety of this sector.

In addition, this subcategory faces two challenges: first, the low barrier to entry has led to severe homogenization and inconsistent quality; second, the novelty wears off quickly, making it difficult to sustain positive feedback for players.

Consequently, the issue that Version 2.0 brought to the market was a flood of capital pouring into a relatively narrow product category, with a steady stream of similar products being released. This quickly eroded players’ initial sense of novelty, ultimately leading to a distortion of the market’s overall development trajectory to some extent.

Version 3.0 features games like *Liao Nu*, *Shengshi Tianxia*, and the upcoming *Jiangshan Beiwang Shidai*. These titles share a common trait: they are neither the flawless, invisible guardians of the past nor the one-dimensional "beauty-focused" games of yesteryear. Instead, they represent a diverse array of high-quality, story-driven productions that embrace a wide range of genres—a formula for success that can be replicated.

While the exploration of Version 3.0 may seem endless, it will ultimately reveal to the market which types of interactive live-action games hold the most value. Only then will creators truly understand how to develop such products, leading to the gradual emergence of a steady stream of titles that are genuinely suited for this format in the coming period.

Jin Yecheng, an investor at Genki Capital, shared a similar perspective. Although he has previously invested in a wide range of sectors, he has been deeply involved in the live-action interactive cinema and gaming sector for 10 years. In his view, the current market for live-action interactive cinema and gaming is characterized by a relatively small existing market size, moderate growth rates, and steady expansion; overall, the sector is still in its early stages.

He also pointed out an interesting phenomenon: the player base for interactive live-action games is quite unique—it’s not entirely comprised of traditional Steam users who purchase games outright. From this perspective, such games are better positioned to break out of their niche. While traditional game genres often require a substantial player base to gain mainstream traction, interactive live-action games, thanks to their unique gameplay and viral potential, can attract a significant number of players outside their core audience with sales of around 100,000 to 200,000 copies.

In fact, these characteristics of the genre became apparent very early on. Previously, among the user base of *Invisible Guardian*, players downloading the Steam platform for the first time accounted for over 30% of the total, and many of them were more interested in the game’s cinematic elements. It is precisely this group of new players that is more likely to drive traffic to the platform.

It is clear that the market for interactive live-action games remains relatively niche, yet it holds the potential to break into the mainstream. The current proliferation of diverse game genres appears to be an inevitable stage in the industry’s development, gradually moving from a chaotic exploratory phase toward greater clarity.

Di Huang admitted today: ““Just as the film market hasn’t performed as well in recent years as it used to, audiences’ demand for high-quality content has never waned—they simply haven’t been able to find better works. So, fundamentally, we view the live-action interactive cinema and gaming market with a relatively optimistic outlook. In the future, it may evolve into a user experience market with higher demands for storytelling, immersion, and premium content. I believe live-action interactive cinema and gaming has the potential to develop these market characteristics.”

02

Whether it’s profitable or not is the question

Interactive live-action games have always prioritized experience over gameplay, making it increasingly difficult for creators to innovate or differentiate themselves in terms of gameplay. So, compared to short films—which lack eye-catching visual content—and traditional games—which offer somewhat limited gameplay—many people are curious: what kind of experience and what do players actually want from interactive live-action games?

Shengjiang Kunyu Studio has previously released and produced several live-action interactive cinematic games, which have been well-received in the market. After interacting with players on numerous occasions, Dong Keke, the head of publishing, realized that “interactivity” is an indispensable element of live-action interactive cinematic games.

He explained that this unique interactivity allows players to move beyond passively watching the plot; instead, they can decide the story’s direction themselves, thereby altering and influencing the fates of the characters. This sense of participation is something traditional TV shows and movies simply cannot offer. Of course, at its core, it all hinges on a compelling story—one that fosters a deeper emotional connection and unlocks novel gaming experiences.

Player Reviews of "The Girl-Hunting Game"

Emperor Jin, who is also a creator, pointed out that this type of interactive storyline allows players to receive substantial positive feedback in return for their efforts. From this perspective, for players seeking higher quality and a more immersive experience, the experience offered by live-action interactive games aligns almost perfectly with their needs.

