Support NeoGAF

[RevGaming]

Sony about to learn live service games bomb more often than not.

Most single player games bomb.

Not from Sony.

So why can't I expect the same wkth GaaS? Maybe the majority are hits and a lot of popular games stop being that popular since sony is offering something better (which is not hard).

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

Okay now that you put it that way, maybe some of my concerns have been dissuaded. The traditional AAA games they've been funding since 2019, some of them still haven't released, and they've been putting roughly $170 million - $180 million each year since 2019 towards those.

So even if the live-service/GaaS budget looks to be really big (especially for FY25), it probably actually still turns out to be less in total funding by that point than what the traditional games from FY19 to FY25 will have received.

The only concern from that POV would be if for successive FYs the ratio continues similarly lopsided in favor of the GaaS/live-service content. But I suspect, especially considering post-FY25 they will have stabilized on at least a few of the live-service/GaaS titles as big titles to just continuously fund for updates (but wouldn't require huge financial investments to do that), naturally the allocation for the non-traditional games comes back down and it swings back to prioritizing traditional games again.

Which going by historical trends would just mean total investment costs come down as a whole. But, per-game costs for AAA games as a whole, including traditional ones, might increase more, so traditional game funding might increase to like $200 million or something like that per FY like around FY26 or FY27.

I've been pretty clear about what I think Sony's long-term plan is with their Live Service game push:

I don't think the overall dev spend goes down eventually. I think they're building for a Live Service game cash cow now to mitigate the risks of increased AAA SP game costs coming into this gen. And it's absolutely the smart way to go.

If at least say one or two of the big 5 or 6 Live service games they're developing does gangbusters, then they will have that constant billion-dollar revenue stream to offset the risk of letting their hit-factory SP dev studios branch out to new IP, while also fuelling additional acquisitions of indie and mid-tier (and/or even AAA SP-focused studios).

Dev cycles are expected to extend once full-fat current-gen development gets into full swing. So in order to maintain the steady stream of hit games, Sony will expand their first-party portfolio, while filling in the gaps with strategic 3rd party exclusive partnerships where they can.

 

[gow3isben]

If the future is live service then Xbox should focus on single player games.

And I will jump ship to them.

 

[RevGaming]

What you are saying doesn't make sense though. Its unreasonable.

The same thing that got them to where they are now, they are still doing. And even increasing spending in that area. It just so happens to be that they are also expanding their market. And spending on areas that they previously didn't have much of a presence.

If spending was reduced in the areas we love, then what you are saying would have merit. I don't care about GAAS, and likely never will, however, I am fine as long as they are still spending on what I love. Which they are doing, and even increasing spending in that area.

So your problem here is not just you don't like something, but you have a problem with them trying to expand to that market, even if it doesn't affect what you do like. Even when spending is increasing in what you do like. See? Unreasonable.

Guess the joke is on me for trying to reason this out then.

People don't get single player gamers will always buy ps5s. They need to make sure the people that don't give a damn about single player always buy a Playstation... but gamers are entitled so every sony games has to be SP.

 

[Crayon]

If the future is live service then Xbox should focus on single player games.

And I will jump ship to them.

If ms could snap their fingers and compete on sp games I imagine they would have done so by now.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

If the future is live service then Xbox should focus on single player games.

And I will jump ship to them.

If Xbox focused on any games at all it would be helpful. They can't seem to get any of their big games out the door; in a polished and reasonable state.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

A lil different

Hermen Hulst talked about their GaaS plans as bringing the "Single Player production values to MP Live experiences"

I am hoping we get some unique titles that can appeal to both SP and MP players alike and offer that high quality experience. What we typically get with GaaS is a bunch of watered down SP experiences that fail to keep players engaged or excited

It's a HUGE undertaking; I don't think there is a single example in the entire industry that has succeeded at both.

form that point of view, Factions is the most intriguing and important game sony can show tomorrow.

 

[RevGaming]

This doesn’t seem true though. They have less studios working on SP games than they did last gen, and some of their premier studios are working on live service games which is probably going to tie them down pretty hard.

Safe bet that Naughty Dog will again only release two games this generation and one of them will be live service. It’s disheartening.

false. Ps5 has already a better single player catalogue for the first 3 years vs ps4.

