• 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.

Gaming Industry is going against the current to force live service games.

RCU005

Member
I understand that "hitting the jackpot" and having one game making billions a year is every company's wet dream. However, it's very clear that consumers just don't want that.

Sony wasted their entire PS4 success and complete hype for the PS5 due to them trying to make a live service game happen. The reason the PS4 succeeded, was not because the Xbox One failed, of course that gave them a huge advantage, but it was because Sony created a constant flow of great games, accompanied by a constant flow of third party games. Which in turned continued their PS3 success at creating several new and successful IPs.

This time, Sony's PS Studios is practically dried out. No announcements, no events, no games. You might say that they have released amazing games like Spiderman 2, Ratchet and Clank, etc. but by this time on PS3 and PS4 lifespan, they already had much more games and new IPs. Where are the new IPs this generation from Sony?

I believe it was in 2022 that Sony announced several games, and what did all have in common? There all were Live Service: Helldivers 2, Concord, Fairgames. It's like Sony is trying to become Ubisoft.

Xbox also is trying to make Gamepass work. While it's understandable that they focus on a way to make money since their consoles have failed to sell, their first intention is so that the consumer doesn't have any control of whatever they purchase. Sony, Microsoft, Ubisoft, EA, etc. want to make the cake and eat it, too.

Nintendo's huge success should be their wake up call to notice that traditional way of gaming is what people want. Why else would the Switch sell more than 120 million consoles? Everyone is complaining that games have become so expensive, but do you think that Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, which is the best selling game on Switch, or BOTW were $300 million budget games? Of course not! Nintendo is spending a much less than every other company, and selling 10 times more.

While it would be so awesome that a company has a billion dollar game, they haven't realized that GaaS games are the exact same thing as Netflix in the following regard: Netflix was successful because it had practically EVERYTHING. Once everyone wanted a piece and removed content to make their own service, it fragemented the market and it didn't work. ONE live service game works, having 30 live service games doesn't. People can't play all of them, and if one guy spends $500 on one game, he won't spend $500 in each of the 30 games that exist. But somehow those companies believe he will!

They also tried to make gaming become like mobile when mobile was so successful, and what happened? It wasn't possible! The same is going to happen to live service games. All of this is affecting their financials, it's affecting employees and consumers, but they are unwilling to back out.

Gaming needs to retract a lot. It need to become smaller again. They all started making open world games like if every game had to be a GTA, and that's why it has become so expensive. They believe that games now need to be AAA Hollywood productions, when Nintendo is proving them wrong since 2017, and I bet the Nintendo Switch 2 will be as successful for this same reason. Other company that has proved them wrong this gen is Capcom.

I remember that many players started complaining about 8 hour games during the PS3/360 gen. Maybe this is why companies started to make open world games. But right now, is not about making games shorter, but they need to be more compact. Not every world needs to be 3,000 miles wide.
 
Last edited:
I understand that "hitting the jackpot" and having one game making billions a year is every company's wet dream. However, it's very clear that consumer just don't want that.

Sony wasted their entire PS4 success and complete hype for the PS5 due to them trying to make a live service game happen. The reason the PS4 succeeded, was not because the Xbox One failed, of course that gave them a huge advantage, but it was because Sony create a constant flow of great games, accompanied by a constant flow of third party games. Which in turned continued their PS3 success at creating several new and successful IPs.

This time, Sony's PS Studios is practically dried out. No announcements, no events, no games. You might said that they have released amazing games like Spiderman 2, Ratchet and Clank, etc. but by this time on PS3 and PS4 lifespan, they already had much more games and new IPs. Where are the new IPs this generation from Sony?

I believe it was in 2022 that Sony announced several games, and what did all have in common? There all were Live Service: Helldivers 2, Concord, Fairgames. It's like Sony is trying to become Ubisoft.

Xbox also is trying to make Gamepass work. While it's understandable that they focus on a way to make money since their consoles have failed to sell, their first intention is so that the consumer doesn't have any control of whatever they purchase. Sony, Microsoft, Ubisoft, EA, etc. want to make the cake and eat it, too.

Nintendo's huge success should be their wake up call to notice that traditional way of gaming is what people want. Why else would the Switch sell more than 120 million consoles? Everyone is complaining that games have become so expensive, but do you think that Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, which is the best selling game on Switch, or BOTW were $300 million budget games? Of course not! Nintendo is spending a fraction of every other company, and selling 10 times what everyone sells.

