• 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.

SONY/SIE: The Balance Of Chasing Margins, Multiplat Expansion, And Maximizing The Console

What areas do you want Sony to focus more on (select all that apply)?


  • Total voters
    139
  • Poll closed .

cash_longfellow

Gold Member
That's what it seems like. But with how talented they are, Arrowhead could probably adjust to working in a SOCOM type of design space. It'd really come down to if they're interested.



Seriously gotta think they are having talks with Arrowhead right now. Either for an acquisition or a very strategic long-term partnership, including funding for investments and even more collaboration with 1P studios plus long-term publishing deal. Sony'd be completely crazy to not be doing that.

Koei-Tecmo do have sensible budgets for their games, and some useful IP, just not sure where they'd fit as an acquisition. Games like Ninja Gaiden or DOA...Sony could always just co-fund or co-develop on them, arrange marketing deals etc.

Square-Enix seems to have a bit messier management, but they do have more IP I'm personally fond of than Koei-Tecmo. Still, even for FF XIV I dunno if Sony "need" to buy them; they could definitely extend their working partnership beyond mainline FF games though, and crate dig some of Square-Enix's legacy IP for new games, remakes/reboots etc.



I tried :/



"PC" is not even in the title, sir.



The posting got kinda hectic but the Brief Summation part is there, 2nd post. Could probably make it more brief but I'm beat.
Still, all the respect from me for putting so much thought into this post! 😀
 

mdkirby

Member
locking down their smaller partners and enabling them with increased resources and access to sonys internal tools, engines, rigs, experts,

Keeping the same number of AAA exclusives, but releasing double or triple the number of games by also releasing AA Original and IP games using a mix of new teams at their big studios and from new acquisitions.

For every game like spider man, there should be 2 smaller games on the same engine, by the same studio, made by support teams, filling the gap until the next major release. This should be repeated accross all their major studios. Whilst they double down on making things like returnal and helldivers, and have even smaller teams making things like dredge or road96

This will significantly ramp up their total yearly output; allow more risks, and much more diversity in titles. This is what they should have done imo instead of “50% of our games will be GAAS”, an initiative they’ve spent billions on, and so far (helldivers doesn’t count it was being made already) all we’ve seen is a graveyard of large scale cancellations and corresponding job losses 🤷‍♂️
 

Killjoy-NL

Member
locking down their smaller partners and enabling them with increased resources and access to sonys internal tools, engines, rigs, experts,

Keeping the same number of AAA exclusives, but releasing double or triple the number of games by also releasing AA Original and IP games using a mix of new teams at their big studios and from new acquisitions.

For every game like spider man, there should be 2 smaller games on the same engine, by the same studio, made by support teams, filling the gap until the next major release. This should be repeated accross all their major studios. Whilst they double down on making things like returnal and helldivers, and have even smaller teams making things like dredge or road96

This will significantly ramp up their total yearly output; allow more risks, and much more diversity in titles. This is what they should have done imo instead of “50% of our games will be GAAS”, an initiative they’ve spent billions on, and so far (helldivers doesn’t count it was being made already) all we’ve seen is a graveyard of large scale cancellations and corresponding job losses 🤷‍♂️
This is an interesting post that puts a lot of the pessimism regarding GaaS-focus into perspective:

No, according to Sony the first of the 12 franchises was MLB. Slide from 2021/2022:
86526_99_mystery-playstation-live-games-mlb-the-show-23-last-of-us-factions_full.png

Notice Gran Turismo 7 isn't listed as a "single-player game catalog" or "live services game catalog" because these graphs seem to be to differentiate the type of products, but GT7 can be included in both sides and wouldn't make sense to include another column for GT. In fact, both columns lack important franchieses for them. They only listed there some examples wanting o highlight than in recent years they focuse in non-GaaS SP titles, and now they'll add also more effort in the MP/GaaS side.

Updated page for last year:
image.png

  • Out of the 12 (later, when acquired they added Bungie) this year they'll have in the market MLB, Gran Turismo, Destiny, Firewall, Helldivers, Concord (6 franchises, as estimated in the graph)
  • They cancelled TLOU Online and London new IP (8 franchises)
  • Next year or later -some beyond the initially estimated max. March 2026 target- they should release Marathon, Fairgame$, Deviation's game (development seems to have been rebooted and delayed), Horizon Online, Firesprite MP game, another Bungie IP (14 franchises)
  • They have margin to cancel 2 more, or move them outside the group because of their release date. Doing so they'd still have 12 franchises with GaaS
I'd say they don't include here mobile games, as it's the case of Neon Koi game and the Horizon game with NC Soft.
 
Last edited:

Bernardougf

Gold Member
Shorter, more focused, gameplay first games ... stop this bloated open world ultra cinematic nonsense .. this eat costs, take 4 years to make and is just not fun to play.

Good acceptable graphics
60 fps fluid gameplay
Nice simple story with no agenda/propaganda bullshit
Gameplay first story second
15-20 hours max game time
No filler, side bullshit (cut costs)
Recognize your audience still is predominantly male and make games accordingly
Stop the woke/feminist bullshit for "muh awards"
 

Eotheod

Member
He only writes about Sony though lol. This place used to have insane Xbox people too but they have seemingly left or commited sudoku
They are around still, just not as committed to writing literal thesis on the bloodline of a company that at the end of the day gives no shits about you. Actually, Xbox fanatics would probably do just that.

Still, people need to step back from the edge of the cliff that is idolised commitment to a faceless corporation that cared so much about the player that they fired 900 people last week and cancelled at least one game known of.
 

NahaNago

Member
I'd go with mostly the first two. I'd probably have their teams not put anything too controversial in the games and keep beloved characters alive. The goal would be to be able to grab as large an audience as possible and not drive anyone away. Making the AAA games as safe as possible but pushing the gameplay and graphics. I'd also just pepper in a couple of aa and smaller games whether it be from Sony personally or them paying others and make sure folks know it is from Sony's money. I still think they need better scheduling management of their releases.

If you know AAA games take 5 years to make then expand the team and have a portion make a game that just takes less than 3 and another team for a spinoff/dlc for the AAA game so you get pretty much 4 games in 7 years from that . The studio also won't get burnt out working on one game for so long.


edit: I haven't even completely read the opening post. I'll do that when I wake up
 
Last edited:

DonF

Gold Member
bro just look at nintendo, no gaas, crappy hardware, but the games, THE GAMES!! Why do we buy consoles?! THE GAMES!!!

