Where are the japanese games though
Steam has 120m players, who active every month, compared to Sony 100+MAU.If they put all of their games Day 1 on PC though, they lose the value of double-dipping because some of the players who may've bought it on console at launch and then on PC years later, could just choose the PC version and be done with it. Even if Day 1 on PC could remove certain bonus content and enhancements that late ports afford.
Vice Versa. Steam and Epic has PC users, who dont have a PS console. Sony can make more money if those users buy their console.They also would need to be able to guarantee they can sell a significant portion of copies on PC to make up for the loss of potential 3P revenue (and their cut from that revenue) of players who decide to go PC for those Sony 1P games instead of picking up a PlayStation...and there are WAY more 3P games released a year than any number of games Sony (or any platform holder) can release in that same time frame.
Not every 1st party game sells 10m copies in the 1st year, or even 20m for a long time.So even if a platform holder like Sony gets a majority of their 30% cut from games priced at $30 or $40, if that still equates to 100 million units of 3P software sold that year, they make a lot more versus potentially reducing that 3P revenue and selling say an extra 8 million units combined on PC for 1P Day-1 games. Say that by them doing all 1P, single-player story-driven games Day 1 on PC, Sony lose 10% of their core console market but 30% of division revenue (lost 3P sales, lost subscription revenue, lost DLC & MTX purchases in their ecosystem due to lost sales, etc.).
Look at games these days. Call of duty, cyberpunk2077.Quantity of games is never really the problem, the question is the quality. And more specifically, as MS are a platform holder, which of those games will rise up and be a leading example for the industry to follow in terms of some or multiple aspects of game design? More sheer amount of games can give you more chances at such quality but in no way guarantee any of them will actually hit that type of quality.
As well, more devs means more overall management and it's not really a matter of talent at question with Xbox, but their management capabilities over their teams. They are still struggling very clearly at demonstrating that management has improved.
Whales only matter on games, which sells alot of mtx. Games like fifa benefits from those. MS doesnt have those type of MTX. Their model is skins, which anyone can buy it. It doesn't bring them more money like call of duty and fifa.Maybe, but that depends on player communities and what portion of them are "whales" or big spenders. All of those games you listed already have much smaller average player communities than the bigger PC live-service GaaS titles, and I doubt they have a higher density of whales compared to those games, either. So needless to say while they probably generate some money it is not as much as the more popular games.
That would have worked well, if PC wasnt that strong. Steam alone has 120m monthly userbase. 3P publishers are paying more attention to the PC landscape. And since PC is just digital only, 3P make more money on steam, than consoles. So Sony is fighting Steam, Epic, Xbox and Switch at the same time to gain more sales. With the new gen, Sony would lose their strongest PS4, once most publishers move to next gen only.Yes that's correct, and maybe that approach works for Microsoft. My point is, that approach very likely won't work for Sony without causing some notable decrease in overall console sales and spending in the PS ecosystem. And unlike MS, Sony isn't a $2.5 trillion company that has a gaming division which is only a paltry amount of their total revenue, wherein the other divisions can more than cover any softening of revenue and profits for.
Sony needs console gaming and the full PS ecosystem (which includes console as the root) a lot more than Microsoft needs console gaming and the Xbox ecosystem, and it's been that way for several years now. So I wouldn't expect Sony to more closely mirror MS's approach for any 1P games that aren't easily identifiable as live-service GaaS titles, and even there, they may be a bit selective (i.e in the off-chance they ever did a Parappa live-service game (not saying they will or that I'd even want THAT type of direction for Parappa, but it's an example), it may probably not be Day 1 on PC and just be something for PlayStation).
For the 1P single-player games, especially marquee story-driven content, their approach will more closely mirror Nintendo's, then you might get PC ports much later for some or all of such titles (eventually). They won't really risk Day 1 PC for any of those.