We can go studio by studio and you'll see there are more sp games. Last gen was ghost, tlou 2, gow, hzd, u4 and spiderman alone. At least the ones that are system sellers and are good.

 

[feynoob]

Most single player games bomb.

Not from Sony.

So why can't I expect the same wkth GaaS? Maybe the majority are hits and a lot of popular games stop being that popular since sony is offering something better (which is not hard).

live service games are different. Unlike SP, you need engagement. Without that, you cant sustain those games, even if its high quality.
Think of it like shooter games.

 

[Unknown?]

What irks me the most about this is the fact that they are clearly stating that's what they want to put more investment into from a first party perspective. So 60% of their resources will be going towards live service crap? Nah, not for me, they can forget seeing my money going forwards if that's where they're heading.

But if you look traditional investment is up a lot compared to this year and slightly over 2019.

 

[feynoob]

But if you look traditional investment is up a lot compared to this year and slightly over 2019.

You have to account the production timeline.

Most games these days take longer to make, so you need more studios to have more content.

If your studios are working on live service games, you are reducing that investment. This is an area where Xbox is struggling currently.

Live service games would take time and resources from their studios.

Imagine insomniac doing a live service game like Bungie with destiny 2. That is a loss of 2-4 AAA games.

 

[Unknown?]

You have to account the production timeline.

Most games these days take longer to make, so you need more studios to have more content.

If your studios are working on live service games, you are reducing that investment. This is an area where Xbox is struggling currently.

Live service games would take time and resources from their studios.

Imagine insomniac doing a live service game like Bungie with destiny 2. That is a loss of 2-4 AAA games.

Then what are they investing in of it's up? How can they lose AAA games while investing more into them?

 

[Gamerguy84]

Everything evolves or eventually gets left behind. PS has to as well. As long as they don't forget what got them here and keep pumping out those first party hi production single player games.

 

[Torrent of Pork]

So Sony 1st party is going to be 3rd person action adventure games with stealth elements, and mtx-infused live service games that demand 200% of my time.

I think I'll invest in PC.

 

[feynoob]

Then what are they investing in of it's up? How can they lose AAA games while investing more into them?

Because AAA cost more money and time, and needs more studios or expanding current studios in to multiple teams.

As people said here, games take time these days. We are not in 2-3 years era, due to high graphics and size of the game. You need to have too many studios working on those AAA games.

With live service games in the mix, that means some studios will be occupied with those games, which will result in less AAA games.

 

[Leo9]

Then what are they investing in of it's up? How can they lose AAA games while investing more into them?

Investing more? That increase won’t even cover inflation.

 

[Unknown?]

Because AAA cost more money and time, and needs more studios or expanding current studios in to multiple teams.

As people said here, games take time these days. We are not in 2-3 years era, due to high graphics and size of the game. You need to have too many studios working on those AAA games.

With live service games in the mix, that means some studios will be occupied with those games, which will result in less AAA games.

It's only a few years difference though, it's doubtful two years difference means it costs that much more while making less games.

All studios are larger plus they bought some large new studios so what you just said has happened.

Investing more? That increase won’t even cover inflation.

Is there any evidence this isn't adjusted for inflation? It's a pretty basic chart that doesn't even show numbers other than percentages.

 

[TaylorSwiftFan]

I think they will succeed, big time. (with several fail GaaS of course).

Remember how people say most PS gamer wont subscribe PS premium?

I don’t know why people said that about Premium - it’s only $20 more per year than Extra and it includes the Classic catalog and game trials.

 

[Crayon]

The next round of concern trolling is born before your eyes, people.

To be fair, I think some are legitimately worried. Not for reasons that make sense to me, but sincerely.

Just get ready to hear a whole lot of this for a while:

So Sony 1st party is going to be 3rd person action adventure games with stealth elements, and mtx-infused live service games that demand 200% of my time.

I think I'll invest in PC.

 

[existensmaximum]

According to Jim Ryan

I really wonder which companies Brand B and Brand C could be!

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

I really wonder which companies Brand B and Brand C could be!

Atari and Sega

 

[mckmas8808]

That's not what I wanted to see.

Me either. I'm getting worried. But maybe I shouldn't be.

 

[jm89]

Me either. I'm getting worried. But maybe I shouldn't be.

It only looks bad as they are now investing in live service alot more, but the investment in traditional has gone up aswell.