Sony has some of the best talent in the world but their development pipeline must be atrocious if they cant release 2 AA or AAA games a year.

They really need to focus on AA and AAA experiencies. We love the big blockbusters but we also enjoyed a lot the "experimental stuff", some of my faves are AA games, for example Patapon
 
He only writes about Sony though lol. This place used to have insane Xbox people too but they have seemingly left or commited sudoku

Bro I did a similar thread about Microsoft like two weeks ago:

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/why-...-business-model-makes-business-sense.1667077/

It's like the same type of analysis but from the Microsoft POV. Will they do any of stuff mentioned there? Who knows. Plans can always change, same for Sony.

Was thinking about doing one for Nintendo, but there's probably not too much to go over, they don't really have a multiplatform strategy like Microsoft or even Sony. I think most of the flexibility on their end would be in transmedia adaptions of their IP.

...also most of the Xbox diehards either stick to purely Xbox threads or left for ResetERA and XboxERA. Or Twitter, like Senjutsu Sage.

It's the publicly viewable votes. It making people crazy they can't pad the stats without being called out.

Yeah made sure to keep the votes public for this one, given some of the options 😁
 

Senua

Gold Member
Bro I did a similar thread about Microsoft like two weeks ago:

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/why-...-business-model-makes-business-sense.1667077/

It's like the same type of analysis but from the Microsoft POV. Will they do any of stuff mentioned there? Who knows. Plans can always change, same for Sony.

Was thinking about doing one for Nintendo, but there's probably not too much to go over, they don't really have a multiplatform strategy like Microsoft or even Sony. I think most of the flexibility on their end would be in transmedia adaptions of their IP.

...also most of the Xbox diehards either stick to purely Xbox threads or left for ResetERA and XboxERA. Or Twitter, like Senjutsu Sage.
Apologies dude I missed that one, I still think you're nuts for how much effort you put into these threads though lol.

I wonder why all the Xbox guys have moved away from gaf, it's annoying because now all the Sony warriors troll PC threads as they have no Xbox warriors to target lol.
 
locking down their smaller partners and enabling them with increased resources and access to sonys internal tools, engines, rigs, experts,

Keeping the same number of AAA exclusives, but releasing double or triple the number of games by also releasing AA Original and IP games using a mix of new teams at their big studios and from new acquisitions.

For every game like spider man, there should be 2 smaller games on the same engine, by the same studio, made by support teams, filling the gap until the next major release. This should be repeated accross all their major studios. Whilst they double down on making things like returnal and helldivers, and have even smaller teams making things like dredge or road96

This will significantly ramp up their total yearly output; allow more risks, and much more diversity in titles. This is what they should have done imo instead of “50% of our games will be GAAS”, an initiative they’ve spent billions on, and so far (helldivers doesn’t count it was being made already) all we’ve seen is a graveyard of large scale cancellations and corresponding job losses 🤷‍♂️

Well there's a rumor they've acquired Arrowhead; if it's not true it needs to become true. That'd be a perfect partner to acquire for them with mutual benefits.

The studios being able to make multiple games would require some of them to grow bigger than they currently are; at some point there's probably a limit to the size these studios can increase which would put a cap on how many games they can simultaneously develop. But I agree with studios having the capacity to do 1 AAA game and a couple of AA games alongside that, and maybe some side expansions for the AAA game if feasible.

This is an interesting post that puts a lot of the pessimism redarding GaaS-focus into perspective:

Hold on...so GT7 isn't part of the 12 GaaS initiative? It really was mostly 12 whole new GaaS games (some of which are now cancelled)?

Shorter, more focused, gameplay first games ... stop this bloated open world ultra cinematic nonsense .. this eat costs, take 4 years to make and is just not fun to play.

Good acceptable graphics
60 fps fluid gameplay
Nice simple story with no agenda/propaganda bullshit
Gameplay first story second
15-20 hours max game time
No filler, side bullshit (cut costs)
Recognize your audience still is predominantly male and make games accordingly
Stop the woke/feminist bullshit for "muh awards"

Another benefit of this would be, they could stop chasing MetaCritic as a gauge for a game's reception. MetaCritic needs to seriously restructure how it handles aggregation anyway, IMO. It's screwed over way too many developer bonuses.

They are around still, just not as committed to writing literal thesis on the bloodline of a company that at the end of the day gives no shits about you. Actually, Xbox fanatics would probably do just that.

Still, people need to step back from the edge of the cliff that is idolised commitment to a faceless corporation that cared so much about the player that they fired 900 people last week and cancelled at least one game known of.

I'm not blind to the reality that Sony don't care about me, just like any other company. They only see us as a dollar, just like politicians only see people as a vote. But that doesn't mean I have to roll over and take whatever they want to push even if it's not to my tastes, and that goes for other customers.

We're so quick to let companies do that because we go "well that's what the investors and shareholders want", but why are those investors and shareholders there? Because of the customers who buy the products in the first place? So I think customers are at least comparable in importance to the investors and shareholders, when you really think about it.

If these companies have to provide quarterly fiscal updates to stockholders, why can't they be expected to provide progress updates on upcoming games and reveals? If these companies are expected to maximize their business operations to make money for shareholders, why can't they be expected to maximize the value of their consoles to make that investment worth it for console buyers?
 
I want Sony to acquire publishers and Japanese Devs.

I also think it would be a massive win for everyone if they bring some exclusives to PC and other platforms

What would you consider "some" in this context?

I'd go with mostly the first two. I'd probably have their teams not put anything too controversial in the games and keep beloved characters alive. The goal would be to be able to grab as large an audience as possible and not drive anyone away. Making the AAA games as safe as possible but pushing the gameplay and graphics. I'd also just pepper in a couple of aa and smaller games whether it be from Sony personally or them paying others and make sure folks know it is from Sony's money. I still think they need better scheduling management of their releases.

If you know AAA games take 5 years to make then expand the team and have a portion make a game that just takes less than 3 and another team for a spinoff/dlc for the AAA game so you get pretty much 4 games in 7 years from that . The studio also won't get burnt out working on one game for so long.


edit: I haven't even completely read the opening post. I'll do that when I wake up

This is what I was suggesting kind of when mentioning Sony breaking the big AAA games into smaller "installments" and pricing them cheaper per installment, but where each one could release every couple of years. Although your suggestion's a bit different, I think the assumption is if the AAA SP game is being made on a shorter time scale it's naturally going to be smaller so the price should be reflective to match. But then you have the spinoff/dlc/expansions for that game that can release every couple of years, that's what I had in mind with the "installments" idea.