Jan2 week, then the week after that. Apr 10 week, apr 17 week for Sea of thieve this year. FH4 was dominating 2021 weeks.Well I'm looking through the Top 10 right now and I don't see FH4 or Sea of Thieves in there for any point in 2022 so far.
Like I said I'm sure the games are doing pretty decent sales on average, but I would in no way say they are dominating Steam sales charts, let alone concurrent players.
Metro prime is like Ratchet. Sales arent that strong. Mario kart, Breath of wild, Pokémon are like the AAA Sony/MS which sells alot. And none of those AAA games come close to Animal crossing level of sale.Well even when their games weren't reaching those types of sales they never brought them over to PC. Also not all Nintendo games reach the level of sales Mario Kart does. Metroid Dread definitely hasn't, nor will it, should they consider porting that to PC since there's no chance in hell that game gets to even 25 million let alone 45 million?
Sony does tend to sell higher on day1. 2020 though was lockdown. Still 8m GOT for brand new IP was very impressive. I gotta give props to them.Most AAA games, including Sony's, do the bulk of their sales on launch day and within the first couple of weeks. That's just how the AAA market tends to work. Only some of Nintendo's games are excused from that type of model, and even some of Sony's have managed to show more evergreen properties these days (such as Miles Morales, which sees big sales spikes whenever PS5s are in stock despite also being available on PS4).
Also even at $40 that is still a lot of revenue Sony is bringing in, whether physical or especially digital.
MS pays attention to MAU for gamepass. Because its subscription service. But that doesnt tell the story for steam, which doesnt have a subscription service like gamepass. You have to pay money for steam games. So anyone who plays on steam, buys the game. But the keyword is play. I have bought several steam games, which I havent played it yet. Those are sales to the publishers. But steam wont record me, since I am not playing the game. Hence why steam player count doesnt tell a whole alot of story.Well MS are the ones who introduced MAU into the conversation years back, and in terms of solid numbers MAU and such metrics (such as "lookalikes") are the only ones MS present publicly when talking gaming revenue (aside from general revenue figures per sector).
Also their GamePass sub numbers are basically another form of measuring active players, you can't be implying sub numbers are also junk for fanboy kids too, right?
Unique players matters, when you want to know the bigger picture. It has faulty numbers, like using the same disc. But those faulty are minimal. It can give you an estimate of sales on steam for example. Anyone that opened the game, would be counted as a player. Just like how faulty players affact the numbers, there are also users, who bought the game, but didnt launch it yet. So the numbers evens out.Except it doesn't. Or at least, we don't know for certain if it does because Microsoft doesn't provide enough data. It could be millions of cumulative players, but those might not all be 100% unique players, just player instances that log on each day over a period of days, weeks or months.
Basically the way it is on Steam when a lot of companies mention MAU. Then you look at concurrent player counts (something MS does not provide through GamePass) and you get a better picture of how popular a game really is in terms of the core mainline community, when a certain level of players can be maintained over the long-term period.
I listed right now in my list. I made 1 wrong from my data though. FH4 was dominating the weekly sales for 2021, not 2020. SOT had 4 appearances so far in top 10 this year. FH5 affected fh4 sales, so we dont see it in top 10.Except I just mentioned (and checked for 2022 at least so far) that MS games are rarely, if ever, in the Top 10 weekly sales on Steam. They do decent on Steam on average but I suspect any that do pop into Top 10 and aren't brand new releases, manage that through sales discounts or specific events.
Agreed.They’ll just continue to drip feed old games onto PC, a single studio isn’t enough to keep up with everything that’s releasing.
You don't like that Sony is putting their platform, they've poured billions into making, first?Have fun waiting I guess
Personally I really don’t like Sony’s strategy, everything is timed exclusive to console and once the PC version is out the hype is gone and it’ll just be an old and expensive game I’ve already played or had the story spoiled. Takes away much of the fun even though it’ll be better versions. It’s such an annoying strategy even though I understand why they’re doing it.
