• 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: Our live-service games will target different genres, release schedules and audiences


Hulst better know where his bread is buttered. The second you undermine the quality and/or frequency of single player first party games, you've fundamentally damaged PlayStation. Simple as.

We don't need to name the laundry list of single player studios and publishers that have been financially and reputationally damaged by sticking their noses into this where they don't belong.
Last edited:

Iced Arcade

I am happy with this, they cant all be copy pastas of the current live service mega games. I love this type of experimentation, especially since live service tends to have a cheaper cost of entry (and likely f2P), it can only be good for consumers who wont waste money on games that may lose support
dinner pasta GIF


The biggest issue for any big game in development, be it single player or GaaS/Co-op, is that the design ethos you start with may not actually be relevant by the time you release. These are not quick development games either, they still will have the same AAA quality to them because they need to in order to sell. People don't want to play shit looking GaaS games outside of ones that truly click right mechanically.

Single player games do have a bit of leeway in avoiding that design shift that the industry keeps seeing, as they have a contained story that helps service the mechanics of the game. GaaS/multiplayer games struggle with that because inclusion of multiple users needing to make decisions impacts the depth of mechanics and story elements you can offer. You are not going to have a super detailed AI path or user-defined storyline with multiple people needing to add to that system. It's too much for development.

I believe what will happen, much like others have said, is Sony is just trying to stick something to the wall that works for recurring income. Problem is, that's a huge risk to play when your userbase is only so time available, and most users have maybe two on-going titles they play. These decisions have the potential to really fuck up Sony in not just brand but financial too.
And it failed spectacularly and made their portfolio of games look weaker and more bland. I'm guessing this will too. Stick to your strengths.
they have also done games like rain, fat princess, helldrivers, lbp, modnation racers, lbp karting, ps allstars, heavy rain, dead nation, stardust and the ps4 had at least resogun, dreams, alienation, gravity rush, last guardian. Diversity was great(er) in their most troubled years and spilled over in the transistion to being king, now everything is streamlined to cinematic experiences (which I certainly love most but don't want to be everything) but not that much else.... ? GaaS are imho as open world games, always much worse than they could be if they would focus on anything properly instead of being a time consuming loop. So even if those are succesful, they don't capture me and all the Uncharted, GoW are like Marvel/Star Wars overfeeding, I also want non formulaic non hero stuff.
I am fine with them branching out to some extend though, following the money, they ahve to, but those games that made me a loyal fan seem to be not that important right now. Housemarque with over the shoulder ambitions, no small studio acquisitions that could replace their style, the failing Studio Japan gone, also no replacement for quantic dream yet (super massive or ready at dawn were suitable candidates imho) while all (?) new studios doing some MP/GaaS and it feels like only open world over the shoulder narrative games are coming. Just one fps would already shake things up. Make some HL Alyx yourself if Steam won't cooperate.


Gold Journalism
Exactly my thoughts as well. Would much rather they throw all of their resources at creating high quality single player experiences.

I don't get what they are going for, as if there aren't already a ton of live service games out there, most of which are already avialble on PlayStation.
1) They need to reduce their dependency on third-party live-service games. Look at how much money games like Fortnight, Apex, COD, Genshin Impact, GTA Online make for PlayStation. That's multi-billion dollar revenue for them every year. And they almost lost COD.

2) They also want to have at least one PS Studios title that generates the same amount of money for them and Sony gets to keep 100% off.

Personally, I'm excited to see what Sony can bring to the table. They revolutionized 3rd person cinematic action-adventure games. If they can also revolutionize the FPS, TPS, live-service genre, I'm all for it.


Sony doing GAAS games good, MS doing GAAS games, gamepass fodder. Make up your minds.

Buddy, did you actually read this thread or did you just see "PlayStation Live Service" and charge in to complain about fanboys? Because if you did read, you'll see plenty of people in here, even PlayStation fans, groaning and fearing over live service games.

John Wick

This is true. MLB The Show is considered live service now with the Diamond Dynasty mode that is the game's bread and butter, but it still retains all the great single player modes and traditional online play outside of that.

GT7 is another example of them doing live service correctly as well.
The updates to GT7 have been fantastic. PD have pulled out all the stops. Nobody can complain it hasn't been worth it surely.
Top Bottom