So example, instead of a GOW that takes seven years to see the light of day, you develop it as three "installments", each one feels like a game unto itself but comparable in length to certain expansions they've released in the past. Then the next part comes out maybe 2-3 years after the last, building on the meta story but having its own self-contained story too, adding new mechanics, continuing progress etc.

Some teams may opt for that approach; others in the same studio might just opt to make smaller games altogether but as mid-or-high AA productions.

genuine question: Why are you writing all of this?

Same reason I wrote the Microsoft one couple weeks ago and might write a Nintendo one in the future: I like writing and I like gaming.

thicc_girls_are_teh_best thicc_girls_are_teh_best I love your threads, but holy crap that's not a wall of text it's a novel! 😂

Didn't think it was too much wording when writing it in the document, then put it in a word counter and immediately saw the character limits getting broken.

Not trying to do that on purpose, swear!

Apologies dude I missed that one, I still think you're nuts for how much effort you put into these threads though lol.

I wonder why all the Xbox guys have moved away from gaf, it's annoying because now all the Sony warriors troll PC threads as they have no Xbox warriors to target lol.

It's not all of them; you've got more sensible Xbox fans here who still post regularly, but most of them are also multi-platform owners with PlayStations, PCs, Switch systems as well. The super-obsessed diehards, most probably lurk, some still post. But I guess some others would rather want echo chambers for whatever crazy anti-PS stuff they want to say. That's why dudes like Mauler X are on Install Base (I don't know a lot about that place, but I've heard there are some hardcore anti-PS people there).

Me? I don't even hate Xbox. The console could be doing a lot better, it's cannibalizing Microsoft policies that have let the Series consoles (and Game Pass to a lesser extent) down. And who's been leading Xbox the past 10 years? Who's been managing XGS the past 10 years? Who's been promoting Xbox online the past 10 years?

That's the stuff frustrating me with Xbox, not the console or even games themselves (always said they've had good/very good 1P games over the years. Problem was brand decline in the biggest IP and most of those good games having limited market appeal especially as Xbox console exclusives).
 

mdkirby

Member
Well there's a rumor they've acquired Arrowhead; if it's not true it needs to become true. That'd be a perfect partner to acquire for them with mutual benefits.

The studios being able to make multiple games would require some of them to grow bigger than they currently are; at some point there's probably a limit to the size these studios can increase which would put a cap on how many games they can simultaneously develop. But I agree with studios having the capacity to do 1 AAA game and a couple of AA games alongside that, and maybe some side expansions for the AAA game if feasible.



Hold on...so GT7 isn't part of the 12 GaaS initiative? It really was mostly 12 whole new GaaS games (some of which are now cancelled)?



Another benefit of this would be, they could stop chasing MetaCritic as a gauge for a game's reception. MetaCritic needs to seriously restructure how it handles aggregation anyway, IMO. It's screwed over way too many developer bonuses.



I'm not blind to the reality that Sony don't care about me, just like any other company. They only see us as a dollar, just like politicians only see people as a vote. But that doesn't mean I have to roll over and take whatever they want to push even if it's not to my tastes, and that goes for other customers.

We're so quick to let companies do that because we go "well that's what the investors and shareholders want", but why are those investors and shareholders there? Because of the customers who buy the products in the first place? So I think customers are at least comparable in importance to the investors and shareholders, when you really think about it.

If these companies have to provide quarterly fiscal updates to stockholders, why can't they be expected to provide progress updates on upcoming games and reveals? If these companies are expected to maximize their business operations to make money for shareholders, why can't they be expected to maximize the value of their consoles to make that investment worth it for console buyers?
If they have acquired arrowhead it would follow a common pattern for their recent purchases. Studio they’ve worked with closely for many years release a big new game that is much more ambitious than their prior ones. It does well, they buy them soon after.

Yah, true, tho they have been rapidly expanding the size of many of their studios. Sadly a lot of that expansion had been directed towards GAAS initiatives at their big studios, ostensibly so they could have a company like guerrilla continue to make their main single player games whilst also making GAAS. A lot of these recent job losses seem to be at these initiatives, the biggest known one being the cancellation of last of us Gaas. I know that was meant to be an entirely separate team, but I find it hard to believe it didn’t drain some resources from the main team, which would explain their seemingly anaemic output this gen, aside from remasters it’s looking like we will be lucky to see any new major release from naughty dog this entire generation, which is such a waste.

Feels like the new leadership will see some sort of realignment in terms of content. Which to be fair is common in leadership changes.
 

yurinka

Member
Hold on...so GT7 isn't part of the 12 GaaS initiative? It really was mostly 12 whole new GaaS games (some of which are now cancelled)?
Of course it's part of the 12 IPs with GaaS they originally planned to be released between FY21 to FY25, these are my bets:
  1. MLB - 2021
  2. Gran Turismo - 2022
  3. Destiny - 2022 (acquired)
  4. Firewall - 2023
  5. Helldivers - 2024
  6. Concord - 2024
  7. Marathon - 2025
  8. Horizon Online - 2025
  9. Firesprite MP game - 2025 (the cancelled Twisted Metal according to Jason Shredder still wasn't greenlighted so it's another one)
  10. Fairgame$ - 2026
  11. Matter - 2026
  12. Deviation's game - 2027 (development apparently rebooted / greatly delayed)
  13. London Studio new IP
  14. TLOU Online
First they said "more than 10", later 12, and later bought Bungie who knew had one and were going to release two more in this period. Pretty likely they knew that out of the dozen at some point probably they were going to cancel a few because cancelling games is very common, so having Bungie they could replace them and still have more or less that number.

Later they saw some were not going to release on time so dropped their initial March 2026 goal. Which is also common, games get frequently delayed specially before publicly announcing release dates.
 
Last edited:

NahaNago

Member
This is what I was suggesting kind of when mentioning Sony breaking the big AAA games into smaller "installments" and pricing them cheaper per installment, but where each one could release every couple of years. Although your suggestion's a bit different, I think the assumption is if the AAA SP game is being made on a shorter time scale it's naturally going to be smaller so the price should be reflective to match. But then you have the spinoff/dlc/expansions for that game that can release every couple of years, that's what I had in mind with the "installments" idea.

