• 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.

PlayStation Is Putting $300 Million More Into First-Party Games, and Aiming for 'Multiple Platforms'

I think they’re moving to sell more to PC because of the PS5 shortage. Day 1 on PC doesn’t make sense though - they’ll miss out on the double dippers and get a smaller share of the sale.
 
I think they’re moving to sell more to PC because of the PS5 shortage. Day 1 on PC doesn’t make sense though - they’ll miss out on the double dippers and get a smaller share of the sale.

I think 12-24 months depending on the game makes the most sense.

For games like Gran Turismo 7, I would say 12 months is appropriate.

For games like Spider-Man, you're probably looking at 2 years.

For games like MLB The Show, I think it should probably already be Day 1, since it is available everywhere else.
 

John Wick

Member
They won't sit down, while MS is doing day1 games infront of their eyes.
You think Sony would say "Oh, MS is making money from those day1 sales. Oh well, I will wait and hold on to my IPs, and would sell them after 3 years ".

That is a bad business for them. The longer Sony is able to wait, the more sales MS would generate.

Sea of theives and FH4 are on weekly top 10 steam alot of times. That is alot of sales for MS. Now imagine Day1 sales for MS.
MS is a primarily a PC company so it makes sense for them to be on PC day 1. It doesn't for Sony. They want their own customers ie the PlayStation owners the priority. Releasing certain games like gaas day one I can see that happening. Their exclusives will probably be a year. Sony will make more money this way by keeping PS players in their eco system.
 

WoodyStare

Member
Well I've been reading gaf for about an hour tonight and have had 6 facepalm, wtf moments.

Goodnight
tenor.gif
 

John Wick

Member
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
Your a genius. Your comparing some of the biggest multiplatform AAA games budgets to a single platform AAA budget? I think any idiot could tell you the answer to that. TLOU 2 was made for 2 platforms PS4 and Pro. Assassins Creed Valhalla was made for how many? It's pretty obvious if TLOU2 was made for the same amount of platforms as AC it would cost far more.
 
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

I think you're mistaken to think that AAA games get bigger budgets because they are multiplatform. While Sony might not have the expectation historically to sell as many units as multiplatform games, they also realize that their software pushes their platform which is in turn ROI, especially when you think about digital sales accounting for 60-70 percent of all sales and 30 percent of that going to SIE as well.

You're only looking at the part of the formula that helps your supposition.
 

kingfey

Banned
MS is a primarily a PC company so it makes sense for them to be on PC day 1. It doesn't for Sony. They want their own customers ie the PlayStation owners the priority. Releasing certain games like gaas day one I can see that happening. Their exclusives will probably be a year. Sony will make more money this way by keeping PS players in their eco system.
They can buy GOG. This way, they can sell 3P games, and their 1P games. They won't pay 30% tax to anyone.
Steam is just a launcher. They don't have to put their games directly on that launcher.
 

DukeNukem00

Banned
Your a genius. Your comparing some of the biggest multiplatform AAA games budgets to a single platform AAA budget? I think any idiot could tell you the answer to that. TLOU 2 was made for 2 platforms PS4 and Pro. Assassins Creed Valhalla was made for how many? It's pretty obvious if TLOU2 was made for the same amount of platforms as AC it would cost far more.

Why are you telling me this in such an angry manner since you correctly observed that i am aware. I was adressing the numerous people who dont know. The ones that are "give this to sony so it can get those 1st party money"

I think you're mistaken to think that AAA games get bigger budgets because they are multiplatform. While Sony might not have the expectation historically to sell as many units as multiplatform games, they also realize that their software pushes their platform which is in turn ROI, especially when you think about digital sales accounting for 60-70 percent of all sales and 30 percent of that going to SIE as well.

You're only looking at the part of the formula that helps your supposition.

Im not mistaken in the slightest. We have various budgets throughout the years. Games are budgeted as ive said - on your projected sales. For example Elden Ring was projected to sell 4 million in i dont know how many months. So if your market data says you will probably sell 4 million units on three platforms, then your development budget plus marketing needs to be small enough that you also make profit in those projected sales. Thats how Epic was paying developers a few years ago when they started their shit storefront. They were using sale projections based on other similar titles to estimate an amount of money they would give to the devs in order to have them only sell their game on epic store for a certain amount of time.