While it would be so awesome that a company has a billion dollar game, they haven't realized that GaaS games are the exact same thing as Netflix in the following regard: Netflix was successful because it had practically EVERYTHING. Once everyone wanted a piece and removed content to make their own service, it fragemented the market and it didn't work. ONE live service game works, having 30 live service games doesn't. People can't play all of them, and if one guy spends $500 on one game, he won't spend $500 in each of the 30 games that exist. But somehow those companies believe he will!

They also tried to make gaming become like mobile when mobile was so successful, and what happened? It wasn't possible! The same is going to happen to live service games. All of this is affecting their financials, it's affecting employees and consumers, but they are unwilling to back out of this.

Gaming needs to retract a lot. It need to become smaller again. They all started making open world games like if every game had to be a GTA, and that's why it has become so expensive. They believe that games now need to be AAA Hollywood productions, when Nintendo is proving them wrong since 2017, and I bet the Nintendo Switch 2 will be as successful for this same reason. Other company that has proved them wrong this gen is Capcom.

I remember that many players started complaining about 8 hour games during the PS3/360 gen. Maybe this is why companies started to make open world games. But right now, is not about making games shorter, but they need to be more compact. The world doesn't need to be 3,000 miles wide.
They're just following the money. Helldivers 2 is another sign that this well has not dried up yet.
 

Sanepar

Member
What is the worst about all that is Sony knowing MS failed because they didn't care about sp games and tried to explore gaas model with all their franchises. They had too success with that: forza horizon and sot.

Most of consumers who bought ps5 are still waiting for the great sp games like ps4 era. They will probably wait forever.
 

GHound

Gold Member
Honor of Kings/Arena of Valor and Fortnite are the dreams of all.
Sakura Kakumei and Lawbreakers are the reality for most.
 

midnightAI

Member
What is the worst about all that is Sony knowing MS failed because they didn't care about sp games and tried to explore gaas model with all their franchises. They had too success with that: forza horizon and sot.

Most of consumers who bought ps5 are still waiting for the great sp games like ps4 era. They will probably wait forever.
You do realise this gen isnt that much different to the PS4 gen right?

The main difference being that this gen had cross platform.

The heavy hitters come in the latter half of the gen, and there are reasons for it....
Engine maturity (and current gen specific features)
Bigger audience (unless you do cross gen but that contradicts with engine maturity)
Time it takes to develop games
Allows for increased console sales latter half of the gen instead of tailoring off due to high quality of the games (Pro console they will hope will do the same also) and these games do help sell the next gen of console as people are hungry for what the new hardware will do

This gen is a little different also due to stock issues but they have all been resolved now.
 

IDKFA

I am Become Bilbo Baggins
It’s funny how people didn’t see this shift for Sony coming when the PS4 crew started leaving and Jim Ryan took the helm.

And now it’s only going to get worse because MS doesn’t know what the hell they are doing. Sony is basically a home console gaming monopoly now. They can do whatever they want.

If Microsoft leave the hardware market then Sony won't have a monopoly. The Nintendo Switch exists and it's successor is just around the corner, so we'd have a home console duopoly.
 

midnightAI

Member
If Microsoft leave the hardware market then Sony won't have a monopoly. The Nintendo Switch exists and it's successor is just around the corner, so we'd have a home console duopoly.
high quality GIF


Switch and PlayStation are two very different things (I honestly dont see Switch as a 'home' console, we have three of the things and we never use them on the TV, yes, I know other people will do that but its a 'handheld' that you can plug into the TV), they arent fighting for the same market (maybe Switch 2 will, but I doubt it)

But I do agree that the likes of Switch existing and even PC that it should keep Sony in check as there are other options out there if they mess up.
 
Last edited:

IDKFA

I am Become Bilbo Baggins
high quality GIF


Switch and PlayStation are two very different things (I honestly dont see Switch as a home console, we have three of the things and we never use them on the TV, yes, I know other people will do that but its a handheld that you can plug into the TV), they arent fighting for the same market (maybe Switch 2 will, but I doubt it)

But I do agree that the likes of Switch existing and even PC that it should keep Sony in check as there are other options out there if they mess up.

