• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Washington Post: Sony and Nintendo are not in-step with how the rest of the software industry works

elliot5

Member
But there is still work involved, far more than PC and Mobile anyway.And its not an irrelevant cost. MS is doing the whole Smart Delivery stuff as a marketing stunt, not out of the kindness out of their heats.They are by far the last of the Big Three in terms of hardware sales and brand recognition.I bet they are losing quite a sum of money with these "free" upgrades.

Plus, like someone else already said, its not like its free on PC and mobiles - Its expensive as hell to upgrade your phone or rig.So even with the console "fee", you still pay way less, and thats for a game that you already played once.(not sure why you would be playing it again)
Developing shippable titles on PC and mobile is way more challenging than a single hardware configuration (ps5, etc).. what even
 
Last edited:

Nautilus

Banned
Developing shippable titles on PC and mobile is way more challenging than a single hardware configurations (ps5, etc).. what even
What even what?

If developing for PC was way harder or more expensive, we would have heard about that by now. Not only that, but some consoles have been notorioisly known to be hard to develop, like the PS3, though I dont think that's the case anymore.

Plus, once you have developed your game for PC, for the most part you wont have to touch it ever again.While for consoles, you will not only have to rework it for every console gen(for the most part), but also pay all its underlying costs, such as marketing, update the graphics(because people expect you to do so), etc.
 

VAVA Mk2

Member
Ya you just pay a crap load more.

Anyway why isn't the Washington Post banned? Who cares about news by Jeff Bezos.
salt salting GIF
 

elliot5

Member
What even what?

If developing for PC was way harder or more expensive, we would have heard about that by now. Not only that, but some consoles have been notorioisly known to be hard to develop, like the PS3, though I dont think that's the case anymore.

Plus, once you have developed your game for PC, for the most part you wont have to touch it ever again.While for consoles, you will not only have to rework it for every console gen(for the most part), but also pay all its underlying costs, such as marketing, update the graphics(because people expect you to do so), etc.
I don't get your point. You're bringing up the PS3 which was yes hard to develop for, but that's kind of the point of the article and what I've said before in this thread. The modern consoles are fairly homogenous with modern x86 AMD hardware vs CELL or powerPC and whatnot of yesteryear. They are much more straightforward. Switch is an outlier with an ARM based APU which may require more effort, but idk I don't have experience with it.

The rise of SaaS engines like UE4 and Unity take away a lot of the pain of shipping to multiple platforms from a fairly unified code base. Build the game, create specific config files and hook in to specific APIs, and you can ship to basically any platform.

Giving a game like Jedi Fallen Order a "next gen update" is basically as simple as an .ini edit. Yeah some games like Ghosts may take more effort, but $10 worth? Multiplied by millions for what probably cost a few Gs worth of labor? C'mon. Games like God of War and GT7 are already being made for both platforms. Graphics are easily scalable. Again, config file.

And the reason why PC and Mobile are difficult to develop for if you're not just exporting a barebones Unity horror game is you have a huge matrix of device configs, setting options, OSes, screen sizes, input types, compatibility issues, etc. There's a reason devs prefer to ship on iOS over Android bc of the streamlined models and less OS adoption fragmentation. That and iOS users pay more.
 
Last edited:

elliot5

Member
It must be a joke. Someone should tell these people Apple doesn't make games, and should ask them that if you want to upgrade from iPhone 11 to iPhone 12 if Apple gives you that upgrade for free, if they charge you $10 or if you has to pay the full price.
Why are you talking about the cost of hardware when this is about software
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
It must be a joke. Someone should tell these people Apple doesn't make games, and should ask them that if you want to upgrade from iPhone 11 to iPhone 12 if Apple gives you that upgrade for free, if they charge you $10 or if you has to pay the full price.
You expect new hardware iterations like cellphones (or other things like TVs, stereos and microwaves) to be given to people for free or $10? The material and shipping cost on a $2000 TV is probably $1000 alone.

Software is totally different.

Sony didn't force PS4 Pro gamers to pay an extra $10 even though it had better res, frames and AF.
 