At the same time, the current content market is relatively lacking in this kind of perfectly balanced sense of satisfaction and gameplay.Why is this the case? Users seeking pure entertainment may turn to TikTok and short-form videos, while players looking for more sophisticated gameplay and a richer experience will opt for AAA titles or large-scale games. This creates a gap in the market: there is a demand for story-driven experiences with high intensity and immediate feedback that don’t become inaccessible due to overly complex controls. It is precisely to address this need that interactive live-action games have emerged.

That said, the reality is that the market is flooded with a large number of poorly made, low-quality products. Even with low price points ranging from 20 to 40 yuan, the average sales of most interactive live-action games barely reach a few thousand to over ten thousand copies, and titles selling more than 100,000 copies are few and far between.What’s even more interesting is that, according to insiders, the production cost of this year’s smash hit *The Girl-Catching Game* exceeded 10 million yuan, while *The Golden Age*, a major production, reportedly cost as much as a top-tier web series—making the disparity between revenue and costs even more striking.

Screenshots from the game *Prosperous Realm*

The flood of related R&D projects that has followed often creates the illusion that the average cost in this category is low. Is the market really that profitable? And if so, who exactly is losing money?

From an investment perspective, Jin Yecheng breaks this down into two aspects. First, as buy-to-play single-player games, live-action interactive games inherently share the same characteristics as standalone titles—namely, the vast majority fail to turn a profit. He provided some data to illustrate this point: the average survival rate (break-even rate) for standalone games is around 4%, so it is consistent with market trends that most live-action interactive games do not turn a profit.However, he also noted that once the poorly made, market-disrupting trash is weeded out, the average survival rate of the live-action interactive film and game market is around 15%, which is roughly four times that of ordinary standalone games. This is one of the reasons why a large number of developers in this sector are willing to continue entering the market.

Therefore, this issue cannot be simplistically interpreted to mean that those who do it will inevitably lose money, or that those who lose money will stop doing it. Compared to ordinary solo developers, whether the survival rate is high or low is a key factor they consider when deciding whether to proceed.

Furthermore, the so-called cost-effectiveness is a relative matter. If an advertising agency or a short-form video production company has excess production capacity and the opportunity to develop a higher-margin product, then utilizing that excess capacity is undoubtedly a cost-effective option.He particularly emphasized that investors currently bullish on live-action interactive film and gaming are not necessarily from the traditional gaming sector, but rather primarily investors from the film and television industry. Compared to the current sluggish film and television market, this emerging sector of live-action interactive film and gaming—which involves lower costs—is actually more likely to pique their interest.

Screenshots from the game *Oh No! I'm Surrounded by Beauties 2*

Dong Keke, however, provided more concrete cost figures: “In terms of costs, our investments are currently focused primarily on film and television production. The R&D costs for our gaming division are relatively lower and more manageable, so the bulk of our spending is currently concentrated on the initial stages of film and television production. Therefore, by being frugal and spending our money wisely, I believe it’s not impossible to turn a profit.”

In my view, the costs for this category can generally be divided into three ranges. The first is for projects with budgets exceeding 10 million yuan; we’ve already seen three such titles this year. These are large-scale productions with massive investments and grand settings, offering eye-catching performance effects and star-studded casts. However, the problem lies in their excessively high costs and the significant risk involved in recouping the investment.Second, the 3 to 5 million yuan range. This falls within the standard cost bracket for live-action interactive film-game experiences. Production quality is generally above average, and barring major missteps, these projects can typically guarantee sales of at least 50,000 units. Of course, overall, some turn a profit while others lose money—it feels like a 50-50 split.Third, projects under 1 million yuan tend to be first-time trials or small-team side projects. While the quality may not match the higher-budget categories, they occasionally produce unexpected hits, and I’ve seen some turn a profit.

"So I don’t think looking at cost alone is enough to determine whether a game is profitable. Some teams take a ‘small but polished’ approach, while others might invest heavily in big-budget productions in the hope of creating a hit. There are success stories for both approaches, but in the end, it all comes down to the quality of the game."

Finally, he also highlighted another key point: he recommended that developers of interactive live-action games explore cross-platform distribution—such as mobile games, Nintendo Switch, PlayStation, and Epic Games—even though revenue may not be as high as on Steam, it can still serve as a source of income. They have also experimented with the Google Play Store in markets like Southeast Asia, Japan, and South Korea. For this type of game, user acquisition performance has been fairly good, generating a steady flow of traffic and recurring revenue.