Yes. Yes it is.

It doesn't matter how you use it. The Switch is a home console. You're correct to point out that they're totally different because the Switch is a hybrid.

In which case, has Nintendo been a monopoly since 2017 by having the only hybrid home console?
 

Killjoy-NL

Member
It’s funny how people didn’t see this shift for Sony coming when the PS4 crew started leaving and Jim Ryan took the helm.

And now it’s only going to get worse because MS doesn’t know what the hell they are doing. Sony is basically a home console gaming monopoly now. They can do whatever they want.
Anyone could've seen it coming, because for years we've seen development time increasing, so obviously GaaS was going to rise as it keeps people playing. No matter the platform.

You can't keep getting flagship titles with high production value one after the other at a rapid pace.

So without GaaS, it means there will be massive droughts in between major releases.
 
Last edited:

midnightAI

Member
Yes. Yes it is.

It doesn't matter how you use it. The Switch is a home console. You're correct to point out that they're totally different because the Switch is a hybrid.

In which case, has Nintendo been a monopoly since 2017 by having the only hybrid home console?
Well I'm not getting into an argument over this as a lot of it is semantics anyway. But yes, I'll accept 'hybrid' console.

But let me ask you this, I have a laptop, I can plug in a monitor, a mouse and a keyboard, does that then make it a desktop? or is it just a laptop plugged into a monitor, keyboard and mouse? It may act like one, but is it one?

(also, the PSP (3000 at least) allowed you to play on TV so is that technically a hybrid? it was never called as such .. a bit different I know)
 
Last edited:

IDKFA

I am Become Bilbo Baggins
Well I'm not getting into an argument over this as a lot of it is semantics anyway. But yes, I'll accept 'hybrid' console.

But let me ask you this, I have a laptop, I can plug in a monitor, a mouse and a keyboard, does that then make it a desktop? or is it just a laptop plugged into a monitor, keyboard and mouse? It may act like one, but is it one?

That's a bit of a nonsensical argument. Your laptop is a laptop. The selling point being that it's portable and can be used independently without a separate monitor, KB etc. The fact you can do that is an added bonus. A majority of laptops also have this feature. I fail to see what point your making here.

(also, the PSP (3000 at least) allowed you to play on TV so is that technically a hybrid? it was never called as such .. a bit different I know)

PSP is no longer being sold. That being said, does Nintendo have a monopoly on hybrid consoles at the moment?

I think people fail to understand exactly what a monopoly is. If Microsoft leave the console market not only do Nintendo still exist, but there is nothing stopping someone else entering the console hardware market.

Here is an example of a monopoly. In the UK all the water companies are private companies. One of them is Thames Water. They provide clean and waste water services for London and the rest of the Thames Valley region. If you live in that area then you're only choice of water provider is Thames because they control the region. There is absolutely no other option at all and there never will be. No other company can decide to step in and offer competition to Thames as a water supplier. That's a true monopoly.
 

Felessan

Member
I understand that "hitting the jackpot" and having one game making billions a year is every company's wet dream. However, it's very clear that consumers just don't want that.
By consumers you mean residents of Gaf or mass market?
Because all metrics (money spent, MAU, hours played etc) show that gaas are vastly more popular in the mass market compared to old style gaming. And business just follow the crowd.
 

midnightAI

Member
That's a bit of a nonsensical argument. Your laptop is a laptop. The selling point being that it's portable and can be used independently without a separate monitor, KB etc. The fact you can do that is an added bonus. A majority of laptops also have this feature. I fail to see what point your making here.
So like the Switch then, it's selling point being it's portable and can be used without a TV and the fact you can plug it into a TV is an added bonus, and the majority of Switches have this feature. See my point?

PSP is no longer being sold. That being said, does Nintendo have a monopoly on hybrid consoles at the moment?
And my point here was that you could plug the PSP into a TV and it was never considered to by a hybrid or a home console it was only ever a handheld, so the ability to plug a handheld into a TV does not make it a home console.

Anyway, like I said, pointless arguing over this, this has been debated loads of times, some think it's a handheld, some think it's a home console, some thing it's neither and it's a hybrid.
 
Last edited:

FunkMiller

Gold Member
The fact of the matter is that the industry can only support a few GaaS games at a time. Yes, a small amount are hugely successful, but it’s always a small amount.