Sony's 1st party sales are a tiny amount of the whole. 14% i think it was ? 86% of their software units are 3rd party stuff. Its a combination of factors, but the fact remains that sony 1st party money doest mean what its fans think it means. If you want the biggest budgets, people should want the opposite of a platform holder's money. People should say i want EA money for that game, or Ubisoft money for that game.
 

Topher

Gold Member
They can buy GOG. This way, they can sell 3P games, and their 1P games. They won't pay 30% tax to anyone.
Steam is just a launcher. They don't have to put their games directly on that launcher.

Steam is not just a launcher. It is an ecosystem and community in itself. There is a reason why so many PC gamers only use Steam and it isn't because Steam launches games better than GOG, Epic, or any other launcher. The fact that Microsoft has committed all future games to Steam says all that needs to be said.
 
Last edited:
Why are you telling me this in such an angry manner since you correctly observed that i am aware. I was adressing the numerous people who dont know. The ones that are "give this to sony so it can get those 1st party money"



Im not mistaken in the slightest. We have various budgets throughout the years. Games are budgeted as ive said - on your projected sales. For example Elden Ring was projected to sell 4 million in i dont know how many months. So if your market data says you will probably sell 4 million units on three platforms, then your development budget plus marketing needs to be small enough that you also make profit in those projected sales. Thats how Epic was paying developers a few years ago when they started their shit storefront. They were using sale projections based on other similar titles to estimate an amount of money they would give to the devs in order to have them only sell their game on epic store for a certain amount of time.

Sony's 1st party sales are a tiny amount of the whole. 14% i think it was ? 86% of their software units are 3rd party stuff. Its a combination of factors, but the fact remains that sony 1st party money doest mean what its fans think it means. If you want the biggest budgets, people should want the opposite of a platform holder's money. People should say i want EA money for that game, or Ubisoft money for that game.

the level of assumptions you're making being equal across the board is ridiculous, especially when you ignore several key factors.

Is it original IP? Does it use an established engine? Does it use a proprietary engine or a licensed one?

You have no idea what the budget is of two different AAA games, whether they are 1st party or otherwise unless explicitly stated.
 
Last edited:

PhaseJump

Banned
The only way fanboys will accept day 1 PC ports being a good thing is when there's overwhelming results in sales showing up. If a company like Nintendo were to release the next Mario or Zelda day one on Steam & Switch, how much of a mind fuck would the sales numbers be? It wouldn't happen, but hypothetically speaking, Playstation fanboys would likely hand wave it and lean into Nintendo's irrelevance toward high performance hardware, or the constant drought already scaring away "hardcore gamers" for generations. I think if this situation were to happen, and Playstation was doing it as well, we would be able to measure just how far 1st party platform gatekeeping can go with it's marketing, one way or another. I think Nintendo and Sony are generally leaving a ton of money on the table, and that says nothing about the reach of subscription models.
 

Neofire

Member
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?
What source do you have that confirmed all Sony's games are coming to PC? Maybe I missed something 👀
 

DukeNukem00

Banned
the level of assumptions your making being equal across the board is ridiculous, especially when you ignore several key factors.

Is it original IP? Does it use an established engine? Does it use a proprietary engine or a licensed one?

You have no idea what the budget is of two different AAA games, whether they are 1st party or otherwise unless explicitly stated.

i see i've found the sony fan. Naaaaais.

You seem to have confused hard data with assumptions here. Assumption means you dont know things. Thats not the case here. Horizon 1 budget was 40 million. Tomb Raider a year later was 100-135 million. And the game director making that claim said this budget is normal in the industry for these types of games. Crysis 2 released back in 2011 had a 45 million budget, if you want more frame of reference. Darksiders 2 in 2012 had a 50 million budget.