Last edited:

yurinka

Member
Why are you talking about the cost of hardware when this is about software
Why do the article compares Sony and Nintendo console upgrades to PC and mobile upgrades when Sony and Nintendo consoles aren't PC or mobiles.

And why do they talk as if Sony or Nintendo were dumb when they are swimming in money and breaking records

You expect new hardware iterations like cellphones (or other things like TVs, stereos and microwaves) to be given to people for free or $10? The material and shipping cost on a $2000 TV is probably $1000 alone.

Software is totally different.

Sony didn't force PS4 Pro gamers to pay an extra $10 even though it had better res, frames and AF.
I was making a non sensical question as a joke, similar to the nonsensical question of the article when they try to compare consoles to PC and mobile when they are so fucking different things in tons of areas. Incluing the extra costs of publishing and selling a game in consoles (retail versions, certifications, age ratings etc etc).

8I am with Sony at this. 🤣

If you go to read the original interview Jim Ryan says they will continue supporting PS4 during at least 2 or 3 years (something they always did) after the release of PS5 and explains the reasons. So exactly what they are doing.

And then he adds he wants to see the games taking advantage of the new features and technologies introduced by the new console when they release a new generation, in this case dualsense features, 3D audio, faster loading times etc. Exactly what they are doing, all games are supporting that.

He never said they wouldn't make crossgen games. He explained the strategy they are following, but due to the context of when it was made the interviewer gave that words other meaning and made his own (wrong) assumptions.
 
Last edited:

FStubbs

Member
I don't get your point. You're bringing up the PS3 which was yes hard to develop for, but that's kind of the point of the article and what I've said before in this thread. The modern consoles are fairly homogenous with modern x86 AMD hardware vs CELL or powerPC and whatnot of yesteryear. They are much more straightforward. Switch is an outlier with an ARM based APU which may require more effort, but idk I don't have experience with it.

The rise of SaaS engines like UE4 and Unity take away a lot of the pain of shipping to multiple platforms from a fairly unified code base. Build the game, create specific config files and hook in to specific APIs, and you can ship to basically any platform.

Giving a game like Jedi Fallen Order a "next gen update" is basically as simple as an .ini edit. Yeah some games like Ghosts may take more effort, but $10 worth? Multiplied by millions for what probably cost a few Gs worth of labor? C'mon. Games like God of War and GT7 are already being made for both platforms. Graphics are easily scalable. Again, config file.

And the reason why PC and Mobile are difficult to develop for if you're not just exporting a barebones Unity horror game is you have a huge matrix of device configs, setting options, OSes, screen sizes, input types, compatibility issues, etc. There's a reason devs prefer to ship on iOS over Android bc of the streamlined models and less OS adoption fragmentation. That and iOS users pay more.
Switch uses a literally off the shelf Tegra X1 so it's basically the same as mobile hardware, pretty straightforward.
 

TwiztidElf

Member
I hate the misnomer of iOS and PC forward compatibility.
I have iOS games that don't work and are incompatible on current and latest iOS models and hardware.
I also have PC games that don't work and are incompatible on current and latest PC models and hardware. (I can get these working by stuffing around with old PC emulators and the like though).
 
Last edited:
Console gaming has existed since long before mobile and outside of hardware BC (which we currently have with PS5), if the same game launched across two generations of hardware in previous generations, you had to basically pay for the game twice. There was no upgrade path at all.

Bitching about a $10 upgrade fee while pointing at mobile and PC gaming is a puerile red herring, because those are both entirely different platform concepts. In both the case of PC and mobile there is no fixed hardware and so games are not even developed in the same way as it is on consoles. Thus the business models are different by necessity because the cost structures for games development are dissimilar... and vastly so in the case of mobile where games don’t even come close to $100m+ dev costs.
 
Last edited:

yurinka

Member
Gene Park is a better gaming journalist than anyone at Kotaku or Bloomberg.
Well, this is pretty easy :messenger_tears_of_joy:

But this article is pure garbage that makes dumb comparisions that don't make sense at all. The mobile casino games from mobiles infested with microtransactions and mind tricks to keep you playing and paying can't be compared to Sony and Nintendo console games at all. And same goes with the costs of making your game compatible with a new device in console vs PC or mobile.
 