 

[Topher]

Me either. I'm getting worried. But maybe I shouldn't be.

Some are saying we are worrying over nothing. I hope they are right.

 

[X-Wing]

That's not what I wanted to see.

Investment in single player remains basically the same. They are just massively increasing investment in GaaS.

 

[ergem]

With live service games in the mix, that means some studios will be occupied with those games, which will result in less AAA games.

That's why Sony bought Bungie, Haven, and all that recent acquisitions doing GaaS games.

AAA studios specializing in single-player games will continue to make single-player games. Naughty Dog may be doing a single-player game as they used to alongside their GaaS Factions game.

 

[Ronin_7]

PS5 is surpassing PS4 in every category

It's unstoppable wow

 

[Kusarigama]

I am laughing so much at this, how they've referred to Nintendo as brand B and Xbox as brand C

 

[jm89]

PS5 is surpassing PS4 in every category

That full game decrease is a bit of a shame.

Also i assume add on includes mtx? If so and it explains why sony are gonna heavily invest in live service. I'm not a fan of live service, but then again I can't blame them when spend for mtx has gone up that much.

 

[ergem]

I do think however that Sony should also invest in new studios doing single-player games like Housemarque. They should acquire Ember Labs for example.

But more strategic is to acquire studios that are well-known for Western RPGs. Sony seriously needs WRPGs.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

According to Jim Ryan

look at that "mindshare". this brand is too damn strong. it must be stopped.

 

[jm89]

look at that "mindshare". this brand is too damn strong. it must be stopped.

Paging congress as we speak.

 

[mckmas8808]

It's going to be interesting to me if Sony has any way to create GaaS titles that don't SOLELY depend on multiplayer engagement.

Like, I think it would be cool if games could support Solo play with asynchronous online community building. Like in "Factions" you join an online community but don't need to play with them and in the background they are helping to build your faction community which allows, over time, for stronger individual character progression and you can play these missions solo or in co-op and bring resources back to the "tribe" in the background while others aren't actively playing.

This would be super smart. I love this idea.

Plus what happened to this????

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

I appreciate you and @ChiefDada putting things into perspective, but I do notice the amount going into traditional game investments is barely budging, and that can be considered good and bad simultaneously.

You already touched on the good, but the bad is that budgets for AAA traditional games keep increasing, so $180 million in FY25 likely won't net the same number of 1P AAA releases that $180 million would have in 2019 or 2020, as an example.

2021 for example, I don't know what portion was allocated to traditional games but I assume it wasn't that far off from 2019 or 2023. Had they released on time, we would've gotten GT7, HFW and GOW Ragnarok that year, all cross-gen games. But if the budget allocation for traditional games stays relatively static going forward, and PS5-only sequels to those games were to come about, we might only end up with two such games for a fiscal year instead of three, due to increased costs per game and yet the amount for those traditional games basically staying the same.

So, that is a potential downside here. Just something to maybe consider.

Yeah, you are completely right. That really could be a downside, I did consider it though but I guess I just looked t it slightly differently.

However thinking about it further, I guess regardless of how one looks at it, inflation is a factor. But indulge me for a second.

What I considered is how that $180M is actually spent. I think people sometimes forget that Sony is not paying for games per se but instead paying developers. So when Sony says they spent $180M on traditional games, what that just means is that they spent $180M in wages, contracts, and marketing where necessary for that year.

Eg... A 300-person studio with an average salary of $80,000/year (and this is actually a high average especially when you consider some of these devs are in Europe/Asia) still comes up to $24M/year. About half of that if in Europe/Asia. And then you have studios whose primary function is to be support staff (also no coincidence that most of those kinda studios are in Asia...), so yeah... it's kinda hard to just look at the spending and take it as just that.

 

[reksveks]

That's not what I wanted to see.

It's a slight increase from last year's slide iirc. Just snipped out comparable slides from this year and last year.

The 250m pc revenue is a miss on their forecast but it's still rather irrelevant to thier business.

 

[reksveks]

Quick snip from the last two years

FY23 Slide on Investment Model

FY22 Slide on Investment Model

FY23 Slide on LTD spend and monetization

FY22 Slide on LTD spend and monetization

FY23 Slide on IP investment

FY22 Slide on IP investment

FY23 Slide on Brand Strength

FY22 slide on Brand Strength

FY23 Slide on release per platform

FY22 Slide on release per platform

FY23 Slide on PC growth

FY22 slides on PC growth

FY23 slides on accessories

Apologies for the size of the images.