Why in the fuck are you offended at the notion that sony doesnt have the biggest budgets ? They dont. Deal with it
 

Fredrik

Member
What source do you have that confirmed all Sony's games are coming to PC? Maybe I missed something 👀
No sources, it’s just what I expect going forward based on the talk in the OP about their multi platform strategy, plus the Nixxes acquisition. I absolutely think we’ll see GT7, Miles Morales, Ratchet & Clank, Returnal, HFW on PC before the end of 2025.
 

Neofire

Member
No sources, it’s just what I expect going forward based on the talk in the OP about their multi platform strategy, plus the Nixxes acquisition. I absolutely think we’ll see GT7, Miles Morales, Ratchet & Clank, Returnal, HFW on PC before the end of 2025.
Well I can't predict the future and with Jimmy at the helm of Sony, I can't completely count out something as alienating as that to happen.

But at this point it's just wishful thinking. I believe Sony is only doing it because of the support constraints and they are trying to fill in the gaps in a bit of revenue from another source (PC) in the meantime.
 

Zeroing

Banned

Multiple Platforms​

meaning, we will see stuff on iOS, macOS and android. Unlike MS, Sony does not have an agenda of trying to push people into their platform (windows)
And it has already been proved that Apple is more than happy to have Nintendo games on their platform, why not Sony's ? They already sell PS5 controllers on their store.
 

kingfey

Banned
Steam is not just a launcher. It is an ecosystem and community in itself. There is a reason why so many PC gamers only use Steam and it isn't because Steam launches games better than GOG, Epic, or any other launcher. The fact that Microsoft has committed all future games to Steam says all that needs to be said.
Its a launcher. It might be an ecosystem which has community. But at the end of the day, it's a launcher.
GOG is young. But with right investment, it can grow as big as steam.
Also, MS hindred windows store, which gave Steam a reign to conquer.
That is what happens, when you force heavy drm on your store.
 

John Wick

Member
i see i've found the sony fan. Naaaaais.

You seem to have confused hard data with assumptions here. Assumption means you dont know things. Thats not the case here. Horizon 1 budget was 40 million. Tomb Raider a year later was 100-135 million. And the game director making that claim said this budget is normal in the industry for these types of games. Crysis 2 released back in 2011 had a 45 million budget, if you want more frame of reference. Darksiders 2 in 2012 had a 50 million budget.

Why in the fuck are you offended at the notion that sony doesnt have the biggest budgets ? They dont. Deal with it
What are you going on about? Find me a 3rd party game with the same budget as TLOU2 for just two platforms?
Sony give their developers plenty of money and creative freedom to make great games.
Where have you got that 40 million budget for Horizon from? Because according to Dumbo Ryan Sony blockbusters cost $150-200 million.
I remember people claiming Returnal was expensive to make and Sony lost money on it. I know Returnal wasn't that expensive as it's a small game compared to Horizon.
 

John Wick

Member
No sources, it’s just what I expect going forward based on the talk in the OP about their multi platform strategy, plus the Nixxes acquisition. I absolutely think we’ll see GT7, Miles Morales, Ratchet & Clank, Returnal, HFW on PC before the end of 2025.
Probably within a year once supply of PS5 catches up. One year is plenty of time for Sony to get as many sales as possible on PS platforms.
 

PhaseJump

Banned

Multiple Platforms​

meaning, we will see stuff on iOS, macOS and android. Unlike MS, Sony does not have an agenda of trying to push people into their platform (windows)
And it has already been proved that Apple is more than happy to have Nintendo games on their platform, why not Sony's ? They already sell PS5 controllers on their store.

Unlike MS?

50T.gif


Sony has an agenda to make money and push sales in their ecosystem. Getting that ecosystem extended will take in more money.

MS has game pass running on Android and iOS has been a target. They support and push updates to Linux. They port their software to mobile and Mac devices. Apple has marketed Xbox controllers with their Arcade game service before.
 

Fredrik

Member
Probably within a year once supply of PS5 catches up. One year is plenty of time for Sony to get as many sales as possible on PS platforms.
I think that’s too optimistic. Well Maybe Miles, it’ll be 3 years in the end of next year. Can’t see Horizon Forbidden West and GT7 come out within a year.
 