So example, instead of a GOW that takes seven years to see the light of day, you develop it as three "installments", each one feels like a game unto itself but comparable in length to certain expansions they've released in the past. Then the next part comes out maybe 2-3 years after the last, building on the meta story but having its own self-contained story too, adding new mechanics, continuing progress etc.
The problem I see with this is if you cut the games length in half you pretty much are playing games during the ps3 era since most games during the ps4 pretty much doubled in how long you played the main scenario and had 3 or 4 times extra content. It makes no sense to cut the price that much if that is what they do.
 
I just checked the poll results and I am pleasantly surprised to see AA exclusives at the top. It's just a ball sack hair in first but still impressed. Whenever I'm browsing threads I mostly see folks talking about wanting more big budget Horizon, GOW, TLOU, GoT, etc.

Season 6 Nbc GIF by The Office
 

Fabieter

Member
I truly believe it will backfire if they continue releasing everything on PC, even if they don't do day and date. If they adopt day and date releases, they might face a situation similar to what Microsoft experienced next generation.

I also think implementing price hikes for games, subscription prices, and mid-gen console prices while making all exclusives available on other platforms is ridiculous. It suggests they believe they can sell solely based on brand power, which might be true today but is unlikely to remain the same in the long term if consumers feel the value is diminishing.
 

March Climber

Gold Member
What makes me worry the most about Sony is the fact that IIRC, Playstation is their biggest breadwinner. Their camera business is doing just ok. Their huge blockbuster movies have been underperforming lately aside from very, very few standouts like Spiderverse. Mobile is almost nonexistent. They’re trailing behind other cheaper TV brands. Their headphones are trailing behind other audiophile brands.

It just feels a bit volatile and it’s something to consider each generation when adults and younger audiences stray further and further away from traditional consoles.
 

nial

Gold Member
Of course it's part of the 12 IPs with GaaS they originally planned to be released between FY21 to FY25, these are my bets:
  1. MLB - 2021
  2. Gran Turismo - 2022
  3. Destiny - 2022 (acquired)
  4. Firewall - 2023
  5. Helldivers - 2024
  6. Concord - 2024
  7. Marathon - 2025
  8. Horizon Online - 2025
  9. Firesprite MP game - 2025 (the cancelled Twisted Metal according to Jason Shredder still wasn't greenlighted so it's another one)
  10. Fairgame$ - 2026
  11. Matter - 2026
  12. Deviation's game - 2027 (development apparently rebooted / greatly delayed)
  13. London Studio new IP
  14. TLOU Online
Gran Turismo 7 is not GaaS and SIE agrees with that. Also, the Bungie games were never part of the roadmap, not sure why you included them.
Hold on...so GT7 isn't part of the 12 GaaS initiative? It really was mostly 12 whole new GaaS games (some of which are now cancelled)?
Right, this is a more accurate list.
It was 12 GaaS series, with Horizon having 2 games in development (the Guerrilla and NCSoft ones), and MLB The Show obviously getting new titles each year.
So far, we know they cancelled games of 5 different series,
The Last of Us Online
Twisted Metal
London Studio's new IP
Deviation's new IP
Insomniac's Spider-Verse project

which would lower the number to 7.
MLB The Show
Helldivers
Concord
Fairgame$
Horizon
Neon Koi's new IP for mobile

As of now, we're only missing 1 game of their live service roadmap. Of course, they also have the Bungie stuff, but that is separate.
I think some will say that Firewall Ultra is the one missing title, but nah, that was just a normal MP game.
 
If they have acquired arrowhead it would follow a common pattern for their recent purchases. Studio they’ve worked with closely for many years release a big new game that is much more ambitious than their prior ones. It does well, they buy them soon after.

Yah, true, tho they have been rapidly expanding the size of many of their studios. Sadly a lot of that expansion had been directed towards GAAS initiatives at their big studios, ostensibly so they could have a company like guerrilla continue to make their main single player games whilst also making GAAS. A lot of these recent job losses seem to be at these initiatives, the biggest known one being the cancellation of last of us Gaas. I know that was meant to be an entirely separate team, but I find it hard to believe it didn’t drain some resources from the main team, which would explain their seemingly anaemic output this gen, aside from remasters it’s looking like we will be lucky to see any new major release from naughty dog this entire generation, which is such a waste.

Feels like the new leadership will see some sort of realignment in terms of content. Which to be fair is common in leadership changes.

Eh, we can scratch the Arrowhead thing off the list for now, the CEO has said no to that rumor. Doesn't mean it hasn't happened or isn't in the process of happening, but the current time that rumor's being shut down. Either it happens or not, at the very least SIE and Arrowhead can continue and strengthen their partnership for Helldivers 2 and future games.

Of course it's part of the 12 IPs with GaaS they originally planned to be released between FY21 to FY25, these are my bets:
  1. MLB - 2021
  2. Gran Turismo - 2022
  3. Destiny - 2022 (acquired)
  4. Firewall - 2023
  5. Helldivers - 2024
  6. Concord - 2024
  7. Marathon - 2025
  8. Horizon Online - 2025
  9. Firesprite MP game - 2025 (the cancelled Twisted Metal according to Jason Shredder still wasn't greenlighted so it's another one)
  10. Fairgame$ - 2026
  11. Matter - 2026
  12. Deviation's game - 2027 (development apparently rebooted / greatly delayed)
  13. London Studio new IP
  14. TLOU Online
First they said "more than 10", later 12, and later bought Bungie who knew had one and were going to release two more in this period. Pretty likely they knew that out of the dozen at some point probably they were going to cancel a few because cancelling games is very common, so having Bungie they could replace them and still have more or less that number.

Later they saw some were not going to release on time so dropped their initial March 2026 goal. Which is also common, games get frequently delayed specially before publicly announcing release dates.

It's been confusing to say the least :/

I just checked the poll results and I am pleasantly surprised to see AA exclusives at the top. It's just a ball sack hair in first but still impressed. Whenever I'm browsing threads I mostly see folks talking about wanting more big budget Horizon, GOW, TLOU, GoT, etc.

Season 6 Nbc GIF by The Office

I haven't actually checked the poll results yet but this is very interesting (and welcomed) news!
 
The problem I see with this is if you cut the games length in half you pretty much are playing games during the ps3 era since most games during the ps4 pretty much doubled in how long you played the main scenario and had 3 or 4 times extra content. It makes no sense to cut the price that much if that is what they do.

Well, I can see your point from that perspective. But what if dividing the big games into smaller installments also meant they could focus more on areas of the game which haven't seen too much advancement from the PS3 era, such as AI and physics?