Someone gets itTheir main source of revenue are those PS+ subs, digital revenue from PS store and royalties. That's their business. First party sales are only a fraction of their actual gaming business.
We know this because they released the splits themselves.
70.5m units of PlayStation software for the Quarter -
14.5m units of first party games for the Quarter -
Digital Software Ratio 71%
47.4m PS+ Subscribers
106m Monthly Active Users
What's more important? 14 million first party sales in their biggest quarter with HFW and GT7 which they can only replicate once every year, maybe once every two years? Or 47 million users paying $60 every year?
They have 106 million active users on PS platforms. THAT is their moneymaker. A first party game that takes 5 years to come out and then sells an extra 1-2 million on PC is pennies compared to their main business which is making those 106 million users feel prioritized.
Insane reading a first party console manufacturer literally come out and say we are going multiplatform. If they want to go multiplatform, they should go third party.
If anything it will probably have the effect of expanding the brand appeal. There will always be people who prefer the simplicity of dedicated consoles. But at the end of the day, the soul of PlayStation isn't found in a box. It's in the games that carry the name.by the way, to all the people saying "playstation shouldn't do this, it's damaging their brand etc etc etc" The xbox series X/S has been out for 18 or so months and has been the fastest selling xbox in history, and all of its games are available on PC. Playstation is the more popular brand. Do you honestly think people are gonna stop buying playstations when the games go to PC? No. They're not gonna. Some people perfer a console experience. Some people like the nice UI. Some people like plug n play. It ain't a big deal.
Yes, and another one announced for summer. But they are two, so you may count them as three games for this year so far.3 or 4 sounds a bit high, they’ve only had 1 so far this year right?
100% on to something with this point; all these acquisitions DO affect Nintendo, but people want to pretend that Nintendo doesn't rely on 3P software. Even though that's a big reason the Switch has been doing so well: 3P software, particularly from Japanese developers (but also certain Western teams as well).
I don't know when the narrative suddenly changed that 3P doesn't matter for Nintendo when the Wii U primarily failed due to lack of 3P support, despite having a lot of the same 1P games the Switch now has. Kind of feels like a way for some people to excuse dreaming up acquisitions and conveniently ignore the impact on Nintendo out of the conversation, and that kind of feels cheap.
>no GT7Yes, and another one announced for summer. But they are two, so you may count them as three games for this year so far.
This is the PC line-up I'd release:
-God of War Trilogy Remastered (Q4 2022, months before the PS5 only sequel)
-Spider-Man Remastered + Spider-Man Miles Morales (Q2 2023, months before the PS5 only sequel)
-TLOUDC bunble including TLOU Remake+TLOU2 remastered (Q3 2023, months after being released on PS5 and the release of the TV show)
-Uncharted Nathan Drake Collection (Q1 2024, months before the PS5 only sequel)
-Bloodborne Director's Cut (Q2 2024, half a year after PS5 version)
-God of War Origins Collection (Q3 2024)
-Knack I & II Director's Cut NFT Remastered Metaverse (H1 2025)
Eh? It’s common sense. I said I understand why they are doing it but for me it’s only an annoyance, I’ll either play an inferior version day 1 or has to wait years for a superior version or end up double dipping and pay 2x the price. Why would I like it?You don't like that Sony is putting their platform, they've poured billions into making, first?
You can't make this stuff up folks
Pumping $300m for more first party game?
This FY they'll invest extra ~$307M to grow their existing (not counting Bungie or Haven, see above) gamedev teams.Pour more money into Insomniac. Watch them crank out the games, and also put them on PC.
According to this list MS was going to release around 16 AAA games during 2022, including Scalebound and other ones that still are in preproduction.>no GT7
>no Demons Souls
Your list ain't it, fam. Those games are basically confirmed too (Nvidia leak).