John Wick

Member
I think that’s too optimistic. Well Maybe Miles, it’ll be 3 years in the end of next year. Can’t see Horizon Forbidden West and GT7 come out within a year.
It's optimistic right now but I think it will become the standard once Sony gets enough PS5’s out there.
 

DukeNukem00

Banned
What are you going on about? Find me a 3rd party game with the same budget as TLOU2 for just two platforms?
Sony give their developers plenty of money and creative freedom to make great games.
Where have you got that 40 million budget for Horizon from? Because according to Dumbo Ryan Sony blockbusters cost $150-200 million.
I remember people claiming Returnal was expensive to make and Sony lost money on it. I know Returnal wasn't that expensive as it's a small game compared to Horizon.

You keep going on about last of us when i specifically called ND as an outlier for sony. Since their games have been selling very well since the first last of us, they get the biggest budget out of all of sony's studios, because their sale record is proven. This wasnt the case with other productions. I also said how after both Horizon and God of War doing well with sales, their sequels are now proper big budget games. Because the bar was set by the first installments.

I really have no idea why such a simple concept comes as a surprise for some. That a smaller install base for a game commands smaller budgets than a bigger one.
 

Zeroing

Banned
Unlike MS?

50T.gif


Sony has an agenda to make money and push sales in their ecosystem. Getting that ecosystem extended will take in more money.

MS has game pass running on Android and iOS has been a target. They support and push updates to Linux. They port their software to mobile and Mac devices. Apple has marketed Xbox controllers with their Arcade game service before.
Unlike MS, Sony never been a decade warring against Apple and Google and Linux ! And unlike Nintendo and Sony, MS went willingly into the lawsuit against Apple… you can already see how things are changing again! It’s going back to the old MS modus operandi.

You really expect other companies will be friendly? Nah they will not.
 

PhaseJump

Banned
Unlike MS, Sony never been a decade warring against Apple and Google and Linux ! And unlike Nintendo and Sony, MS went willingly into the lawsuit against Apple… you can already see how things are changing again! It’s going back to the old MS modus operandi.

You really expect other companies will be friendly? Nah they will not.

This is fucking foolish. Business is business. Nobody is "friendly" other than to seeing profit and value for everybody involved going up. Competitors prop up each other's services all the time.

Microsoft runs the Playstation Network on it's Azure servers. It submits patches to the Linux kernel to run WSL and generally help everybody, just like Google. Not "Friendly", though. Yeah. OK.

Microsoft wants access to roll out game pass on iOS, cost grievances need to be sorted between them before happens. Sony has been waging war against it's own customers via DRM root kits on music products, and have shut down Linux use on their consoles. They have frivolously destroyed stores that exported their consoles. Apple has been selling premium priced glued together trash for decades, fighting the user right to repair.

Microsoft is no different from Apple, Google, Amazon, Sony, Nintendo, etc. They are all ruthless and will go after expanding their market, getting their patent money, helping the industry as a whole grow and expand for mutual benefit.
 

reksveks

Member

Multiple Platforms​

meaning, we will see stuff on iOS, macOS and android. Unlike MS, Sony does not have an agenda of trying to push people into their platform (windows)
And it has already been proved that Apple is more than happy to have Nintendo games on their platform, why not Sony's ? They already sell PS5 controllers on their store.
What sort of stuff? Mobile games? Native ps now apps?

You do realise that there is also Microsoft games on ios via the app store?
 
Last edited:

Zeroing

Banned
This is fucking foolish. Business is business. Nobody is "friendly" other than to seeing profit and value for everybody involved going up. Competitors prop up each other's services all the time.

Microsoft runs the Playstation Network on it's Azure servers. It submits patches to the Linux kernel to run WSL and generally help everybody, just like Google. Not "Friendly", though. Yeah. OK.