 

[Bonfires Down]

Gotta be a stacked PC release schedule if they expect to almost double revenue.

Factions
Forbidden West
Ghost of Tsushima
Rift Apart
Gran Turismo 7
Demon’s Souls?
TLOU2?
More GaaS?
Bloodborne Remake

 

[Panajev2001a]

PS5 is surpassing PS4 in every category

Decrease in full game ltv while subscriptions ltv increase… well, people not on the GP koolaid saw how one would hurt the other and well it explains Sony’s growing investment in titles like in the GaaS/Live Services slide too because those are more immune from the effects of subscription services and free games expectations hurting perceived games value and games sales.

 

[TaylorSwiftFan]

So if I understand correctly Sony made 17% less money from PC than expected.

 

[DonJimbo]

All hail Jimbo

 

[Denton]

Hopefully few of the GAAS games bomb and Jimbo will reorient back to singleplayer first.

So if I understand correctly Sony made 17% less money from PC than expected.

Yep. TLOU sales heavily underperformed, as expected with its technical problems. Hopefully a good lesson for the future, do not skimp on optimization and do not prioritize release date over quality.

 

[mrmustard]

Gotta be a stacked PC release schedule if they expect to almost double revenue.

Factions
Forbidden West
Ghost of Tsushima
Rift Apart
Gran Turismo 7
Demon’s Souls?
TLOU2?
More GaaS?
Bloodborne Remake

Don't be silly. Only possible on PS5!

 

[Eotheod]

You know what, I'm just happy more PC games are coming. It doesn't canabalise sales, because those titles will still come out on PS5 as well. The idea that the platform getting more revenue through "double dipping" alternative platforms isn't a bad thing, it should actually be encouraged. Still same amount of traditional support, just adding an extra release to the title.

 

[StealthGoblin]

If the future is live service then Xbox should focus on single player games.

And I will jump ship to them.

Sony aren’t making less single player games. They are just investing in more multiplayer and GAAS games.

Remember, Bungie factor into those percentages as they look them on and they are exclusively GAAS, and games like MLB, Gran Turismo etc also fall into that category even though most people play them as SP or MP games.

 

[HerjansEagleFeeder]

The percentage of investments going into new IP dev is very promising. Thank god they don't intent to repeat the same shit over and over again like certain other companies.

 

[Heisenberg007]

It's a HUGE undertaking; I don't think there is a single example in the entire industry that has succeeded at both.

Grand Theft Auto.

But I agree. It's a tough nut to crack. And if anybody can, it's Sony.

 

[ToadMan]

Gotta be a stacked PC release schedule if they expect to almost double revenue.

Factions
Forbidden West
Ghost of Tsushima
Rift Apart
Gran Turismo 7
Demon’s Souls?
TLOU2?
More GaaS?
Bloodborne Remake

The chart wasn’t PC revenue - it was ratio by title.

Those GAAS games will all be on PC, hence the percentage.

 

[Cyberpunkd]

According to Jim Ryan

Man, Sony rubbing it in with the colours of Brand B and C.

 

[Heisenberg007]

I do think however that Sony should also invest in new studios doing single-player games like Housemarque. They should acquire Ember Labs for example.

But more strategic is to acquire studios that are well-known for Western RPGs. Sony seriously needs WRPGs.

Yeah, but the problem is that Microsoft has pretty much hoarded all of them at this point.

Only CDPR and Techland remain, but both of those publishers/studios are a mess in terms of management problems. Sony would be hesitant to invest billions of $ in them just yet.

Alternatively, however, Sony's own first-party studios have been doing a great job at making RPGs: Horizon, God of War, Ghost of Tsushima, etc. In a couple of iterations, I feel like those games will become even bigger.

But yeah, a studio like Larian would do them good - if they can use their expertise and hook them up with a AAA team to lend their expertise.

 

[reksveks]

The chart wasn’t PC revenue - it was ratio by title.

Those GAAS games will all be on PC, hence the percentage.

There is a chart where they are 450m revenue from pc up from 250m. Obviously the back catalogue will increase and drive a decent chunk of that 450m.

Also another note, the 250m includes Bungie pc revenue