They‘e going to bankrupt themselves trying to force more of something into the market that it doesn’t want, and can’t sustain.

Frankly, good. The rush to make GaaS has now become a survival of the fittest kind of deal, where the ones with brains are realising it’s a fools errand to keep chasing it. Quite happy to see all the companies continuing to chase it thanks to their stupid fucking greed to go under.

For instance, if Rocksteady really were the ones to push for a GaaS, making their devs produce a game they had no interest in, then I’m fine with them going under.
 

Angry_Megalodon

Gold Member
I understand that "hitting the jackpot" and having one game making billions a year is every company's wet dream. However, it's very clear that consumers just don't want that.


This time, Sony's PS Studios is practically dried out. No announcements, no events, no games. You might say that they have released amazing games like Spiderman 2, Ratchet and Clank, etc. but by this time on PS3 and PS4 lifespan, they already had much more games and new IPs. Where are the new IPs this generation from Sony?

I believe it was in 2022 that Sony announced several games, and what did all have in common? There all were Live Service: Helldivers 2, Concord, Fairgames. It's like Sony is trying to become Ubisoft.



Nintendo's huge success should be their wake up call to notice that traditional way of gaming is what people want. Why else would the Switch sell more than 120 million consoles? Everyone is complaining that games have become so expensive, but do you think that Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, which is the best selling game on Switch, or BOTW were $300 million budget games? Of course not! Nintendo is spending a much less than every other company, and selling 10 times more.

While it would be so awesome that a company has a billion dollar game, they haven't realized that GaaS games are the exact same thing as Netflix in the following regard: Netflix was successful because it had practically EVERYTHING. Once everyone wanted a piece and removed content to make their own service, it fragemented the market and it didn't work. ONE live service game works, having 30 live service games doesn't. People can't play all of them, and if one guy spends $500 on one game, he won't spend $500 in each of the 30 games that exist. But somehow those companies believe he will!

They also tried to make gaming become like mobile when mobile was so successful, and what happened? It wasn't possible! The same is going to happen to live service games. All of this is affecting their financials, it's affecting employees and consumers, but they are unwilling to back out.



While I agree with the overall message, some points need elaboration.

1) Sony has released an exclusive game, new IP, called Stellar Blade, that goes against ALL "modern trends" including the ones that Nintendo themselves have embraced, adding DLCs to a game like Zelda BOTW.

2) Yes, Sony has dried out due to poor management from Jim Ryan and Hermen Hulst, that's unquestionable. Bad management is to blame.

3) Nintendo's success is impossible to replicate, and it's also a tricky one.

- Nintendo has 30-year-old IPs with a huge core audience.

- Nintendo is limited to a "certain type of games". They can't develop a GOW, a TLOU, or a Final Fantasy.

4) As for mobile game models on consoles, the most successful gaming company in the world right now is Mihoyo. No wonder Sony's execs are scratching their heads. However, that success is also impossible to replicate.


Sony's current strategy is wrong. Either they step back or they will fall off a cliff.
 

Schmendrick

Member
It's approaching the PS2, the most sold console of all time in term of units sold but it's not a serious player? Third party support is not a requirement if you can be that successful without them.
I`d still argue that the switch is not directly competing with Xbox or PS.
The target audiences, while ofc having overlaps, are different. Nintendo has carved out its very own and very comfortable spot.
 
Last edited:

AV

We ain't outta here in ten minutes, we won't need no rocket to fly through space
They only sold 150 million because the discontinued their DS and you know it.

Yeah, and PS5 only sold whatever is has because they discontinued the PS4. Switch being a hybrid doesn't make it "not a console". 100% of my TotK playtime was on a couch and TV.

I would bet that by now there are more people in the world using Switch exclusively on a TV than there are using Series S/X combined.
 

Laptop1991

Member
They won't force money out of me no matter how many live service games they make, i don't enjoy the grindy gameplay and everything about them is just average at best, and they keep charging more and more money for them, if it means companies get shut down because of these consistent failures apart from the 1 or 2 that succeed for the higher ups to stop pushing them on us then so be it.
 
Last edited:

midnightAI

Member
Yeah, and PS5 only sold whatever is has because they discontinued the PS4. Switch being a hybrid doesn't make it "not a console". 100% of my TotK playtime was on a couch and TV.

