Support NeoGAF

[Hudo]

Not all my jokes land, unfortunately.

To be fair, I don't have a sense of humor according to my second ex-girlfriend. So I might be at fault here.

 

[Agent_4Seven]

Demon’s Souls Remake is already 1440p/60 on the regular PS5…

It sure is, but 4K 60 was mentioned as well and it's not gonna happen on the PS5 Pro, not until PS6, with a patch to unlock FPS in the PS5 version. PC will get native 4K 60 FPS way before PS6 though.

 

[TGO]

Well they don’t really announce PS5 games

Ftfy

 

[Jaybe]

Not sure why they bother with the extended announcement-to-release time gap. Just get the game completed and throughly tested and launch-ready. pick an open time in the release schedule (like maybe not the day before dragons dogma 2), and put out the announcement trailer 2 weeks prior to launch.

 

[mckmas8808]

Cool. I had LOUII pegged after Ghosts, so might come true. Then after LOUII I had the game after (Q4) being GT7 with VR mode and PSVR2 PC support promoted all at once.

So maybe an August release date for TLOU2 on PC?

 

[PixelatedBeast]

It sure is, but 4K 60 was mentioned as well and it's not gonna happen on the PS5 Pro, not until PS6, with a patch to unlock FPS in the PS5 version. PC will get native 4K 60 FPS way before PS6 though.

Nobody even knew what the resolution was when they first released the gameplay demo. I think Bluepoint's devs or Digital Foundry had to come out and tell people its not 4k, and thats when early in this generation the general gaming consensus agreed that they would rather have games push for 1440p/60 instead of 4k/30 because they could barely tell the difference.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

No, the list missed a ton of games they were/are porting to PC even before than some games listed there and had dates wrong. And had some PSVR1 game like Déraciné.

It also had the PS4 Ratchet instead of Rift Apart (at the time Sony said they were going to port PS4 games).

The R&C listing could've just been a simple mistake. I mean Insomniac had a R&C listing mistake in their own slides, when they meant the PS5 version but the release date was off by like a week.

That doesn't really say much if anything TBH.

The list apppeared as I remember when the Uncharted Collection was publicly announced "for PS5 and PC" without mentioning release date for the PC version, and the list wrongly listed the PC port for the same month it released on PS5.

Again, simple mistake. Plans around the dates could've changed. They could have been targeting Day 1 for both but had to delay the PC version for further polish & optimization. The point is, the PC version DID release and it wasn't very long after the console edition, so the list is validated.

As I remember the list also wrongly listed GT7 for 2022. When asked about it Yamauchi later said they weren't working in a PC port and didn't plan to port it in the future.

Again, you're getting hung up over small details when my point is: ALL of the games on the list so far for Sony, HAVE been ported to PC/Steam. If the timings were a bit different, is ultimately inconsequential to my point.

For all we know, Sony may've been internally considering a 2022 port for GT7, but scrapped that because they wanted to wait on PSVR2 and that didn't launch until early 2023. And maybe they originally considered bringing it to PC without VR support, but then decided a delay was worth it to add VR support.

FWIW, we already have word that Sony are testing PSVR2 compatibility on PC, and GT7 is on that Nvidia leak. Not hard to put two and two together :/

For the Sony side the list had guesses saying some publicly known or easily guessed games. Sony is porting everything, so every game in that list is getting correct. As just happens with any list of guessed PC ports.

Right so you agree with my main point. That being the case, what exactly are you disagreeing with? Date timings? I never implied (or wanted to imply) the list was accurate WRT timings, just the games getting ported in general.

I think they won't port Astro, because as you mention I see it more like a tech demo to showcase the gamepad than a commercial game. Destruction All Starts was an utter failure, I think they won't revive it for PC.

Right, those are reason why those two games probably won't get ported. I would not want Astro's Playroom to get ported because the PS5 needs at least something special 1P-wise to call its own.

I originally thought that they were keeping some games exclusive forever in the console, but I think they'll end porting Demon's Souls, GT7, GoWR and Spider-Man 2 after the typical "around 2 years or more after the original release" window because they need extra revenue and specially profit, every year the PC gives them way more revenue with a great profitability margin, and basically all the console metrics keep improving and breaking historical records, showing absolutely no signs of negative impact due to the PC ports.

And this is what is going to ultimately hurt the console brand. The console metrics are not improving the way you think they are: PS5 will miss its FY target by ~ 2 million potentially. 23 million is still an amazing number, but it's not 25 million now is it? And this FY is meant to be the peak year for console sales, meaning the next FY will have a lower sales target.