Timelines are never set in stone. There is also no Scalebound on the list. And Microsoft only has 11 games on the list, 7 of which have already been confirmedAccording to this list MS was going to release around 16 AAA games during 2022, including Scalebound and other ones that still are in preproduction.
How do you know it's bullshit? So far the list has been very accurate.The list may had some good guesses and a few proper leaks, but also a huge amount of bullshit like the Sony games you mention.
Scalebound was there in the list and listed for 2022. And they were over 11 MS games listed for 2022, I saw it.Timelines are never set in stone. There is also no Scalebound on the list. And Microsoft only has 11 games on the list, 7 of which have already been confirmed
Because many of them were clear fakes. The list had a lot of bullcrap, maybe you're talking about a shortlisted version.How do you know it's bullshit? So far the list has been very accurate.
Steam has 120m players, who active every month, compared to Sony 100+MAU.
That is alot of users, who can buy their games, even if some console users opted to buy it on pc.
There is also the side affect, which can attract those PC users to PS brand. Some PC like to play only on PC. If Sony gives them their games, they might be able to change their mind and buy PS consoles.
This is the current plan for Sony, until they reach the day1 in the future.
Vice Versa. Steam and Epic has PC users, who dont have a PS console. Sony can make more money if those users buy their console.
Day1 is also about attracting those people to your console. People dont just be done playing your games on games, and call it end of the day. They would have some interest about your platform. One of the key reason, why Sony is focusing on PC. Those users have the potential to buy their system. Its untapped market. Even Japanese studios are focusing on PC market, more than consoles. See Monster hunter Rise.
Not every 1st party game sells 10m copies in the 1st year, or even 20m for a long time.
3P games exist on all platforms. People who have PC/PS would buy their 3P games on PC, same if those users have Xbox. That math is what destroyed xbox one. Xbox users migrated to PS, once Xbox one was considered a failure. With MS making Xbox attractive, and PC becoming a hot money printing for those 3P developers, Sony would need to look for another revenue.
Sony is entering a new age. Nintendo is overtaking the Japanese's market. Sony is losing their 3P timed exclusive games to steam. Xbox bought bethesda and Activision. Soon, Sony might be able to buy some japanese publishers. With all these acquisition, the guaranteed money is diminishing slowly. And soon Sony would lose Ps4, once most publishers start making the games only next gen consoles, making steam even more attractive.
Look at games these days. Call of duty, cyberpunk2077.
People only care about their quick fix. You yourself might care about Sony quality, but majority of gamers dont. People used to buy fifa every day. Same for call of duty and battlefield.
For MS, The IP is what matters. Elderscrolls games are buggy as hell. But the journey these games offer, makes people forget about those bugs. Just like how cyberpunk2077 sold alot of copies, Skyrim sold 30m copies despite the bugs.
Gamers wont care about any management of MS, as long as the games matches their taste. These idiots bought gta anniversary.
Whales only matter on games, which sells alot of mtx. Games like fifa benefits from those. MS doesnt have those type of MTX. Their model is skins, which anyone can buy it. It doesn't bring them more money like call of duty and fifa.
Halo infinite is anomaly, since it serves 2 games. F2p and SP mode. There is no clear big picture on how many people played SP or MP mode.
Also, player count doesnt tell the whole story.
God of war had 2k players in 24 hour. 0 in 24min right now. That doesn't mean nothing, since god of war has estimate of 2m sales. That is what matters the most. People who spent money, buying the game. Not people who are playing the game.
That would have worked well, if PC wasnt that strong. Steam alone has 120m monthly userbase. 3P publishers are paying more attention to the PC landscape. And since PC is just digital only, 3P make more money on steam, than consoles. So Sony is fighting Steam, Epic, Xbox and Switch at the same time to gain more sales. With the new gen, Sony would lose their strongest PS4, once most publishers move to next gen only.
MS knows this. Its why they are making their windows store attractive now. The more 3P favors steam, the more sales steam would have.