Last edited:
In the iphone example, is the same game sold for more if you have the iphone 12?
Alot of games have been delisted, and dont work all together.


Like Trainyard
pzsae_1.png

Pro Zombie Soccer - I cant even find this in my purchase history even though I have every iPhone made available to me.
 

elliot5

Member
Why do the article compares Sony and Nintendo console upgrades to PC and mobile upgrades when Sony and Nintendo consoles aren't PC or mobiles.

Because software is software. They're all 64 bit x86 developed programs made in C++ or some other language on PS4 and PS5 and Xbox One and Xbox Series. Nintendo is ARM but still probably C++ just a different compiler.

Why doesn't Sony charge $70 for Horizon Zero Dawn or Days Gone on PC if they have enhanced graphics and support for kb/m. Ultra wide, etc? Who cares if it's the same game, there was extra work done and enhancements to justify the $10?

If Sony wants to charge $70 for PS5 exclusives that's their business. I don't have to like it, but they're free to do that / people can decide on their purchases.

Just don't act like games made specifically for the PS5 and PS4 from the start, and even older games getting small bumps in enhancements is justified by a fee lmao. It's just greed.
 

MrA

Banned
nintendo's actions being indecipherable and the whole garbage with the virtual console may be a fair criticism, but they sell complete products for a fixed price
and I won't pay 70 USD for ps5 (not that I ever paid 60 for ps4 games either) and if you don't like paying 10 dollars more, by all means, complain about (AND DON"T BUY THE GAME AT FULL PRICE EITHER) but with the ps5, it's like 99% back compatible, isn't it? with said purchases carrying over?
but acting like mobile is some sort of gold standard is bananas,
updated to long longer support your os, deal with it, and don't think you can use the older version
new os rendered your game unplayable, if the dev doesn't upgrade it, deal with it
and oh yeah, why make a real game when mobile users would rather drop a fortune on microtransactions than pay 10 dollars for a fully-featured game
 

yurinka

Member
Because software is software. They're all 64 bit x86 developed programs made in C++ or some other language on PS4 and PS5 and Xbox One and Xbox Series. Nintendo is ARM but still probably C++ just a different compiler.

Why doesn't Sony charge $70 for Horizon Zero Dawn or Days Gone on PC if they have enhanced graphics and support for kb/m. Ultra wide, etc? Who cares if it's the same game, there was extra work done and enhancements to justify the $10?

If Sony wants to charge $70 for PS5 exclusives that's their business. I don't have to like it, but they're free to do that / people can decide on their purchases.

Just don't act like games made specifically for the PS5 and PS4 from the start, and even older games getting small bumps in enhancements is justified by a fee lmao. It's just greed.
I'd like you to pay the PS5 devkit, QC certification testing, age ratings and so on, plus the cost of implementing the new features like 3D audio, Dual Sense features plus extra visuals stuff and their related testing and so on of my next game xD

There are a lot of work and many stuff to be paid even if it sounds simple. PC and mobile don't have these things when you want to support a new device, it simply just works (unless it had a huge change like when Apple decides to delete all the games that don't support X new stuff) and you as dev don't need to pay.

That’s because iOS switched to 64-bit and developers had to upgrade their 32-bit apps for it.
In PC 32bit apps run with 64bit CPUs, why didn't Apple implemented the same? Because Apple wanted these thousands of devs to buy their new devices to upgrade it.
 
Last edited:

elliot5

Member
I'd like you to pay the PS5 devkit, QC certification testing, age ratings and so on, plus the cost of implementing the new features like 3D audio, Dual Sense features plus extra visuals stuff and their related testing and so on of my next game xD
Damn that huge cost Sony's first party studios have to shoulder to get PS5 devkits and go through certification, huh.

DualSense features are likely easy enough to implement to take a few weeks time (or more depending on scale, idk) to implement. Again, cost of a salaried grunt engineer vs millions x $10. You think that dev is getting rewarded fairly? It's all going to Jimbo's pockets let's be real.