And, what if they miss that target? What's going to be criticized as the culprit then? Will people make up ridiculous reasons or finally admit that the PC porting strategy is at least a notable contribution towards the sales decline IF those declines come? Or it could even be that sales targets are set due to internal guidance predicting lower-than-desired sales due to factors like the PC porting strategy (the way it's been publicly established at current) which us nor shareholders would be privy to?

You are also overstating the profit they get from the PC ports. If PC Port A sell 1 million copies in a year at $50 each, and Valve takes a 30% cut, then initial profits for Sony are $35 million. However, if the port costed $15 million (remember, any port over $30 million required a deeper approval process; they wouldn't pick $30 million unless there WERE ports costing them $30 million or more to make), then net profits are just $20 million.

Now let's compare that to the game on PlayStation console...

Game A (begets PC Port A) sells 10 million on PS5 in one year, and let's say 50% of those are digital sales. It costs $70. That's a total revenue of $700 million, and initial profits of $595 million (let's just assume the physical cut for Sony is 70%). The game had a budget of $250 million, marketing costs of $50 million, so total costs of $300 million. That's a net profit of $295 million from the PS5 sales. That's a near 15x increase in profits from the PS5 version sales vs. the PC version sales of that same game.

So...where is this "way more revenue with great profitability margin" from PC for that hypothetical game? And if more would-be console buyers opt out to wait for the PC port, why would Sony risk that drop in profits console-side for only marginal gains in profit from the PC sales of the same game?

Regarding 2020 and older games, pretty likely their next PC releases will be GoT (2020), TLOU2R (2020) and Until Dawn (2015). I think they'll continue bringing back PS3 and PS4 games via remasters and remakes, specially those from top selling IPs or getting movie/tv show adaptations.

This isn't a bad idea in isolation, but it ends up looking bad for the PS5 when you realize:

1: It leaves VERY few 1P exclusives for the console itself, and

2: It's not leading to a healthy rate of new equivalent or "higher-tier" 1P titles exclusively for the console.

Think of it like a well; Sony's taking out more water (porting games to PC) than they've got coming in to refill (new 1P games exclusive to the console). Eventually the well is going to run empty for hardcore/core enthusiasts who prioritize new console exclusives that have some meaningful duration of exclusivity, and those would be the first ones Sony risk going over to platforms like PC for most or all of their gaming dollars & time.

The domino effect that'd have on other gaming demographic types would snowball over time, especially with the release of new console hardware (slower & lower adoption rates, for example).

I think they may port without any remaster ore remake Shadow of the Colossus remake, Patapon Remastered (when close to the animation release) and maybe some of the PS4 Housemarque games like Resogun, Super Stardust Ultra, Alienation, Nex Machina or Matterfall plus Tearaway Unfolded to help the profitability of their studios. If they make some adaptation, also Wipeout Omega Collection, Loco Roco Remastered or Parappa Remastered.

And what new 1P SIE games are coming exclusively for their current-gen console platform, to offset all of these ports? Especially considering more 3P games are going multiplat themselves, meaning you can't rely on those nearly as much either as defacto exclusives to fill that void, or as timed exclusives (as those end up costing more and more)?

You aren't answering that question, when it's kind of the central question here. What are these ports doing to benefit the console owners? Where are the new exclusives? Where is that virtuous cycle?

There's absolutely zero negative effect in any PS5 number, which keep improving and breaking. Starting next FY, the yearly PS5 will start declining because like any console will enter in the 2nd part of its sales cycles and like any console its yearly sales will keep decreasing gradually after its peak year. But not because of PC: launch aligned will perform well compared to PS4 and its active userbase, software revenue, 1st party sales, PS+ revenue will continue with stunning numbers.

Again, Sony are having trouble hitting their FY target for THIS FY, and have already stated sales for next FY will be lower. Part of that is natural, since PS consoles tend to hit their peak year by the 3rd FY, but part of that may also be unnatural. You are ignoring the unnatural factors here.

You are ignoring that Sony want to prioritize profit margins going forward; PS5 doing as well or about-as-well as PS4 won't mean anything if profit margins decrease. Software revenue doesn't mean much if profit margins decrease. MAUs are worthless if profit margins decrease. 1P sales don't mean much if profit margins decrease. So on and so forth. And PC, being a platform with increasing competition to consoles (albeit not a "direct" competitor to PS the way Xbox is), can throw a wrench in those profitability plans long-term if changes to its role in their multiplatform strategy aren't made.