I would bet that by now there are more people in the world using Switch exclusively on a TV than there are using Series S/X combined.
I think the argument is, if it was a home console only with no ability to have it as a handheld then the Switch would be doing nowhere near its numbers, and arguably if it was a handheld only I bet the numbers wouldn't be too different to what it is doing now.

The difference for me is, we have a PS5, we have an XBox, we have THREE Switches. It is unusual for many family households to have multiple home consoles that are the same (it happens but its rare), it is not unusual to have multiple handhelds that are the same (if you have kids, and lets face it Nintendo is very family oriented).
 
Last edited:

AV

We ain't outta here in ten minutes, we won't need no rocket to fly through space
I think the argument is, if it was a home console only with no ability to have it as a handheld then the Switch would be doing nowhere near its numbers, and arguably if it was a handheld only I bet the numbers wouldn't be too different to what it is doing now.

The difference for me is, we have a PS5, we have an XBox, we have THREE Switches. It is unusual for many family households to have multiple home consoles that are the same (it happens but its rare), it is not unusual to have multiple handhelds that are the same (if you have kids, and lets face it Nintendo is very family oriented).

Sure, I was only replying to the nonsense "the Switch is a handheld" line, literally the entire point of it is that it's both. Nintendo themselves and the actual IP patent refer to it as a video game console because it's what it is. The Switch Lite is a handheld variant and that's the worst-selling model, though of course it was released after a lot of people already bought the base one.

We need to abandon traditional definitions of these things because they're no longer relevant. The Switch was a new concept that blew the doors off the market, Xbox as hardware is collapsing, the concept of generations is completely dead when Nintendo are out of sync with it and we had 3 years of PS4 titles that ran better on PS5, PC gaming is more popular than ever and mobile phones can run Call of Duty. It's all change.
 
Last edited:

Angry_Megalodon

Gold Member
Yeah, and PS5 only sold whatever is has because they discontinued the PS4. Switch being a hybrid doesn't make it "not a console". 100% of my TotK playtime was on a couch and TV.

I would bet that by now there are more people in the world using Switch exclusively on a TV than there are using Series S/X combined.


A simple question: do you think Nintendo can survive as a non-portable device? By survive I mean not losing half of their revenue.

I don't think so. The way the brand is oriented (family, convenience) needs portability as an option, regardless of the use people make of it.
 

AV

We ain't outta here in ten minutes, we won't need no rocket to fly through space
A simple question: do you think Nintendo can survive as a non-portable device? By survive I mean not losing half of their revenue.

I don't think so. The way the brand is oriented (family, convenience) needs portability as an option, regardless of the use people make of it.

Survive? Yes. Be as profitable? Of course not. Losing half your revenue != "not surviving".

If for whatever reason Nintendo released a home console only in 2017 and completely scrapped handhelds, they would still be handily outselling the Series S/X based on Pokémon, Mario and Zelda alone. I would wager they'd sell more home consoles than there exist total Game Pass subscribers. They have untouchable IP. But it's a totally pointless question to ask in the first place when they won't do that.

You have to remember that if the Switch wasn't a handheld, it would've been more powerful and had significantly more third party support on top of what they already offer simply by being a Nintendo system.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, and PS5 only sold whatever is has because they discontinued the PS4. Switch being a hybrid doesn't make it "not a console". 100% of my TotK playtime was on a couch and TV.

I would bet that by now there are more people in the world using Switch exclusively on a TV than there are using Series S/X combined.
Not really. The switch replaced both the WiiU and the DS and hence taps into two different markets.
 

PanzerCute

Member
Nope. The Switch is a hybrid console and to say it's not a serious player in the home console market is absurd. How many have they sold? 150 million so far?
Yes and the paradigm will change with the Switch 2. If the console ends up being a PS4 Pro+, we will see waves and waves of ports from every publishers.
And when PS6 comes, Nintendo could release a Switch 2 Pro to tighten the power gap (thus creating a new Series S like situation, especially as we know the beginning of a gen means à shit ton of cross gen titles)
 

Generic

Member
Everyone is complaining that games have become so expensive, but do you think that Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, which is the best selling game on Switch, or BOTW were $300 million budget games? Of course not! Nintendo is spending a much less than every other company, and selling 10 times more.
And yet they permanently stick a $60 pricetag on these games.
 