Microsoft wants access to roll out game pass on iOS, cost grievances need to be sorted between them before happens. Sony has been waging war against it's own customers via DRM root kits on music products, and have shut down Linux use on their consoles. They have frivolously destroyed stores that exported their consoles. Apple has been selling premium priced glued together trash for decades, fighting the user right to repair.

Microsoft is no different from Apple, Google, Amazon, Sony, Nintendo, etc. They are all ruthless and will go after expanding their market, getting their patent money, helping the industry as a whole grow and expand for mutual benefit.
like you said they are friendly when they benefit both, if not, they wage war between each other, Apple vs intel etc. MS only cares about Linux because after all that decade of forcing pc makers not use the os, now MS sees it as not a threat! Android is “good” now because they failed with windows phone Etc.


My point was and still is!
If MS wanted to put their games on Apple ecosystem they could had done it! That is what I was talking about! They choosen to enter a lawsuit to have their service there, basically taking over a huge userbase without having to obey by the Apple Store rules.
That is what I’m talking about! It benefits Sony, Nintendo and Apple working together while is excluded!
MS opted for a different more aggressive approach!
 

Zeroing

Banned
What sort of stuff? Mobile games? Native ps now apps?

You do realise that there is also Microsoft games on ios via the app store?
Exclusives! Sony and Nintendo do not have a gamepass/cloud service that they are trying to push. They did not join MS on the epic/Apple lawsuit!

Apple gains more by having Nintendo and Sony on their side to fight over MS services! Both android and Apple uses arm! Makes sense for Sony to also port/make games for that architecture.
 

reksveks

Member
Exclusives! Sony and Nintendo do not have a gamepass/cloud service that they are trying to push. They did not join MS on the epic/Apple lawsuit!

Apple gains more by having Nintendo and Sony on their side to fight over MS services! Both android and Apple uses arm! Makes sense for Sony to also port/make games for that architecture.

Exclusive what? So you are expecting Sony to make first party games for iOS and MacOS? What kinda of games? Mobile games? AAA games?

How is that different to MS releasing mobile games on those platforms?

Why are you bring Arm into this? Microsoft uses Arm and has arm chips as well.

You do also realise that Apple/Google can't be seen to be pushing MS for signing onto that lawsuit especially with the Open App Market Act hanging around and DMA progressing.
 
Last edited:

Topher

Gold Member

Multiple Platforms​

meaning, we will see stuff on iOS, macOS and android. Unlike MS, Sony does not have an agenda of trying to push people into their platform (windows)
And it has already been proved that Apple is more than happy to have Nintendo games on their platform, why not Sony's ? They already sell PS5 controllers on their store.

I don't think Microsoft has an agenda to push people into Windows. Microsoft has shown they desperately want Game Pass and xCloud on iOS just as they have fully embraced Android. MacOS may or may not happen as far as a native app, but you still only need a browser. Beyond gaming, Microsoft has changed their strategy from being focused on internally owned technology to a Cloud presence that is largely platform agnostic. For example, you can create an entire cloud environment in Azure that uses Microsoft software. Their entire .Net Core dev platform runs on Mac or Linux just as well as it does Windows. So Microsoft of the past was hell-bent on making everything about Windows in one way or another but their corporate philosophy has changed and I think that is being reflected in their gaming division as well.

Sony hasn't made nearly the effort to diversifying their platforms. As it is, we are really only talking about PlayStation, PS Now app on Windows, and a couple of games on Steam. Having said that, I expect part of their push into Azure is to broaden their platform presence.
 
Last edited:

PhaseJump

Banned
like you said they are friendly when they benefit both, if not, they wage war between each other, Apple vs intel etc. MS only cares about Linux because after all that decade of forcing pc makers not use the os, now MS sees it as not a threat! Android is “good” now because they failed with windows phone Etc.


My point was and still is!
If MS wanted to put their games on Apple ecosystem they could had done it! That is what I was talking about! They choosen to enter a lawsuit to have their service there, basically taking over a huge userbase without having to obey by the Apple Store rules.
That is what I’m talking about! It benefits Sony, Nintendo and Apple working together while is excluded!
MS opted for a different more aggressive approach!