Jan2 week, then the week after that. Apr 10 week, apr 17 week for Sea of thieve this year. FH4 was dominating 2021 weeks.
Most of the rise attributes to steam sales during these weeks.
Metro prime is like Ratchet. Sales arent that strong. Mario kart, Breath of wild, Pokémon are like the AAA Sony/MS which sells alot. And none of those AAA games come close to Animal crossing level of sale.
Sony does tend to sell higher on day1. 2020 though was lockdown. Still 8m GOT for brand new IP was very impressive. I gotta give props to them.
Also long term would sell well. Which is why they managed to hit 20m on their games.
MS pays attention to MAU for gamepass. Because its subscription service. But that doesnt tell the story for steam, which doesnt have a subscription service like gamepass. You have to pay money for steam games. So anyone who plays on steam, buys the game. But the keyword is play. I have bought several steam games, which I havent played it yet. Those are sales to the publishers. But steam wont record me, since I am not playing the game. Hence why steam player count doesnt tell a whole alot of story.
Unique players matters, when you want to know the bigger picture. It has faulty numbers, like using the same disc. But those faulty are minimal. It can give you an estimate of sales on steam for example. Anyone that opened the game, would be counted as a player. Just like how faulty players affact the numbers, there are also users, who bought the game, but didnt launch it yet. So the numbers evens out.
I listed right now in my list. I made 1 wrong from my data though. FH4 was dominating the weekly sales for 2021, not 2020. SOT had 4 appearances so far in top 10 this year. FH5 affected fh4 sales, so we dont see it in top 10.
Top10 steam competes with best games on steam. Making appearance in that top 10, means you sell alot of copies. For example, SOT appeared 2 times in April sales. That is alot of copies, bypassing or sharing space with every new game on that month.
All steam/PC sales does is give more money to the publisher. If Sony wants to increase the budget of their games, Steam/PC sales would help them alot.
The Nvidia list is legit. It's already being proven.Scalebound was there in the list and listed for 2022. And they were over 11 MS games listed for 2022, I saw it.
Because many of them were clear fakes. The list had a lot of bullcrap, maybe you're talking about a shortlisted version.
Example: the Resident Evil game copy pasted from the leaked Capcom schedule (whoever added it to the Nvidia list didn't know the hacker mistranslated from the Japanese its name). Or having a PSP Monster Hunter and with a typo on its name. The list also featured a PS2 MH game plus many, or even things like Mario + Rabbids: Kingdom Battle. Just to name some examples.
No, a ton of the games of the list are fake. Nintendo doesn't pan to release games on PC, MS won"t release over a dozen games this year, Capcom won"t port PS2 or PSP MH games to PC and Sony doesn't plan to releade recent games on PC. All these things are total bullshit even if it got some guesses or rumors right and a few legit leaks.The Nvidia list is legit. It's already being proven.
The problem is that some titles gets canceled. Or out right scrapped.
Because PS is more than a first party console. There are also 3P games on the system.I kind of fail to see how this is the case when, if they bring ALL of their games to PC Day 1, including all the single-player games, what PC player is going to have an incentive to then go buy a PlayStation when they're getting almost all the same 3P games and all of Sony's 1P on PC Day 1? That logic just doesn't make any sense.
That is plain false. PS4 systems didn't disappear from Japan overnight. There are over 9m ps4 in Japan.Japan is not a good example to use here because unlike the West, the console market in Japan has been shrinking gen over gen, not growing. So sales Japanese 3P games that normally could not go on weaker Nintendo hardware would've seen on PlayStation, in the Japanese market, are being lost due to the continued decline of console sales in that market. Those devs/pubs have to make back up those sales so providing those on a platform like PC on Day 1 makes sense...for them.
When did I say that? All I said, was that people moved on from Xbox to PS. Ps to pc. It's normal thing that happens, when people don't find your platform interesting.Wait you kind of contradict a part of your argument here. You say that users with PC & PS would buy their 3P games on PC instead of PS, especially if all of Sony's 1P games (including the single-player games, which are at the heart of this discussion) were on PC Day 1. You even admit that something similar had happened with Xbox once they did Day 1 for all 1P games on PC as well as Xbox.