Ninja Theory implementing graphical upgrades and raytracing and 3 different modes across 2 devices (read: 6 configurations) probably took way more QA work than testing DualSense features. And that was free.
 

yurinka

Member
Damn that huge cost Sony's first party studios have to shoulder to get PS5 devkits and go through certification, huh.

DualSense features are likely easy enough to implement to take a few weeks time (or more depending on scale, idk) to implement. Again, cost of a salaried grunt engineer vs millions x $10. You think that dev is getting rewarded fairly? It's all going to Jimbo's pockets let's be real.

Ninja Theory implementing graphical upgrades and raytracing and 3 different modes across 2 devices (read: 6 configurations) probably took way more QA work than testing DualSense features. And that was free.
Yes, they don't want to work for free. They want revenue in exchange for their work, it isn't something new.

MS is different, they now decided to give away their work for free because they decided to have a different business and don't care about losing billions of dollars in the process. Something that for most companies doesn't make sense and won't commit suicide by doing the same.
 
Last edited:

elliot5

Member
Yes, they don't want to work for free. They want revenue in exchange for their work, it isn't something new.
Revenue that can be earned via new sales of the game for $60, no? Crazy. It's the same reason horizon and days gone sold not marked up on PC even though extra work was done.
 
Last edited:

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
Damn that huge cost Sony's first party studios have to shoulder to get PS5 devkits and go through certification, huh.

DualSense features are likely easy enough to implement to take a few weeks time (or more depending on scale, idk) to implement. Again, cost of a salaried grunt engineer vs millions x $10. You think that dev is getting rewarded fairly? It's all going to Jimbo's pockets let's be real.

Ninja Theory implementing graphical upgrades and raytracing and 3 different modes across 2 devices (read: 6 configurations) probably took way more QA work than testing DualSense features. And that was free.
It's amazing how some people will defend $70 as if making cross genned PS5 versions are the highest costing things ever in gaming to make.

If game development is so costly the higher the specs, then game makers would make PC games $100+ since they have to cover everything up to ultra settings.
 

Ghostdance

Neo Member
They are probably right about PC, mobile being the future of gaming do to streaming. But Sony is leading in core gaming, while casuals and families make them break even core gamers are how they make profit.
 

yurinka

Member
Revenue that can be earned via new sales of the game for $60, no? Crazy. It's the same reason horizon and days gone sold not marked up on PC even though extra work was done.
Yes, revenue in consoles comes primarly from the full price game sales and from DLC/IAP. Same goes with PC. But in PC the revenue source of DLC/IAP is way more important because that market way more dominated by F2P games than the consoles market.

But ports of old games typically aren't sold at full price unless you are Nintendo because if not people doesn't buy them.
 
Last edited:

elliot5

Member
Yes, revenue in consoles comes primarly from the full price game sales and from DLC/IAP. Same goes with PC. But in PC the revenue source of DLC/IAP is way more important because that market way more dominated by F2P games than the consoles market.
I don't see how this is relevant at all
 
I don't like the 2 tier pricing, but logic is simple, if the ps5 version costs 10 bucks more, but they offer a free upgrade, it undermines the entire price structure. Why buy the ps5 version at all when you can get it 10 bucks cheaper. If the games cost the same, charging would be insane, but with the 2 tier price it only makes sense.
They should have 1 price per game, bundle both versions after the ps5 release.

Pretty simple, games made before the ps5 release? well, do what you want, but people have expectations...
 

yurinka

Member
I don't see how this is relevant at all
We're talking about business model and monetization in console vs PC, specially in next gen upgrades or ports and how are they funded, so it's totally relevant.
 
Last edited:

kingwingin

Member
Every console has its negatives. Nintendo has a switch tax on multiplatforms and their games never go on sale except a select few once or twice a year.

Xbox smart delivery is useless for physical media owners.

Ps5 has a next gen tax.

Atleast I know in a year after release, ps5 games will be on sale and on the disc when I pick it up.
 