I mean you seem to have been a fan of Jim Ryan, right? Did you forget Jim himself said that PC was a competitor to PlayStation consoles? It's not a widely-advertised quote, but he's on record having said it. I know a lot of people disagree with various actions or ideas of his, but this is probably one idea he'll get a lot of support for either now or in due time as more hardcore/core console enthusiasts become more open to the sentiment.

In fact, I think Helldivers 2, Concord and Marathon (plus maybe Fairgame$ too) will generate a shit ton of money bumping the PS metrics beyond even if released day one on PC.

That doesn't necessarily change the fact that most growth for those games would be coming from the PC side (particularly Steam) since Steam and the PC platform have more means to contribute towards WOM and grassroots growth/hype than PlayStation console currently do.

This, despite the face there are various features on platforms like Steam, which Sony could certainly bring to PlayStation console owners to drive even more engagement console-side.

What SIE lists as non-PS 1st party gaming revenue is PC in addition to Destiny and MLB in rival consoles. This is generating Sony hundreds of millions per year with a huge growth year over year according to Sony's fiscal report. We know even the worst selling ports like Sackboy or Ratchet were profitable, and we know that even if the ports costs around a couple million each many are generating dozens of millions each. So yes, PC ports are highly profitable and don't have any negative effect on PS, so they'll continue porting. With Helldivers 2 this off-PS revenue going to be even way bigger.

$30 million is not "a couple of million". It's several magnitudes more than $2 million.

And again, with the PC revenue, you are ignoring what games like Destiny 2 do to contribute towards that number. Last FY, Sony missed their PC revenue target by $50 million, and the vast majority of what PC revenue they did get came from Destiny 2. If they're setting targets higher than $200 million and beating them this FY or future FYs, you simply aren't achieving that with the sales performance of the games on PC the past year or so, going by the Insomniac hack data.

MLB (I assume some year will also start to be released in PC), GT7 and Firewall Ultra (plus Destruction All Stars) aren't on PC.

Not yet, but MLB is a multiplat in that it's also on Switch & Xbox. Again, in isolation that's fine. It's when you look at the whole picture where the imbalance presents its true self. GT7 and Firewalk Ultra will likely end up on PC this year or very early next because of both the Nvidia leak and also because SIE are testing PSVR2 compatibility on PC (with no indication, to my knowledge, if that includes bringing PC VR streaming to PSVR2 console owners).

And who gives a crap about Destruction All-Stars being a console exclusive? Not only is it GAAS, it's a dead GAAS. That's like a PlayStation gamer being mad Bleeding Edge isn't on PS5; no one really cares.

I'd certainly like to see Twinkle Riot in some new game though. Twisted Metal would've been a great chance but that game's been canned unfortunately.

For MP focused games and particularty GaaS it's key to have the biggest userbase possible particularly at the start of the game. So for GaaS MP only or MP focused games (not the case of MLB or GT7) is key to release them day one on PC as seen in Helldivers 2.

Maybe, but that's not always a requirement. Counterstrike 2's got a very big community and that's not only PC-exclusive, it's also Steam-exclusive at that. So this rule that a GAAS "needs" to be on console & PC or multiple places Day 1 in order to succeed is a myth.

A beneficial convenience? Yes. But a requirement? Nope. And while not GAAS in the traditional sense, both Splatoon and Smash Bros. are at least partly live-service, have found massive success, and are exclusive to a single platform (Switch).

I know that those Nintendo games fit closer to MLB and GT7 than a Helldivers 2, but Helldivers 2 or future MP-only GAAS would be comparable to titles like DOTA 2 or CounterStrike 2, which are exclusives to their own platform and do very, very well.

The majority of PS Studio games under development aren't GaaS.

Well now they aren't, because a lot of the GAAS got cancelled

The majority of games greenlighted by Hermen aren't GaaS. Sony plans to increase their investment on non-GaaS titles for at least the next couple of fiscal years.

People have been hearing this for a while but many want to increasingly see what this means in action.

And to have a super successful game like Helldivers 2 that will generate pretty likely 9 digits of profits is something positive, not a disaster.

Well duh; the game's a massive success and I'm glad for both Arrowhead and SIE on the game. But you're misconstruing me on this point: I said the strategy of Sony making all their games Day 1 on PC just because of Helldivers 2's success would be a disaster, not that Helldivers 2 was a disaster.

Don't even really know how anyone could think I was referring to HD2 and not the 'Day 1 PC for all games' when mentioning "disaster", but hopefully this clarifies.