Exclusives! Sony and Nintendo do not have a gamepass/cloud service that they are trying to push. They did not join MS on the epic/Apple lawsuit!

Apple gains more by having Nintendo and Sony on their side to fight over MS services! Both android and Apple uses arm! Makes sense for Sony to also port/make games for that architecture.


Not joining in on a lawsuit doesn't make one more or less friendly to any party. If anything it means they are tactical, disinterested, or sitting back to wait and see how things shake out for the whole industry while not wasting resources on getting involved.

This is nonsense though. You clearly have a bias or hate for Microsoft, despite them literally supporting all the things you claim they are against.
Their motivations according to you are implied to be nefarious and punitive, rather than realistic and driven by growing the market to profit. You're implying that Microsoft is bad, and Sony or Nintendo are "friendly"

ARM support is hilariously irrelevant in this argument. As far as desktops go, Apple themselves are needing to use rosetta to get the M1 up and running with all the software expectations. They have not yet unified iOS and MacOS. The support isn't there yet, and most of the gaming industry is supporting x86 based tools. Why would Sony want to ditch the PS4 and PS5 pipeline to give Apple support to wage some imaginary war against Microsoft? Why would they push into Apple's mobile platform as a "friendly" company, instead of one indifferent enough to want the freedom that Microsoft wanted?

Sony does have a Game Pass/Cloud service that they are trying to push. PS Now has been around longer than Game Pass. Nintendo now has their Online subscriptions for emulators.

This is all dumb.

8.jpg
 
i see i've found the sony fan. Naaaaais.

You seem to have confused hard data with assumptions here. Assumption means you dont know things. Thats not the case here. Horizon 1 budget was 40 million. Tomb Raider a year later was 100-135 million. And the game director making that claim said this budget is normal in the industry for these types of games. Crysis 2 released back in 2011 had a 45 million budget, if you want more frame of reference. Darksiders 2 in 2012 had a 50 million budget.

Why in the fuck are you offended at the notion that sony doesnt have the biggest budgets ? They dont. Deal with it

Great straw man. No one offended, you just don't know what you're talking about.

Like I said before there are other factors. You're comparing a brand new IP to an established IP. HFW had a much larger budget.

Your apples and oranges conclusions are humorous though.

God of War 3 in 2010 had a 44 million dollar budget equal to that of Crysis 2....
 
That's the budget for 2-3 AAA games.

Oh really? You realize that the cost of a $100 million game is incurred over a period of 5 years on average, given that that is how long it takes to develop one big title nowadays, give or take? Divide the figure by 5 and you get $20 million a year...A simplistic and naive way to allocate the budget, granted, but one relevant enough to show you that you have misunderstood almost everything in that statement.🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️
 
Last edited:

Baki

Member
Yep. This is quite the jump.
I wonder if that forecast includes the cost of hiring developers for Bungie. Technically the acquisition hasn’t closed yet, so I doubt they would include the cost of adding staff to Bungie.

1,500 developers is about the size of 3 AAA studios. Crystal Dynamics and Eidos had 1,100 employees.
 
$308M could translate to an additional 1,500 developers (average cost, including overhead being $200K/year). That’s quite a substantial increase in headcount.

Or potentially it's just extending the development times for games.

Their games have lacked some finish lately in my opinion. Will be good to see if this is about more games or improving games.
 

0neAnd0nly

Gold Member
I think, personally it's a GREAT strategy.

When you build a really big market lead in your respective market after pulling that colossal come from behind at nearly a flat line stance and building such a huge base of supporters - the BEST move is to then STRIP all exclusivity away from your best selling niche, 1st party development.

Why? Why, you may ask?

Well because... reasons... and such.

Phil Spencer must smile at times, or have some serious dirt on Jim. Uncanny amounts of stupidity in this developing move over the last year or two.
 

Lognor

Banned
Good. Less reason to buy a PS5. I'll take the years late releases if I'm truly interested (I'm personally not typically interested - haven't picked up hzd or gow on pc yet). But great for folks like me that don't feel the need to buy a Ps5!
 
Top Bottom