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
It's just exploitive. Plenty of gaming studios have gone back and released PS5 upgrades for free. Borderlands 3, Control, Doom Eternal, and pretty much every single cross gen game released since launch. Only Sony, EA and Activision are charging extra for the same res boost and fps increases they offered for free on the PS4 Pro. It's a greedy practice. No more different than Nintendo charging $60 for Skyward Sword without offering a graphics upgrade like they did for Links Awakening. Nintendo, Sony, EA and Activision do it because they know people will buy these games anyway. The rest of the companies would too if they thought their games could sell for a $10 surcharge.
 

jaysius

Banned
I feel grouping Nintendo and Sony in this case aren't logically sound.

Sony still wants to innovate, it's just wasting energy in some of the wrong directions.

Nintendo is scraping the bargain bins to dig up old shit that they can sell for maximum profit with a super lazy attitude, making sure their games get maximum profit by content starving it's audience.
 

MrA

Banned
Yes, revenue in consoles comes primarly from the full price game sales and from DLC/IAP. Same goes with PC. But in PC the revenue source of DLC/IAP is way more important because that market way more dominated by F2P games than the consoles market.

But ports of old games typically aren't sold at full price unless you are Nintendo because if not people doesn't buy them.
huh? dlc/iap and subscriptions are sony's bread and butter, sony is the console KING of microtransactions and subscriptions, roughly half their income comes from dlc/iap and subscriptions
right in their financials, 2.6 trillion yen from the gaming space 1.3 trillion in dlc/iap and subs,
there are things to defend sony for, like back compatibility or their commitment to full-featured single-player games at a fixed cost, but they couldn't make those if they didn't have fat stacks of fifa ultimate team cash coming in
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
It's just exploitive. Plenty of gaming studios have gone back and released PS5 upgrades for free. Borderlands 3, Control, Doom Eternal, and pretty much every single cross gen game released since launch. Only Sony, EA and Activision are charging extra for the same res boost and fps increases they offered for free on the PS4 Pro. It's a greedy practice. No more different than Nintendo charging $60 for Skyward Sword without offering a graphics upgrade like they did for Links Awakening. Nintendo, Sony, EA and Activision do it because they know people will buy these games anyway. The rest of the companies would too if they thought their games could sell for a $10 surcharge.
It's bad enough there's a $10 upgrade fee for some games. And as you said, nobody pinched people for $10 when the PS4 Pro and One X versions had better res, frame rate and AF improvements. It were free updates for all.

But Sony has taken it beyond that.

Ghost of Tsushima requires the $30 Director Cut DLC to go from PS4 to PS5, and then of course they tried (and failed) the Horizon FW tactic of forcing gamers to either buy both PS4/PS5 copies, or frontload them with an $80 combo edition which is +$20 over the base game.

As crazy as it sounds, Jim's "future games will be $10 upgrades" is cheaper than their recent attempts.
 
Last edited:

Elog

Member
The words 'justified', 'exploited' and 'defensible' are being used in this thread. We are talking about a product that you are free to buy as well as free not to buy. Those words are just wrong in this context.

Sony and Nintendo are among the most successful gaming companies in the world. Pretty rich to claim they are not in synch with the industry when they to a large extent are the industry. Feels like a back-handed gamepass article. MS had to do gamepass since they lacked exclusives - they went for value.. MS did not do it to be 'nice' - they did it out of necessity.
 

yurinka

Member
huh? dlc/iap and subscriptions are sony's bread and butter, sony is the console KING of microtransactions and subscriptions, roughly half their income comes from dlc/iap and subscriptions right in their financials, 2.6 trillion yen from the gaming space 1.3 trillion in dlc/iap and subs, there are things to defend sony for, like back compatibility or their commitment to full-featured single-player games at a fixed cost, but they couldn't make those if they didn't have fat stacks of fifa ultimate team cash coming in
DLC/IAP revenue that coms mostly from other games not published by them. They focus on mostly single player games with barely one or two dlcs only. This is why they need to charge more for their games or for the upgrade for their games.

Because their games aren't F2P/GaaS, so if they want ot continue growing their budget for their games they will need to charge for something else if they want to continue making profitable games.

Once they focus more on developing their own F2P/GaaS then people will cry because they prefer Sony to charge once for the game and maybe some small fee for the next gen upgrade or only 1 or 2 content DLC instead filling their games with tons of transactions as it is the case of the most popular PC and mobile games.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom