Support NeoGAF

[Three]

You mean from the studios, Ryan inherited from previous execs?
I mean. It's clearly so hard to have well oiled first-party studios that was left for you. All you have to do is step away and let them do their job. (/s)
It's certainly harder then building whole first-party basically from ground up, right? (remember, that in time Spencer took a job of head of Xbox, platform had 5 first-party studios)

Jim didn't inherit it. Jim has been part of PS for 28yrs and built and ran SIE Europe, their most successful region, before becoming CEO. Phil also barely built anything "from the ground up" when it comes to first party studios. Must have been "hard" to spend cash.

All this CEO worship is stupid anyway but suggesting Jim hasn't done any hard work but inherited it when he has been an integral part of PS for longer than xbox has existed is stupid.

 

[Snake29]

Jim didn't inherit it. Jim has been part of PS for 28yrs and built and ran SIE Europe, their most successful region, before becoming CEO. Phil also barely built anything "from the ground up" when it comes to first party studios. Must have been "hard" to spend cash.

All this CEO worship is stupid anyway but suggesting Jim hasn't done any hard work but inherited it when he has been an integral part of PS for longer than xbox has existed is stupid.

You can clearly see the difference from 2 communities how they talk about "their" CEO. There is only one that is constantly echo everything the CEO is saying and worshipping him like crazy people.

 

[Belthazar]

Jim Ryan actually delivers what I want from a console on a fraction of the budget the other guy has access to... So obviously him.

 

[Godot25]

Jim didn't inherit it. Jim has been part of PS for 28yrs and built and ran SIE Europe, their most successful region, before becoming CEO. Phil also barely built anything "from the ground up" when it comes to first party studios. Must have been "hard" to spend cash.

All this CEO worship is stupid anyway but suggesting Jim hasn't done any hard work but inherited it when he has been an integral part of PS for longer than xbox has existed is stupid.

That's why I'm talking about stuff both of them did while they were in positions of CEO, not before that and the situation they inherited from their predecessors.

This thread is about "better gaming company leader" ie. CEO. I don't care what they did before that.

Also, increasing number of your first-party studios from 5 to 23 is basically "building from ground up." It's irrelevant if it by buying or creating. Because...fun fact. Xbox during Spencer's era "created" more studios than Sony during Ryan's era. The Initiative is only studio created during that time. Ryan during his tenure bought Insomniac, Have, Bungie, Firesprite, Housemarque, Bluepoint and several other studios. Spencer bought several studios and also Bethesda (and Activision).

 

[Eddie-Griffin]

Because...fun fact. Xbox during Spencer's era "created" more studios than Sony during Ryan's era. The Initiative is only studio created during that time.

Wait, how did they create more studios if The Initiative was the only studio created during that time?

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

Wait, how did they create more studios if The Initiative was the only studio created during that time?

 

[Kumomeme]

i prefer those who didnt like sugarcoat sweet talk things for sake of winning a moment before doing a massive u-turn in future.

 

[Godot25]

Wait, how did they create more studios if The Initiative was the only studio created during that time?

Because 1>0

I know it's shocker.

 

[bentanchorbolt]

Poll results, very telling.

 

[Hobbygaming]

Yes, it’s actually incredible to me how acceptable are ps fans with this guy, he’s (and the current execs) are terrible

What has he done that has really affected PlayStation in a negative way?

 

[FritzJ92]

I dont know. It’s hard to judge a CEO that got handed a winning business versus a CEO who had to save a failing business with less resources and relationships.

 

[ProtoByte]

The only thing Spencer is good for is blowing smoke up the internet's collective ass.

 

[makaveli60]

What has he done that has really affected PlayStation in a negative way?

I wouldn‘t say it affected Playstation itself negatively but us. Actually all his work is about making money for themselves while not even pretending to care about gamers. I’m sure if you check what the Playstation team did from around 2009 until Jim Ryan took over you will see the huge difference.

 

[keefged4]

Neither, Lord Gaben.

 

[Hypereides]

None of them. They really do not have core gamers' best interests at heart.

I legit miss the time when we had actual engineers involved or in charge at the top. Such as: Allard, Iwata, and Kutaragi. Their decision making was more skewed towards the creative process and bringing new ideas to the table. Those were more interesting times to be a gamer.