DaGwaphics

Member
They just haven't accepted the probability of it all yet. Eventually the numbers will make it obvious that for every HD2 there will be 10 KtJL games, and once you get done subtracting all the costs associated with the failures, the winners won't seem quite as impressive as they once did. Publicly traded companies are notoriously stubborn however, so this will take quite a while to sink in. Many more studios will close and more jobs will be lost.

Those of us that like deeper experiences with a narrative focus will have to hope that the private companies will continue to carry on. Turning a profit after everyone gets paid is a success for them and they don't need to be slaves to the numbers to quite the same degree.
 

SHA

Member
Switching between games regardless if you love it or hate it is definitely an uncomfortable process, if you think the alternative way is perfect then you must be delusional, it's obvious that a hit title being a live service at the same time will attract many gamers, that's just a given.
 

Angry_Megalodon

Gold Member
Nintendo needs those high prices and exclusivity so the brand remains strong. They can't treat it like a cheap prostitute as Sony is doing with Playstation under the current leadership.

Nintendo must be perceived as Apple or else it won't survive. Sony has more room for devaluation, but not much more before serious shit happens.
 

Loomy

Thinks Microaggressions are Real
Sony wasted their entire PS4 success and complete hype for the PS5 due to them trying to make a live service game happen.
Have you not seen the recent earnings reports?

This time, Sony's PS Studios is practically dried out. No announcements, no events, no games. You might say that they have released amazing games like Spiderman 2, Ratchet and Clank, etc. but by this time on PS3 and PS4 lifespan, they already had much more games and new IPs. Where are the new IPs this generation from Sony?
They announced a year ago that they want half of their releases by next year(2025) to be new IPs. A bunch of the GaaS games they're working on right now are new IPs. This is also not the first time Sony has gone through a year of drought. Happened during the PS4 days too.

No one has said their new strategy is GaaS instead of single player games. It's additive. Sony even announced during their earnings call a few days ago that their mid range 3 year plan is "enhancement of first-party software and PC deployment" and "richer gaming experiences".

Dev costs are not going down. Dev time is not going to get shorter. And game prices are not going down. Those single player games you love aren't going anywhere. But they're still going to take time to create. Those new IPs you want? At least 5 years.

Publishers need something so they can keep making money during a year like this where they have no major first party sequels coming out.

No one is taking the games you like away. So breathe...relax. It's going to be okay.
 
Last edited:
What a nonsensical take. Very clear consumers don't want that? Go to the PlayStation store. Pretty much every game on the front page is a live service game or has live service features, save for like 3 games.

Too many gamers think they themselves are perfectly representative of the gaming industry.

Sony's first major attempt at releasing a GaaS game has resulted in what looks to be their most successful game ever... EVER... in their 30 years in the industry. This single game has already proven your hypothesis invalid.

You feel comfortable writing this nonsense because a lot of people share your sentiments, but neogaf is an echochamber.

Sony's production thus far in this generation has also outpaced their efforts on PS4.

The biggest games Sony released launched aligned to PS4 were

Killzone Shadow Fall
Knack
DriveClub
Infamous Second Son
LittleBigPlanet 3
Last of Us Remastered
Bloodborne
God of War 3 Remastered
The Order 1886
Until Dawn
Ratchet and Clank Remake
Uncharted 4

That is 5 original IP, 4 sequels, 3 remakes/remasters, and only 2 major hits.

So far this generation Sony has released

Demon's Souls Remake
Sackboy A Big Adventure
Spider-Man Miles Morales
Returnal
Ratchet and Clank Rift Apart
Ghost of Tsushima Director's Cut
Death Stranding Director's Cut
God of War Ragnarok
Gran Turismo 7
Horizon Forbidden West
The Last of Us Part 1 Remake
Marvel's Spider-Man 2
The Last of Us Part 2 Remastered
Helldivers 2
Rise of the Ronin
Stellar Blade

That is 4 original IP (I'd consider sackboy a non sequel to LBP), 7 sequels, 5 remakes/remasters, 6 major titles.

Objectively Sony has been better with their output this generation, but a narrative has been created that people will spout the complete opposite partially because they don't announce games years in advance anymore.
 