The idea is that you price each installment more like an expansion, so instead of a single part at $70 maybe it's 3 parts at $30 each. Each part releasing every couple of years, connecting to each other but also feeling like complete games unto themselves. Maybe it'd be a good idea to test the model with a single game and then expand it to more 1P AAA games over time, if not all of them.

And 4-6 years after the first part's come out, once all the other ones have released and as the last one's releasing, you also release the "complete" version with all the parts as a single game for the usual $70. That could also be the optimal time to port it to a platform like PC (but not with all the AAA games; just some of them).

I truly believe it will backfire if they continue releasing everything on PC, even if they don't do day and date. If they adopt day and date releases, they might face a situation similar to what Microsoft experienced next generation.

I also think implementing price hikes for games, subscription prices, and mid-gen console prices while making all exclusives available on other platforms is ridiculous. It suggests they believe they can sell solely based on brand power, which might be true today but is unlikely to remain the same in the long term if consumers feel the value is diminishing.

Yeah, and it still irritates me so many people want to continue being dense, and act like the decline in Xbox consoles isn't in part due to the Day 1 PC initiative. But again, I can understand it to some extent from Microsoft's POV; they have many vested interests in PC (Windows, Direct X, etc.), and gaming as a whole (especially console gaming) is not a pillar of their business when it comes to biggest revenue and (especially) profit generators.

So PC cannibalizing Xbox wouldn't mean much for Microsoft at the end of the day because they arguably should be focused more on PC to begin with. That's not the case with Sony; PlayStation is one of their core pillars and the console is the biggest part of that by far. In spite of how much they may want to grow on PC, if they do so at the expense of the console, their gaming business will fail. It's just that simple, and Day 1 PC ports for their 1P AAA titles is just too much a risk in contributing towards that type of collapse, to be worth doing.

Realistically, any ports of such non-GAAS (or I would even say, all GAAS titles aka some should be console-exclusive) titles naturally lessen the need for a console to some degree since exclusivity status is intrinsically tied to differentiation which is tied to value proposition compared to rivals, and PC is a rival platform especially these days. However, I think it's also directly proportional to the timing of multiplat status. The longer it takes to go to another platform, the less of a depreciative impact that multiplatform status for the game has in eroding some of the value proposition of the console as a differentiated product in the market.

You always want that erosion factor to be as low as possible, so if you don't intend on the games being permanently exclusive into perpetuity, at least use the typical console generation length as your time standard. If you take a AAA game that's exclusive at the launch of the current console and port it to another platform like PC near the end of that console generation, that's as best you can get while not retaining the game as a permanent exclusive. But it does mean that game has to have considerable demand, and a bunch of new & improved content for the port, to spur sales that late. OTOH, that means more content and value out of that game for your console owners, who are the main customers. Realistically though some games may get ports sooner than that, but I don't think it should be any sooner than a typical halfway point, or 4 years.

That's why in isolation I don't see the GOT port for PC being that big a problem; it just looks bad in relation to the fact almost every other 1P AAA game since 2020 has now gotten a PC port in 2 years or less, and the only ones that'll still be console-exclusive after GOT are GOW Ragnarok (also on the leak), Spiderman 2, GT7 and Demon's Souls remake. Three of those are on the Nvidia leak and one of those could probably happen this year alongside GOT (probably GT7). But now imagine GT7, GOW Ragnarok AND Demon's Souls also got PC ports this year; we know Death Stranding 2 isn't releasing this year, even if GOT 2 gets a reveal it's not releasing this year, and no other major franchises are getting releases this year. So the only 1P AAA PS would have left that's exclusive is Spiderman 2. Which would be absolutely pathetic, and not that much better a look for the console than the situation with Xbox is currently.

Which is also why for me even if they did port some 1P AAA to PC 4 years down the road, some of those games need to stay exclusive to the console altogether. I'd say at least half, but at least 30%-40% of them.

Sony should go into the Pachinko business.

Yeah that worked out so well for SEGA, SNK and Konami in terms of game development did it? 😂.

Interesting how both SEGA & SNK saw big game development improvement when they stopped leaning on the pachinko crap.
 
What makes me worry the most about Sony is the fact that IIRC, Playstation is their biggest breadwinner. Their camera business is doing just ok. Their huge blockbuster movies have been underperforming lately aside from very, very few standouts like Spiderverse. Mobile is almost nonexistent. They’re trailing behind other cheaper TV brands. Their headphones are trailing behind other audiophile brands.

It just feels a bit volatile and it’s something to consider each generation when adults and younger audiences stray further and further away from traditional consoles.

Which really means they should be doubling-down on the console ahead of anything else, and finding ways to diversify not just software but hardware (i.e portable handhelds alongside the home console, etc.). Even things like enhancing the console experience (Steam has some great features absent on PlayStation; Sony should be adding them).

Gran Turismo 7 is not GaaS and SIE agrees with that. Also, the Bungie games were never part of the roadmap, not sure why you included them.

Right, this is a more accurate list.

I think some will say that Firewall Ultra is the one missing title, but nah, that was just a normal MP game.

Hmm OK. And from that list we already know which ones are cancelled. So that's down from 12 to 8. Plus, because of Marathon, I can see one of those other games getting cancelled too. Bringing it down to 7 (then 8 again because of Marathon).

So it'd seem like 2/3 of the original planned amount will still come, but maybe over the next 4 years instead of the next 2 like they originally wanted.
 

Rat Rage

Gold Member
I want them to fire every single one of their useless, incompetent, short-term focused parasitic managers no matter the rank, replacing them with people who a) know how to lead a creative video gaming business and b) - most importantly - intrinsically give a fuck about video games. That's the only way they can sustain their video gaming business in the long run.
However, that is almost impossible to do, because these parasitic mangers will do everything to not lose their jobs, until they've sucked their host dry. It's practiacally over. Sony is a lost cause. In the next 5 years they will die a slow death.
Since decades Sony got carried by AAA 3rd parties and the failures of their competitors. Since AAA 3rd parties are starting to fall apart, because they haven't been able to foresee that their focus on "cinematic experiences" with ridiculous set pieces would ultimately lead to a dead end creatively and financially, they simply don't know what to do. Neither Sony nor AAA 3rd parties have started to initiate any real counter meassues early enough.
 