 

[TheGodfather07]

I dont know. It’s hard to judge a CEO that got handed a winning business versus a CEO who had to save a failing business with less resources and relationships.

Near 90b on two publishers. Less resources my ass.

 

[FF:Enhanced_Reality]

Let's be fair, Jim doesn't have Phil's piggy bank

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

Let's be fair, Jim doesn't have Phil's piggy bank

Very true but also Phil wasn't handed the keys to a Ferrari like Jimmie was

Its amazing Phil has gotten MS to open up this warchest so many people here warned about

 

[FritzJ92]

Near 90b on two publishers. Less resources my ass.

Yeah but that only goes so far. I mean if it was about money google would’ve been a bigger player. You realize both of the big acquisitions made and to be made are from historic relationships with those publishers.

Sony #1 resource is its relationships. They use it in every argument they can and it’s way more powerful than money.

 

[yurinka]

Yeah but that only goes so far. I mean if it was about money google would’ve been a bigger player. You realize both of the big acquisitions made and to be made are from historic relationships with those publishers.

Sony #1 resource is its relationships. They use it in every argument they can and it’s way more powerful than money.

3rd party publishers historically supported mainly the devices with the biggest market share in 3rd party sales. Before the first PS it was Nintendo, so they supported Nintendo. As PS1 started to skyrocket and both PS1 and PS2 dominated the market for 3rd parties, they sticked to PS. Then PS3 had a more tied result compared to 360 so the support was more split between them, also because the development costs skyrocketed and they needed more revenue sources, so many big previously exclusive 3rd party IPs moved to multi.

PS4 dominated again so they supported them again. PS5 even if supply constrained broke many records and has a record demand so apparently will dominate again and will be again the best selling platform for the 3rd parties. So 3rd parties will continue supporting it because they'll consider it's their biggest and more reliable market. So if or when they have to choose a platform that they specially support, its the one that gives them more money.

When it isn't the case, money from someone like MS, Google or Nintendo (and Sony, obviously) helps to moneyhat some exclusive from this publisher or even to buy it.

I wouldn‘t say it affected Playstation itself negatively but us. Actually all his work is about making money for themselves while not even pretending to care about gamers. I’m sure if you check what the Playstation team did from around 2009 until Jim Ryan took over you will see the huge difference.

Jimbo expanded the manpower of all internal 1st party teams and acquired Insomniac, Bungie, Bluepoint, Housemarque and more. Broke all records on revenue, profit, consoles sold, 1st party games sold, awards won, subscribers, console engagement or demand. Is opening the market of their IPs to movies, tv shows, PC and mobile and is highly improving their game subs and VR.

It's hard to ask more to Jimbo, even if part of the good and bad things they did came from the previous eras (where Jimbo already was there and was promoted to CEO because his great results). And well, you could also say that part of who was there before him also did it party because of the legacy of the ones who came before him.

Very true but also Phil wasn't handed the keys to a Ferrari like Jimmie was

Its amazing Phil has gotten MS to open up this warchest so many people here warned about

The biggest PS market has been historically Europe, and Jimbo was there since the early days pushing the ship. And he did it when until then for Sega and Nintendo Europe was a small market way smaller than USA and Japan. Jimbo didn't start now as CEO.

Jimbo had a key role building that Ferrari that he later got as CEO.

 

[MisterXDTV]

I mean all Spencer does is asking cheques to "Daddy" and spending his money....

Even a 8 year old kid could do that

 

[darrylgorn]

Phil's winning!

 

[PharaoTutAnchAmun]

Phil's winning!

No Phil has the green light and he is spending his daddy's (MS) money from the moneytree. But when that will not have
result he is aiming for...daddy wil not be happy....

 

[DForce]

But that's not what is this about.
Because even if you like quality games, you can recognize, that Jim Ryan's input as a CEO has nothing to do with quality of Sony's first-party games. He is CEO from 2019. So basically all games that are coming out rn (Horizon, GT7, God of War, Ratchet, Returnal) was approved and budgeted before he came to his role. I'm trying to evaluate both of them from the time they came into their roles.