Angry_Megalodon

Gold Member
I think it's fair to say that Sony has taken advantage of some late PS4-momentum but now half of their studios are struggling. This is not an opinion, studios that doesn't release a game in 5 years are objectively struggling, unless they are making the GTA or Genshin Killer, which they are not.
 
Last edited:
Have you not seen the recent earnings reports?


They announced a year ago that they want half of their releases by next year(2025) to be new IPs. A bunch of the GaaS games they're working on right now are new IPs. This is also not the first time Sony has gone through a year of drought. Happened during the PS4 days too.

No one has said their new strategy is GaaS instead of single player games. It's additive. Sony even announced during their earnings call a few days ago that their mid range 3 year plan is to "enhancement of first-party software and PC deployment" and "richer gaming experiences".

Dev costs are not going down. Dev time are going to get shorter. And game prices are not going down. Those single player games you love aren't going anywhere. But they're still going to take time to create. Those new IPs you want? At least 5 years.

Publishers need something so they can keep making money during a year like this where they have no major first party sequels coming out.

No one is taking the games you like away. So breathe...relax. It's going to be okay.

Yeah, they literally bought 2 studios and created an internal studio specifically for GaaS. They also bought Isnomniac, Bluepoint, and Housemarque who have a history in single player games.

He ignores the rising cost and diminishing returns on single player games and doesn't understand that Sony isn't Nintendo. They can't put cookie cutter games out that cost little to make and sell millions of copies. I'm sure they wish they could, but their IP isn't as strong yet and I say yet, because the reason why Sony has put out less original IP is because they've finally started leaning on their strong IP they created. They couldn't do that as much with the PS4 as the PS3 didn't have a ton of hits for them to lean on and the PS3 had even fewer ones than the PS2.

But as you said, Sony also is looking to create as many new IPs as they can, because they realize with a transmedia strategy they can make these franchises extremely popular and profitable and it's also a great pipeline for TV/Movies.

GaaS will keep Sony in the green even when you have light years like this year due to release schedules slipping.

Everyone says they'd rather a game be delayed than come out subpar quality, but then they'll actively get mad if games are delayed.
 

Generic

Member
Nintendo needs those high prices and exclusivity so the brand remains strong. They can't treat it like a cheap prostitute as Sony is doing with Playstation under the current leadership.

Nintendo must be perceived as Apple or else it won't survive. Sony has more room for devaluation, but not much more before serious shit happens.
The difference is that iPhones have top-notch hardware.
 

Three

Member
The industry isn't going against the flow. So far in 2024 for PS5 alone they released Stellar blade, Rise of the ronin, FF7 rebirth, and Helldivers 2. Only one of them can be considered live service and ironically it was arguably the most successful of the 4. If people stopped complaining about what the industry is doing, saw the reality of the situation and put that energy into supporting the games that do the things you prefer the actual flow/current might be different.
 
Last edited:

diffusionx

Gold Member
Everything going on with gaashit the industry already went through with MMOs. We are now in that post-WOW feeding frenzy where everyone is trying to throw their hat in the ring and find some success, but the game publishers are making the mistake of thinking people like the genre when in reality they like the game. Like, just because people like World of Warcraft, doesn't mean they will like Warhammer Online, even if Warhammer Online iterates on some element of WoW that people enjoy. Just because people like Fortnite doesn't mean they will like or even try every battle royale shit that comes out. And if they do try it, well it's probably F2P, they play it for a few days and then go back to Fortnite. No skin in the game, no big deal.
 
They are going where the money is. Gaas is important part of the industry now, if you strike big like EA did with Apex Legends, you can fund multiple AAA games in one year of profit. Thats how Jedi Survivor, Dead Space Remake, Immortals of Aveum and the next Dragon age got so easily greenlit. Alan Wake 2 was funded due to Fortnite money. Helldivers 2 making bank makes it easy for Sony to fund their own internal games. So yeah, fleece the whales game industry!
 

Drell

Member
I`d still argue that the switch is not directly competing with Xbox or PS.
The target audiences, while ofc having overlaps, are different. Nintendo has carved out its very own and very comfortable spot.
While I'd not say you're wrong because the game offer is not totally the same, it is still the same market. Most people don't have a lot of time and/or money and will only buy one console (or even just a PC or play on their phone these days). Also you have to take the kids market into consideration. Normal parents won't spoil their children with multiple consoles and will probably turn to the switch since it's the defacto kid friendly console. Sony and MS, while they always wanted to seduce adults primarly also always tried to have some kids' appeal. And again these days parent may prefer buying their kids a phone.
 