March Climber

Gold Member
Which really means they should be doubling-down on the console ahead of anything else, and finding ways to diversify not just software but hardware (i.e portable handhelds alongside the home console, etc.). Even things like enhancing the console experience (Steam has some great features absent on PlayStation; Sony should be adding them).
I don't know...I think it can't just be this reliance they should bank on. Their movie output shouldn't be as bad as it is right now.

Here's an example: 2023 Sony Movie output

*June 2, 2023 Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse
*September 1, 2023 The Equalizer 3
*December 22, 2023 Anyone but You

March 10, 2023 65
June 23, 2023 No Hard Feelings
August 25, 2023 Gran Turismo
September 15, 2023 Dumb Money
November 22, 2023 Napoleon
February 14, 2024 Madame Web

* = The only successful movies, the rest were bombs. This is a ratio of 3/9 successes, with only one movie being a gigantic success(Spiderverse). That is just plain awful.

(Also for anyone fact checking this, keep in mind 50 million budget with 50 million earnings is not breaking even. Hollywood math means you need 1.5x earnings just to be considered breaking even due to marketing and other factors).

Literally unless there is some high-level blackmailing or nepotism happening, Avi Arad and the band of bad decision-making clowns have to eventually be removed from Sony Pictures.
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
I don't know...I think it can't just be this reliance they should bank on. Their movie output shouldn't be as bad as it is right now.

Here's an example: 2023 Sony Movie output

*June 2, 2023 Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse
*September 1, 2023 The Equalizer 3
*December 22, 2023 Anyone but You

March 10, 2023 65
June 23, 2023 No Hard Feelings
August 25, 2023 Gran Turismo
September 15, 2023 Dumb Money
November 22, 2023 Napoleon
February 14, 2024 Madame Web

* = The only successful movies, the rest were bombs. This is a ratio of 3/9 successes, with only one movie being a gigantic success(Spiderverse). That is just plain awful.

(Also for anyone fact checking this, keep in mind 50 million budget with 50 million earnings is not breaking even. Hollywood math means you need 1.5x earnings just to be considered breaking even due to marketing and other factors).

Literally unless there is some high-level blackmailing or nepotism happening, Avi Arad and the band of bad decision-making clowns have to eventually be removed from Sony Pictures.
For movies, the box office revenue needed to just to breakeven is closer to 2x.

The box office cut the studio gets is less than 50%. Domestic is 50%, but Asian countries are in the 40-50% range. Marketing is a lot too pending which movie it is. Googling it, you can add on avg 50% of the production budget. But of course some movies have more or less whiz bang marketing than others.

The budgets thrown around are usually just the production budget too (unless it's stated it's all-in including marketing). So a $200M Marvel production budget movie might have $100M marketing. That's $300M of total costs. Assuming the box office take being a bit less than 50%, this movie would need maybe around $650M box office revenue to break even. Of course that excludes whatever revenue it gets from other sources like streaming or DVD sales.

For gaming, the typical cut for a game studio is 70% if third party, and up to 100% for first party (100% digital but blended down since some sales would be discs from Walmarts and Best Buys get their cut too). But a typical third party game where disc or digital for sake of argument lets say is around the same at 70% gross profit before all costs are taken into account. Gaming revenue is harder to predict since sales per copy will depend on how much is full price and bargain binned. Movies, most of it will be full price ticket sales and it doesn't matter anyway since there is box office sales dollar tracking. Whereas games, you might get unit sales trackers, but I dont think too often you hear about how much $$$ sales the game has generated.
 

nial

Gold Member
What makes me worry the most about Sony is the fact that IIRC, Playstation is their biggest breadwinner. Their camera business is doing just ok. Their huge blockbuster movies have been underperforming lately aside from very, very few standouts like Spiderverse. Mobile is almost nonexistent. They’re trailing behind other cheaper TV brands. Their headphones are trailing behind other audiophile brands.

It just feels a bit volatile and it’s something to consider each generation when adults and younger audiences stray further and further away from traditional consoles.
Sony Music and SMEJ are doing fine, but even combined, they cannot match the amount of money SIE does on its own.
Heck, pictures and mobile gaming (both Aniplex) are also included within Sony Group's Music segment, so it's all weird there.
Sony Financial Group is also pretty big, but sadly they were affected by their low revenue performance much recently.
 
Last edited:

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
What makes me worry the most about Sony is the fact that IIRC, Playstation is their biggest breadwinner. Their camera business is doing just ok. Their huge blockbuster movies have been underperforming lately aside from very, very few standouts like Spiderverse. Mobile is almost nonexistent. They’re trailing behind other cheaper TV brands. Their headphones are trailing behind other audiophile brands.

It just feels a bit volatile and it’s something to consider each generation when adults and younger audiences stray further and further away from traditional consoles.
Sony has been trending to a gaming company. Their gaming division is the biggest so whether gaming does great or tanks, the entire company goes with it. Thats why the recent earnings release the stock dropped 10% over a week all because they said PS5 console sales are forecasted to be weaker than expected. If MS announces Xbox sales are weaker than expected nobody cares since Xbox and gaming is so small you'll be lucky to get a couple bullet points about it in their Powerpoint recap presentation. It'll be buried right beside bullets about Surface laptops. All the while something like Azure gets an entire slide by itself.

Sony is also spinning off most of that finance/insurance company, which means what they got left.... gaming, tvs, music and movies etc... just got more concentrated. which means gaming just got more important since that finance arm I think has been a consistently good performer for a decade. Then again, maybe I'm wrong and it tanked lately and they want to get rid of it.
 
Last edited:

March Climber

Gold Member
Sony is also spinning off most of that finance/insurance company, which means what they got left.... gaming, tvs, music and movies etc... just got more concentrated. which means gaming just got more important since that finance arm I think has been a consistently good performer for a decade.
Do you find this worrying?

Let's say they encounter two bad generations back to back in the gaming industry. Could they weather that storm?
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
Do you find this worrying?

Let's say they encounter two bad generations back to back in the gaming industry. Could they weather that storm?
They totally could. Sony is huge. 10 years ago or so, that TV division was losing billions per year dragging down the whole company. They survived fine after restructuring.
 

Del_X

Member
They need to focus on multiplatform if they're going to justify these huge AAA games or get very good at coming up with original IP that doesn't get weighed down in licensing.
 

ProtoByte

Gold Member
They need just to consolidate on the console.
They're going to benefit from a spurt of console sales, third party game sales and probably subscriptions growth with the PS6 as Microsoft guts the Xbox brand of whatever it has left.
Their new problem on the direct competitor front will be a revitalized Nintendo with a potentially less anemic hybrid console relative to the PS5-Switch gap.