So, Ryan from 2019
Revealed PS5
Bullshited everybody with "We believe in generations" statements
Raised prices of his consoles almost 2 years after their release
Revealed PSVR2
Revamped PS Plus
Tried to shut down old PS Store which backfired
Bought several studios started with Insomniac in 2019
Closed Japan Studio
Started publishing PS Studios games on PC
Lead the charge into increasing price of games
is charging players with next-gen fee with first-party games
is leading charge into GaaS games

TLDR; When he came into his position, he received business which is greatly set-up by his predecessors, and his decision while sometimes good and make financial sense come across as profit-driven and not consumer friendly.

Spencer from 2014
Got rid of mandatory Kinect with Xbox One
Brought backwards compatibility with 360
Closed several studios starting with Lionhead
Cancelled Scalebound
Made Xbox One X
Created Game Pass
Decided that first-party games will come into Game Pass Day one
Convinced Microsoft's leadership that they need to invest into Xbox more which directly lead to purchase of Mojang, several other studios, Bethesda and Activision Blizzard
Increased number of first-party studios from 5 to 23 (30+ after Activision BLizzard)
Championed cross-play
Tried to increase price of Xbox Live Gold
Made Xbox Series consoles (with cheapest and also most powerful console on the market) and Xbox All-Access Plan
Pushed into broad ecosystem with consoles/PC/cloud all interconnected
Started to release Xbox first-party on PC day one
Xbox Play Anywhere, Smart Delivery, FPS Boost...that are all his babies

TLDR; Spencer inherited trainwreck of a platform that came out with tragic reveal of Xbox One. He not only "saved" Xbox, but he also convinced Microsoft that they need to invest into platform to be successful in future. He also made some questionable decisions, but honestly his only "sin" is that he started investing into first-party output late (from 2018) so competing platforms are still ahead in this category.

Of course, if you are ignoring fact that Ryan came into power in 2019 and you are giving him credit for stuff that his predecessors did, I can see that you like his work more. But I have feeling that many people in this thread are acting like "Ryan has better first-party games so he is better." Which does not need to be necessarily true.

Well
Jim
- Negativity towards older games
- Overcharging for TLOU Remake
- Almost backed out of HFW free-update.

Phil
- Bullshitted everyone with "True 4K gaming"
- Bullshitted everyone with VR and Hololens
- Xbox Series S creating problems for developers despite the cheaper price
- Lack of first-party titles within the past 8 years.
- Lack of BC support going forward
- Mismanagement of first-party studios.
- Halo Infinite Launch, which was one of their major IPs

Jim has only been in power for less than 5 years and Phil Spencer has had a longer run.

I went into last generation as a Xbox gamer, and there's no doubt that there has been a severe lack of first-party titles over the past 8 years or so and many empty promises by Phil Spencer. He can make pro-gamer choices such as Game Pass and crossplay, but the lack of First Part content has hurt them.

 

[TLZ]

Who gives a shit. They're there to make money for their trillion dollar corporate, not to be friends with you.

 

[nightmare-slain]

Who gives a shit. They're there to make money for their trillion dollar corporate, not to be friends with you.

Sony is not a trillion dollar company. neither is Nintendo.

Nintendo = $49,000,000,000
Sony = $98,000,000,000
MS = $1,840,000,000,000

notice how MS has an extra three zero's. they are worth more than Sony + Nintendo combined.

but yeah...these billion/trillion $ companies are not your friend. they are out to make money. they don't give a shit about you defending them on the internet.

 

[makaveli60]

3rd party publishers historically supported mainly the devices with the biggest market share in 3rd party sales. Before the first PS it was Nintendo, so they supported Nintendo. As PS1 started to skyrocket and both PS1 and PS2 dominated the market for 3rd parties, they sticked to PS. Then PS3 had a more tied result compared to 360 so the support was more split between them, also because the development costs skyrocketed and they needed more revenue sources, so many big previously exclusive 3rd party IPs moved to multi.

PS4 dominated again so they supported them again. PS5 even if supply constrained broke many records and has a record demand so apparently will dominate again and will be again the best selling platform for the 3rd parties. So 3rd parties will continue supporting it because they'll consider it's their biggest and more reliable market. So if or when they have to choose a platform that they specially support, its the one that gives them more money.

When it isn't the case, money from someone like MS, Google or Nintendo (and Sony, obviously) helps to moneyhat some exclusive from this publisher or even to buy it.