Last edited:

King Dazzar

Member
What a nonsensical take. Very clear consumers don't want that? Go to the PlayStation store. Pretty much every game on the front page is a live service game or has live service features, save for like 3 games.

Too many gamers think they themselves are perfectly representative of the gaming industry.

Sony's first major attempt at releasing a GaaS game has resulted in what looks to be their most successful game ever... EVER... in their 30 years in the industry. This single game has already proven your hypothesis invalid.

You feel comfortable writing this nonsense because a lot of people share your sentiments, but neogaf is an echochamber.

Sony's production thus far in this generation has also outpaced their efforts on PS4.

The biggest games Sony released launched aligned to PS4 were

Killzone Shadow Fall
Knack
DriveClub
Infamous Second Son
LittleBigPlanet 3
Last of Us Remastered
Bloodborne
God of War 3 Remastered
The Order 1886
Until Dawn
Ratchet and Clank Remake
Uncharted 4

That is 5 original IP, 4 sequels, 3 remakes/remasters, and only 2 major hits.

So far this generation Sony has released

Demon's Souls Remake
Sackboy A Big Adventure
Spider-Man Miles Morales
Returnal
Ratchet and Clank Rift Apart
Ghost of Tsushima Director's Cut
Death Stranding Director's Cut
God of War Ragnarok
Gran Turismo 7
Horizon Forbidden West
The Last of Us Part 1 Remake
Marvel's Spider-Man 2
The Last of Us Part 2 Remastered
Helldivers 2
Rise of the Ronin
Stellar Blade

That is 4 original IP (I'd consider sackboy a non sequel to LBP), 7 sequels, 5 remakes/remasters, 6 major titles.

Objectively Sony has been better with their output this generation, but a narrative has been created that people will spout the complete opposite partially because they don't announce games years in advance anymore.
Not saying I disagree with your point. But shouldn't we be including Deaths Stranding, God Of War, Ghost Of Tushima, The Last Of Us Pt2 for PS4?

I do however disagree with your echochamber take. Gaf always seems quite balanced to me with various different takes. They allow yours for example and they allow OP's. Seems fair enough to me.
 
Not saying I disagree with your point. But shouldn't we be including Deaths Stranding, God Of War, Ghost Of Tushima, The Last Of Us Pt2 for PS4?

I do however disagree with your echochamber take. Gaf always seems quite balanced to me with various different takes. They allow yours for example and they allow OP's. Seems fair enough to me.

They didn't come out in the first 4 years of the PlayStation 4's lifecycle AND just as I counted TLOU Remastered on PS4, I would count these games on PS5.

It's absolutely an echochamber. If you polled Gaf on GaaS 75% would say they are against it, despite GaaS being what is selling the best in the industry. I also don't like GaaS, but I can at least admit that I'm not representative of the industry.
 

King Dazzar

Member
They didn't come out in the first 4 years of the PlayStation 4's lifecycle AND just as I counted TLOU Remastered on PS4, I would count these games on PS5.

It's absolutely an echochamber. If you polled Gaf on GaaS 75% would say they are against it, despite GaaS being what is selling the best in the industry. I also don't like GaaS, but I can at least admit that I'm not representative of the industry.
Yeah OK, I'm shit at list wars. Especially time gated ones. And you're right this isnt a fortnite fan forum. But many seem to love HellDivers 2 on here and quite a few still like CoD.... I love Far Cry, yet many on here dont. Seems to be a good mixture of views and takes to me.

Also if I disagree on the echo chamber, and your voice is at odds with the OP, surely that proves we're not an echo chamber. Otherwise we'd all be in agreement....
 
Yeah OK, I'm shit at list wars. Especially time gated ones. And you're right this isnt a fortnite fan forum. But many seem to love HellDivers 2 on here and quite a few still like CoD.... I love Far Cry, yet many on here dont. Seems to be a good mixture of views and takes to me.

Also if I disagree on the echo chamber, and your voice is at odds with the OP, surely that proves we're not an echo chamber. Otherwise we'd all be in agreement....

An echochamber doesn't mean consensus. It just means it's not representative of reality.
 
Top Bottom