VR is irrelevant, and they should stop investing there as far as games go. Spin that off from SIE and sell it to firms looking to use VR in other ways.

They should stop porting their stuff to PC, unless it is online-heavy/only titles. In the short-term, they get a bit of money scraped off the top. I bet a lot of it comes from double dippers; enough that whatever minute actually new audience you're able to get on PC with this type of game does not offset the lost revenues (including and beyond the sale of that first party game) of double-dippers turned PC-only gamers that used to buy PS consoles.
I think, like their live service frenzy, they will back off on this. But I could be wrong.

Sort out the game production pipelines, focus on AAA with the major studios and dabble into AA/threshold AAA with smaller 1st parties like Housemarque, Asobi and Media Molecule and selective indie dealings, and you're all set for a PS6 that sells 140 million lifetime without much problem.
 
I don't know...I think it can't just be this reliance they should bank on. Their movie output shouldn't be as bad as it is right now.

Here's an example: 2023 Sony Movie output

*June 2, 2023 Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse
*September 1, 2023 The Equalizer 3
*December 22, 2023 Anyone but You

March 10, 2023 65
June 23, 2023 No Hard Feelings
August 25, 2023 Gran Turismo
September 15, 2023 Dumb Money
November 22, 2023 Napoleon
February 14, 2024 Madame Web

* = The only successful movies, the rest were bombs. This is a ratio of 3/9 successes, with only one movie being a gigantic success(Spiderverse). That is just plain awful.

(Also for anyone fact checking this, keep in mind 50 million budget with 50 million earnings is not breaking even. Hollywood math means you need 1.5x earnings just to be considered breaking even due to marketing and other factors).

Literally unless there is some high-level blackmailing or nepotism happening, Avi Arad and the band of bad decision-making clowns have to eventually be removed from Sony Pictures.

And yet we haven't heard of any job cuts to Sony Pictures. But yeah, let's cut 900 people from SIE. The gaming side's apparently the one not pulling its weight, not the film division that's had a 66% failure rate last calendar year 🥴

Sony has been trending to a gaming company. Their gaming division is the biggest so whether gaming does great or tanks, the entire company goes with it. Thats why the recent earnings release the stock dropped 10% over a week all because they said PS5 console sales are forecasted to be weaker than expected. If MS announces Xbox sales are weaker than expected nobody cares since Xbox and gaming is so small you'll be lucky to get a couple bullet points about it in their Powerpoint recap presentation. It'll be buried right beside bullets about Surface laptops. All the while something like Azure gets an entire slide by itself.

Sony is also spinning off most of that finance/insurance company, which means what they got left.... gaming, tvs, music and movies etc... just got more concentrated. which means gaming just got more important since that finance arm I think has been a consistently good performer for a decade. Then again, maybe I'm wrong and it tanked lately and they want to get rid of it.

No the financial arm has been doing well AFAIK. Sony even got involved with some bank stuff in Japan a couple years ago, through the financial segment. Which makes them wanting to sell that part off all the more perplexing.

They totally could. Sony is huge. 10 years ago or so, that TV division was losing billions per year dragging down the whole company. They survived fine after restructuring.

Yeah but the financial arm was a big reason why they were able to restructure. During the PS3 era, the parts they sold off were all-around bad performers by that point, like the VAIO computer line.

I think if you got really simplistic way to look at it, it'd be like this: one era you've got Sony doubling down on their console & selling off unprofitable segments, vs another era where Sony might be doubling down on multiplatform & selling off a stable, profitable segment. One's proven to work, the other has yet to (and that depends on if it will still be done that way).

They need just to consolidate on the console.
They're going to benefit from a spurt of console sales, third party game sales and probably subscriptions growth with the PS6 as Microsoft guts the Xbox brand of whatever it has left.
Their new problem on the direct competitor front will be a revitalized Nintendo with a potentially less anemic hybrid console relative to the PS5-Switch gap.

VR is irrelevant, and they should stop investing there as far as games go. Spin that off from SIE and sell it to firms looking to use VR in other ways.

They should stop porting their stuff to PC, unless it is online-heavy/only titles. In the short-term, they get a bit of money scraped off the top. I bet a lot of it comes from double dippers; enough that whatever minute actually new audience you're able to get on PC with this type of game does not offset the lost revenues (including and beyond the sale of that first party game) of double-dippers turned PC-only gamers that used to buy PS consoles.
I think, like their live service frenzy, they will back off on this. But I could be wrong.

Sort out the game production pipelines, focus on AAA with the major studios and dabble into AA/threshold AAA with smaller 1st parties like Housemarque, Asobi and Media Molecule and selective indie dealings, and you're all set for a PS6 that sells 140 million lifetime without much problem.

I agree with everything except the VR part 😂. I know everyone's looking at it like a failed venture, but I think the appetite for VR is there. It's just so obfuscated with high barriers of entry that most aren't going out of their way to access it.

If Sony could work on a way to make low-latency streaming of game content to a VR headset a real thing, make a headset that's more slim and 'chic', and technology that is more modular and scalable to put in headsets that are entry-level to those that are professional/enthusiast-level, they'd have a great potential with that technology at last. The final step would be to make an entry-level headset default with a PS6.

But I know this all depends on how costs can be reduced down to make production more manageable, and if they try to target a reasonable MSRP for that type of package, they'd have to take away from some areas to keep costs manageable. Let's say they got an entry-level headset down to a reasonable $75 BOM, and they want a PS6 that's $499/$599 depending on SKU options. The headset needs to be in both, so...would it really bother folks if you got a 70 TF PS6 instead of a 100 TF PS6, just as an example? At what point is simply having powerful compute "enough", and where anything more is an excess not required?

Personally I think we're already reaching those limits, and it's going to be more about enhancing efficiency for parts of the graphics pipeline that can lighten work loads for developers immensely. That's where things like upscaling tech, AI, RT & PT solutions etc. come into the picture, or mesh shading as another example. And they can go even further than that, like with tech which can help with auto-scaling LODs based on the framebuffer, so devs only need to make single LOD assets and can include metadata AI logic in the system can use to correctly generate additional LODs as needed at runtime using inference.