Jimbo expanded the manpower of all internal 1st party teams and acquired Insomniac, Bungie, Bluepoint, Housemarque and more. Broke all records on revenue, profit, consoles sold, 1st party games sold, awards won, subscribers, console engagement or demand. Is opening the market of their IPs to movies, tv shows, PC and mobile and is highly improving their game subs and VR.

It's hard to ask more to Jimbo, even if part of the good and bad things they did came from the previous eras (where Jimbo already was there and was promoted to CEO because his great results). And well, you could also say that part of who was there before him also did it party because of the legacy of the ones who came before him.


The biggest PS market has been historically Europe, and Jimbo was there since the early days pushing the ship. And he did it when until then for Sega and Nintendo Europe was a small market way smaller than USA and Japan. Jimbo didn't start now as CEO.

Jimbo had a key role building that Ferrari that he later got as CEO.

All that sounds good, but don’t matter to me at all as a mere gamer and not being a stakeholder in Sony or something...

 

[TLZ]

Sony is not a trillion dollar company. neither is Nintendo.

Nintendo = $49,000,000,000
Sony = $98,000,000,000
MS = $1,840,000,000,000

notice how MS has an extra three zero's. they are worth more than Sony + Nintendo combined.

but yeah...these billion/trillion $ companies are not your friend. they are out to make money. they don't give a shit about you defending them on the internet.

Thanks for the clarification. And you did get my point

 

[Raonak]

Spencer talks a lot of good game, but barely has any good games.

while Jimbo just delivers the good games.

 

[yurinka]

All that sounds good, but don’t matter to me at all as a mere gamer and not being a stakeholder in Sony or something...

You don't need to be a stakeholder to have an opinion and talk about games in a forum.

 

[makaveli60]

You don't need to be a stakeholder to have an opinion and talk about games in a forum.

Like, that’s exactly what I’ve been doing, right? What are you trying to tell me?

 

[yurinka]

Like, that’s exactly what I’ve been doing, right? What are you trying to tell me?

You said "don’t matter to me at all as a mere gamer and not being a stakeholder in Sony or something...".

I'm trying to tell you that it can matter to you as a gamer and not as stakeholder, and that it's fine to talk about it as a gamer who likes to analyze the market and the companies in a game forum. And that in fact, stakeholders don't care about most of the topics I mentioned there.

And well, also try to tell you that the narrative that some of you have -or in this case indirectly implied- that to talk about reasons of why a company performs well or their strategy don't matter for players but to stakeholders instead it's bullshit and sometimes is used as fallacy to try others stop talking about these topics, because these things directly affect gamers since they define what games do we get, the budget they receive, how are they are, where are they published, help us understand why they reached to this point and how they may continue evolving, etc.

 

[Celcius]

Not going to vote, but Phil is the only one I ever see talking.I wouldn’t know the other two if I saw them on the street.

 

[The Stig]

no idea. I dont really pay attention to any of these guys ever since that moron fils-aimes

 

[XXL]

I don't care about any of them.

The only industry executive I've ever liked was Shuhei Yoshida. He doesn't come off as a try hard, while alot of them do.

The Kaz gifs and memes were funny, but I dont care about him either.

 

[damidu]

don’t care. they are company suits,
at least one doesn’t try to pose as your nice goofy gaming buddy

 

[makaveli60]

You said "don’t matter to me at all as a mere gamer and not being a stakeholder in Sony or something...".

I'm trying to tell you that it can matter to you as a gamer and not as stakeholder, and that it's fine to talk about it as a gamer who likes to analyze the market and the companies in a game forum. And that in fact, stakeholders don't care about most of the topics I mentioned there.

And well, also try to tell you that the narrative that some of you have -or in this case indirectly implied- that to talk about reasons of why a company performs well or their strategy don't matter for players but to stakeholders instead it's bullshit and sometimes is used as fallacy to try others stop talking about these topics, because these things directly affect gamers since they define what games do we get, the budget they receive, how are they are, where are they published, help us understand why they reached to this point and how they may continue evolving, etc.

But the things that were listed there by the other poster I answered to at best don’t matter in the end game (by which I mean for us, as gamers) or at worst even affects us negatively.