Just because it's on pc day1, doesn't PREVENT PEOPLE FROM BUYING XBOX.So the idea of MS making Xbox an attractive option this gen doesn't really matter in this discussion when the same situation is present: all of their 1P games, including single-player centric titles & non-live service/GaaS titles, are on PC (specifically, Steam) Day 1, which for a lot of people inherently makes Xbox a less attractive option since they can get all the 1P games and virtually all the 3P games on simply PC without needing to pay for online multiplayer on top of that.
Because Sony can't stop it. PC is already an attractive platform without day1 or Ms/Sony games.If you're suggesting that due to growth of Xbox this generation and PC/Steam becoming an even bigger priority for 3P devs, that Sony needs another revenue stream or two, again how does the logic suddenly jump to them bringing all of their 1P, including marquee single-player games, to PC Day 1 in a way which could impact console sales and 3P revenue within the console ecosystem in ways similar to what happened with Xbox? Which, as I just mentioned, is something MS were a lot more okay with happening because unlike Sony, console gaming is not a major revenue stream for the company as a whole, so they could technically afford for that type of reduction and be perfectly fine as a corporation; for a company like Sony where console gaming is a lot more vital to their structure as a company and their bottom line, that type of reduction may not be sustainable.
Live service games aren't a hit on first try. If Sony isn't careful, they could have some serious damage to their brand. Destruction all star is what happens, if you focus on live service that isn't successful.That's why I've been saying their PC strategy in terms of Day 1 games will almost exclusively focus on live-service GaaS-type games, and even some of those could be on a case-by-case basis. IMO I don't think any company, let alone Sony, really needs 10 live-service GaaS titles to have a big revenue stream, especially if all of those games will need regular content updates. Just a smaller handful of really strong titles would almost always be better. I'm surprised they don't do anything like a new sort of Everquest or Everquest-like, get an updated GT Sport sequel live-service, and a couple of hero shooters (or just one hero shooter and something like Dreams to PC) and call it a day. Sounds more manageable but this isn't my company to make those type of decisions.
I am sorry, but Sony doesn't stand a chance against switch. We know what happened after psp. Psvita was their last chance for that market.Nintendo's dominated the Japanese market before with Wii & DS; Sony's answer to that was the PSP. If anything, I think a similar approach would be justified for the market there currently (except the handheld could just serve as a means for instant portability of PS4 games and streaming & Remote Play of PS5 games; maybe lower-scaled local play of PS5 games but they would need a similar RAM capacity and CPU, probably a ~ 2.5 TF GPU and some new policy for 3P devs to scale visual settings for games to 1/4 unless the hardware had a means to do that automatically. And it'd still need a pretty fast SSD).
It changes too much, when it can move consoles.MS buying Bethesda & ABK doesn't actually change too much for PS in terms of 3P revenue; people like yurinka have calculated total percentages of Bethesda & ABK games like COD on PS fiscal revenue and the amounts weren't large at all when looking at the combined results of everything else. Plus games like COD will still remain multiplat (and likely even come to the Switch/Switch 2) in the future.
It depends on who MS and Sony can negotiate with.The other acquisitions have come from companies that have all intention to maintain the status quo in terms of multiplatform support, so again nothing really changes for Sony (or MS or Nintendo) in those cases, unless companies like Embracer Group start shutting down teams they've purchased and cancelling games outright, or those like Tencent start influencing companies they have majority shares in to cancel certain games altogether. Can't see either of those two playing out.