03

Every family has its own set of problems

From the macro perspective outlined above, interactive live-action games are indeed a rapidly growing and promising emerging sector. However, when viewed through the lenses of product development, distribution, and investment, the insights and perspectives within each sub-sector are like those of blind men feeling an elephant—similar yet not entirely the same.

Previously, Shenjiang Kunyu Studio focused on outsourcing and in-house development; its entry into the live-action interactive cinema-game market was the result of a serendipitous opportunity. Dong Keke told me that in 2023, when live-action interactive cinema-games were at their peak, a classmate of his who worked as a director approached him about a collaboration. At the time, many film and television companies were interested in entering the market, but since they lacked expertise in the gaming industry, most chose to partner with game developers for joint development.

At the time, Shenjiang Kunyu Studio produced and released *The Girls Who Make My Heart Flutter*, followed by *Starting with 500 Million*. Now, their third live-action interactive film-game hybrid is currently in development, and before they knew it, they had ventured further and further into this field.

Screenshot from *Starting with 500 Million*

In his view, while the core of marketing and promotion for interactive live-action games—unlike other traditional games—still relies on KOLs and player communities, there is greater flexibility when it comes to operational activities. For example, autographed photos, fan gatherings, and collaborations with influencers can all generate significant exposure for new products.

In addition, when it comes to product collaboration, it’s best to work with film and television production companies from the earliest stages of development. This is because most screenwriters at these companies tend to think in a linear fashion, whereas interactive live-action games feature numerous branching endings. By staying involved from the initial scriptwriting phase, you can save a significant amount on production costs and avoid many unnecessary detours.

Finally, he emphasized that the biggest challenge for them was controlling costs. He had previously met with several film and television production companies where budgets had skyrocketed from an initial 1 to 2 million to 4 to 5 million, and the production costs were simply out of control—which is actually quite alarming.

Di Huang, who works on the product development side, also shared some of his thoughts with me. Unlike other teams that focus on filming, his team considers script refinement to be the most important aspect; filming actually takes up only a minimal amount of time.

Di Huang said today, “We typically spend more than six months polishing our scripts. Take *Looking Northward Across the River and Mountains*, for example—it’s not yet released, but we spent at least three or four years refining the script. Filming actually takes the least amount of time in the entire development process, because if the production cycle is too long, funding can’t keep up, and costs will keep rising.”

Screenshots from the game *Looking Northward*

In his view, every aspect of an interactive live-action game is designed to serve the script. It is precisely this dedication to craftsmanship that led them to scrap and start over from scratch—even after having already written hundreds of thousands of words of drafts—simply because they felt the work wasn’t polished enough.He explained that because the user experience lacked the necessary feedback, they had no choice but to scrap it and start over. During this process, they experimented with numerous angles to effectively tell the story. Since the core plot of *Looking Northward* revolves around the Northern Expedition, there are actually many possible perspectives to approach it from—whether through the eyes of the emperor, a prince, a minister, or even a commoner. They tried nearly every angle before ultimately selecting the optimal one.

Of course, there are reasons behind his meticulous attention to the script. He admitted, “The overall scale of our game’s production isn’t very large, and our budget is extremely limited. The total production budget, when added up, is less than 5 million yuan—perhaps just a fraction of what some major productions spend.“In particular, there is still significant room for improvement in the costumes, makeup, and set design for *Looking Northward*. Therefore, we must refine the story script as much as possible to enhance players’ immersion through the narrative and mitigate some of our weaknesses. We hope to optimize the costs of costumes, makeup, and set design through successive product iterations, ultimately delivering the most perfect experience to players.”

This "online whining" actually shattered my preconceptions about the production costs of interactive live-action games.He explained that since the Northern Expedition storyline inevitably involves scenes with horses, and horses in Hengdian are billed by the hour—not only for the horses themselves but also for every movement the rider makes—they strictly limit horse-riding scenes to one hour. In fact, the script for each scene must include detailed “operating instructions” in advance,specifying how many extras were needed and for how many hours. Once the allotted time was up, they had to wrap up immediately; otherwise, if they went over time, the costs would become nearly impossible to cover.