It matters to Sony alot.I do agree that at some point in the very near future PS4 as far as being a "buffer" incentive for 3Ps is going to lose its power, it will probably happen as soon as next year in fact. However, as long as Sony are able to increase PS5 production and keep production numbers regularly high enough to finally start satisfying pent-up demand before that shift happens, it won't matter. It won't matter if Steam and Xbox are increasingly attractive for 3P sales because Sony will have PS5 regularly available by that point, and all three should see growth.
Look at Sony. They are holding tons IPs on hostage for new IPs. They aren't that different from MS.I feel like this is a very poor reason to excuse questionable IP management but whatever.
MTx cosmetic. The most generous mtx so far, since you can buy it anytime you want.Halo Infinite has a ton of MTX.
Only for halo infinite MP, not the SP, which alot of halo infinite player care about.Player count matters for a game like Halo Infinite because it's a live-service GaaS, and also F2P. So the player count will likely reflect how many of those players could be buying content, which directly influences the revenue the game pulls in.
Very different from the case of God of War.
Your argument would make sense, if PC was 1 store front. PC has tons of launchers. Each launchers has their own games. Ubisoft, EA, take 2, epic store, steam, bethesda, Activision.Steam may have a slightly larger base than PS4, but considering Steam itself is free (not the content on it, of course) and there are billions of PCs in the world, at what point do you look at the storefront platform and at what point do you focus on the actual hardware that storefront platform is available for?
MS only started to focus lately. They didn't give 2 shit about windows store, and made it too much hell, by doing drm. It's why pc gamers hate windows store.MS only now making Windows store better after having a good decade to attempt doing so kind of feels like a lost cause; they might as well just settle with using Steam as that is what the community for their 1P have become comfortable with, and they don't really have the newness factor or brand appeal to leverage something else like Xbox to tie in with Windows Store to work against Steam.
They are open to. They don't have to be exclusive to steam. They can open their own launcher if they want to.Sony could still, if they want, either build their own storefront, or enter a strategic partnership with something like EGS, and fully integrate that with PSN & PS+ on the console side, to still maintain full vertical integration in the possibility they do Day 1 for all 1P content. They could also have a means of monetizing such a thing on the PC side and making PS+ subs have full access to perks between console & PC, and/or provide equivalent perks and tier benefits for PC-only at a reduced cost, to disable an ad-supported model of this type of hypothetical PC storefront. Other benefits too, such as getting PS or PC version of games at half price if you get the other version at full price, etc.
Getting top 10 steam weekly sales is big achievement for sales. Every game is on sale during those weekly sales. So getting top in row, indicates strong sales.Right so what does the situation look like outside of steam sales?
Same for Sony games and MS. Not every game would hit 20m mark. It just indicates your biggest title can sell tons of copies with larger userbase.My point being not every game from Nintendo is a Mario Kart pulling in 45 million lifetime sales. And it's not just Metroid Dread that's the exception, either.
Halo 5 sold 9m on 50m console. If it had ps4 numbers, it could have sold more.Exactly. Meanwhile I wish the same could be said for something like FH5 because it's a legitimately great arcade racer, outside of certain issues. But that isn't the case; same for Halo Infinite though in that game's case it comes down to a multitude of reasons.
Concurrent userbase means nothing for f2p. For steam, it registers as all players logged at the same time, during that period. It changes after certain period of hours.Right but the difference for something like Halo Infinite is that the MP is F2P live-service GaaS. So you don't even have to pay for it upfront; the money comes from MTX which depends on the number of players active in the player base.
Which is why concurrent player count is kind of important of a measure. It's less a factor for things like Forza Horizon 5, where you still had to buy it in order to access it at all.
They use estimate reviews. Only those who owns the game can review it. So the more review it has, the more sales it has.Actually, do we know the specific number of sales for games on the Steam charts? I hear position rankings a lot but haven't heard any actual sales. I guess this is why people use Steam Spy? It was used a lot for Elden Ring although higher estimates ended up being way too high.
That would have been the case for Sony 5 years ago.Right but they have to be very smart & careful about what those games actually are, and the proximity of their availability on PC versus PlayStation. And I'm saying that for 1P single-player games, Day 1 is not viable, especially for the big AAA titles.
Some titles are fake holders. That is to be expected, if you are trying to minimize leaking.No, a ton of the games of the list are fake. Nintendo doesn't pan to release games on PC, MS won"t release over a dozen games this year, Capcom won"t port PS2 or PSP MH games to PC and Sony doesn't plan to releade recent games on PC. All these things are total bullshit even if it got some guesses or rumors right and a few legit leaks.
I think 200M only at naughty dog and the rest to the others
.... Bryank?The clowning in this thread continues.
Some PC fans are desperate for Sony to make day one games and recommend the strategy of a company that lags behind and is forced to buy entire publishers to make any difference.
Dude, Sony knows better what to do when their successful strategy is working now and they have found a way to make extra income.
Perhaps the scale of the project didn't warrant that type of budget.Thats probably accurate, even if you were joking. I ocasionally see people say "1st party money". For some unkown reason, some folks believe that somehow a game that only sells on a single platform has more money than 3rd party games that are budgeted for sale on 4 platforms. Games are budgeted based on market research and expected ROI. You will not get the same budget from a game that has a fraction of the market as potential clients as a game that has the entirety of the gaming market.
Other than ND at sony no studio had budgets that could compare with the most expensive AAA games, so when you see people say "sony or microsoft should buy this studio so it can give it 1st party money", its funny, because that studio would receive a lower amount
Perhaps the scale of the project didn't warrant that type of budget.
Yes and no it's a case-by-case thing and completely product and pitch dependent. First-party game studios still pitch new ideas to their parent company all the time for funding, the same thing happens in the film industry. Let's say for the sake of conversation that I work at Bad Hombre, which would be a subsidiary of Good Universe, which is also a subsidiary of Lionsgate and I had a new film idea that I wanted to pitch. I wouldn't just be trying to pitch an idea to my boss it would have to make its way up the chain and my funding would be completely based on what the higher-ups thought of that pitch/presentation.
Have you played Horizon FW?Other than ND at sony no studio had budgets that could compare with the most expensive AAA games, so when you see people say "sony or microsoft should buy this studio so it can give it 1st party money", its funny, because that studio would receive a lower amount
I think the chip shortage has them 100% reconsidering their focus on hardware.Exactly. People forget these companies are more than just selling games. Sony knows that if their games were multiplatform they would sell more. I'm sure they figured that out even before releasing their first console, lmao.
It's about what's going to give them the most money as all corporations. Sony is a hardware manufacturer. They will always want to sell consoles.
Consoles are the only place where you can be subscribed to their services. This is their target audience. It's not the 2 million Horizon copies sold on PC where a lot of them were double dipping basically..even Jim Ryan once mentioned how important that crowd is for the pc game releases.
I also imagine these gaas games will be getting some great crowds on PC. I'm almost sure some will be released on PC day one...and that could be their triumph. Not saying a lot of people will buy a PlayStation because Sony will release their online games on PC day one...but it's definitely a market they will explore. It's like I can imagine free skins if you're a ps plus subscriber and stuff like that, not available on PC. It's Sony...they will do this lmao.
I say be lucky when and IF you get any of the games. PC isn't Sony's platform and has no obligation to provide games to it.Eh? It’s common sense. I said I understand why they are doing it but for me it’s only an annoyance, I’ll either play an inferior version day 1 or has to wait years for a superior version or end up double dipping and pay 2x the price. Why would I like it?
The problem now is that we kinda know they’re coming. So what do you do? Play the inferior version? wait for the superior version and risk have everything spoiled? or play both?I say be lucky when and IF you get any of the games. PC isn't Sony's platform and has no obligation to provide games to it.
Too many people act so entitled when it comes to Sony's games and PC but I don't see all these comments regarding Nintendo in the same fashion.
If they come to PC then they do, if not then move on .