Screenshots from the game *Looking Northward*

As for why funding is scarce, Jin Yecheng, who represents the investor side, is clearly in a better position to speak on the matter: “If you’re a traditional game investor, the live-action interactive gaming sector isn’t exactly appealing—it’s not really a promising sector.To give a simple example, investing in a roguelike or a simulation game might be more profitable than investing in this. So, I’m not saying that live-action interactive cinema games are bad; it’s just that from a purely financial and investment perspective, they’re a bit lackluster—they don’t really stand out.”

But he then changed the subject, saying that if he were a traditional film and television investor, he might consider this sector to be a good bet—or at least one that’s not the best but still better than most—since the traditional film and television industry currently appears to be in decline.

When I asked what kind of interactive live-action games would most appeal to investors like him, he replied without hesitation with three words: “high-quality production.”

In his view, interactive live-action games should follow the example of the film industry by offering a wider variety of genres and richer themes to deliver a more immersive and interactive experience; ultimately, the path to success will inevitably lie in producing high-quality, premium content.He cited an example: *The Rescue Game* is a typical example of a premium product. The development team is highly experienced and has undoubtedly conducted in-depth analyses of existing successful products and the overall market environment. They understand what kinds of themes and marketing strategies can generate sufficient buzz in the current climate, and content with this level of depth and relevance is capable of sparking emotional resonance among players.

Screenshots from *The Girl-Catching Game*

He concluded, “The overall market for interactive live-action games currently appears to be performing better, but this is actually because the failure rate is relatively low. And the low failure rate isn’t due to a lack of low-quality games, but rather because of an overall shortage of supply.Simply put, because there are ‘too many players and too few opportunities,’ some subpar games are making money they shouldn’t be making—money they likely wouldn’t have made otherwise. This makes the failure rate appear relatively low overall, and there are fewer teams losing money. But once the market reaches saturation, the ultimate deciding factor will inevitably be the quality of the product itself.”

04

Where will the future be?

For quite some time, many people have believed that the future of live-action interactive games lies in the short-form video market. The two share similar formats and target audiences seeking pure entertainment; there have even been instances where developers have repurposed leftover footage from short videos and web series to create interactive games for resale. Compared to the niche market for live-action interactive games, the short-form video market—with a market size exceeding 50 billion yuan—is clearly far more attractive.

But to my surprise, the Emperor—speaking from experience—immediately rejected the idea.

He explained that live-action interactive games and short-form dramas have both been very popular concepts in recent years, so it’s easy to associate them with one another—for example, wondering whether interactive short dramas or vertical-screen live-action interactive games might emerge. These questions likely stem from a lack of in-depth understanding of the industry.In the production process, live-action interactive video games take a more immersive and experience-driven approach, whereas short dramas prioritize quick thrills and immediate positive feedback upon release. Consequently, their target markets and audiences are entirely different.

Returning to this issue, in his view, overseas markets may represent a future direction, and interactive live-action games could also serve as a form of cultural export. In particular, they frequently receive feedback from international players, which has generally been positive. Therefore, the overseas market may still require a blockbuster hit to drive its growth, and this is likely only a matter of time.

On the other hand, as the industry has evolved from the previous state of chaos to the current era of diverse growth, most manufacturers are still searching for their direction. The trend of "good money driving out bad" is inevitable, and ultimately, the entire market will gradually stabilize.

“I believe the business model for live-action interactive cinema is quite similar to that of the film industry. Its inherent potential is undeniable, and while everyone is currently focusing on developing this space, they are essentially still searching for the right direction. I think the most crucial point is to identify the right direction with precision. We must understand that live-action interactive cinema is not a fast-moving consumer good. We’ve just witnessed the explosive growth of the short-form video market, with its rapid rise to mainstream popularity and an audience of unimaginable scale. However, as someone in the industry, I will certainly approach this with a rational perspective.”

"The growth rate of the live-action interactive film and gaming market is certainly far slower than that of the short-form video market, but its market presence—shaped by years of development—will undoubtedly endure longer. This is because these productions demand higher-quality storytelling and offer a more immersive experience. Perhaps in the future, the live-action interactive film and gaming market will follow a pattern where it takes two to three years of refinement to produce high-quality products; however, such a market will undoubtedly consist of premium, enduring content."