Those sort of things, are going to allow games to get made more quickly, and it just feels like the natural progression of what the PS5 & PS4 were already trying to do. So whatever raw power when it comes to GPU, CPU etc. only needs to accommodate those types of features. Then for other things to keep SKU prices manageable, they could just cut down on storage options at default (people can always upgrade with their own SSDs for more capacity), remove non-critical I/O ports into separate peripheral devices, etc. But I think you need both of those things (affordable, scalable VR design & cheap entry-level headset default with every system) for VR to actually take off.

Meta kind of did this with the new Quest, but they don't have the software expertise of SIE, so they lack the ability to actually push the tech with 1P software. Also while Meta itself is a huge brand globally, the Quest VR headset is a much smaller brand gaming-wise than PlayStation. Although ironically, I'd say it's about maybe as big now as Xbox, which kind of shows how much cache the Xbox brand has lost over the years if anything.

As for the multi-platform ports...well again, ideally everything being exclusive would be the dream. But that's all it can probably be: a dream. I'm looking at this from an angle of: "Okay, we know Sony are going to pursue some form of multiplatform support regardless, there's no changing that. So what's the best way to do that without belittling or harming the console itself?". That's why I've looked it from the POV of increasing the gap for AAA non-GAAS to 4-6+ years before getting ported to PC, and even then not all of them should even get ports, certainly not for that console generation. Just as an example.

But it's also why I tried looking at it from game type: there's more leniency for, say, a AA remake maybe being Day 1 on PC and mobile, than a new AAA game. And it should still be case-by-case, it obviously shouldn't be for all games, some should still remain exclusive to the console regardless, and any port should beget a new equivalent or "higher" game exclusive to the current-gen PlayStation within a year or two. The way you handle announcements of those ports or such also matters, it plays into optics.

For example with the recent GOT PC port announcement. It's not the port itself that's an issue, after all it'll be 4 years since the initial release and that fits a 4-6+ year window. It's the fact that you can look at the totality of 1P releases since 2020 and realize the sheer amount of games that HAVE gotten ports and how few remain exclusive to the console. Between that and also excusing cross-gen games, the only current-gen specific 1P SIE games still exclusive to PS5, are: Astro's Playroom, Demon's Souls Remake, and Spiderman 2. And the Nvidia leak has Demon's Souls Remake on it, plus we know a Spiderman 2 port is inevitable (if it happens, probably in 2025), so into the 5th year of PS5 the only 1P game that might still be exclusive would be Astro's Playroom.

So again, the GOT port, in isolation there's nothing wrong with it. There not being an announcement for the sequel is a bit more an issue, though rumor has that'll come during a Showcase in the summer. The real issue is, what that port announcement does in terms of optics regarding the totality of ports so far vs. what still remain actual exclusives. It's increasingly anemic for the latter. If each of those PC ports got new 1P equivalents announced and/or released exclusive to PS5, there'd be a better balance. Some want to say 3P exclusives help fill that in and to an extent they do, but unless Sony have some type of leverage with those games (publishing rights, IP ownership, stock investments/partial ownership etc.), then those 3P exclusives can only be short-term solutions in providing content differentiation for the console. Some may provide a big effect initially but, over time, 1P content fulfilling that role would provide better long-term value and results.

Plus, for a company that wants to be less reliant on 3P revenue for profits, I'd think SIE would want to focus more on getting 1P that can act as suitable replacements for what would've once been 3P exclusives. The PHYSINT announcement for example is a great move because that's basically MGS (honestly, better-than-MGS) in all but name, and we know SIE have investments into KojiPro, they'll probably own or co-own the PHYSINT IP rights, have publishing rights etc. Helldivers 2 is another great example, because it could really grow into being a new home for disgruntled Halo & COD fans (among others), and SIE own the IP rights. Stellar Blade is a good example in that it has a ton of promise and works out better long-term vs. say getting a new DMC game as a timed exclusive. Though I think SIE need to buy shares into Shift-Up if able; they already have a partnership with them though so that's good.
 

Roronoa Zoro

Gold Member
Sony just look at Nintendo. They stuck with it and it got them that next generation of gamers and even more success. Also cut production costs and cut out shit like DEI from your writing which just adds cost and degrades quality and adds extra stress for employees.
 

Roronoa Zoro

Gold Member
They need just to consolidate on the console.
They're going to benefit from a spurt of console sales, third party game sales and probably subscriptions growth with the PS6 as Microsoft guts the Xbox brand of whatever it has left.
Their new problem on the direct competitor front will be a revitalized Nintendo with a potentially less anemic hybrid console relative to the PS5-Switch gap.

VR is irrelevant, and they should stop investing there as far as games go. Spin that off from SIE and sell it to firms looking to use VR in other ways.

They should stop porting their stuff to PC, unless it is online-heavy/only titles. In the short-term, they get a bit of money scraped off the top. I bet a lot of it comes from double dippers; enough that whatever minute actually new audience you're able to get on PC with this type of game does not offset the lost revenues (including and beyond the sale of that first party game) of double-dippers turned PC-only gamers that used to buy PS consoles.
I think, like their live service frenzy, they will back off on this. But I could be wrong.

Sort out the game production pipelines, focus on AAA with the major studios and dabble into AA/threshold AAA with smaller 1st parties like Housemarque, Asobi and Media Molecule and selective indie dealings, and you're all set for a PS6 that sells 140 million lifetime without much problem.
Exactly this. They're trading short term sales for long term degrading of the platform. Nintendo is happy they didn't go this route when they sold 13 million WiiUs
 
Exactly this. They're trading short term sales for long term degrading of the platform. Nintendo is happy they didn't go this route when they sold 13 million WiiUs

I'd also say that even tho Wii U didn't sell that well, the software sold very well. Maybe the best attach rate for a console ever when looking at the 1P.

The real reason MS are going more 3P isn't due to declining Series console sales, but the collapse of B2P and MTX/add-on content sales of games in global markets. That's where they would have counted on making up for hardware losses and the numbers are just dead.

IMO the reason SIE seem to be going with this multiplat strategy isn't because people aren't buying their games on console. Some tried saying Rift Apart was a failure; it sold 4 million prior to the PC port. Spiderman 2 is probably at 15 million by this point. GOW Ragnarok is probably around 20 million.

No the reason is because of greedy investors & shareholders pushing the BoD to chase "infinite growth" at all costs instead of maintaining stability. This is why I hate publicly-traded companies, especially those where close family members aren't calling the shots (like with Nintendo, where the family own the controlling shares and seats among BoD). Valve doesn't have to worry about chasing "growth" because they are privately owned.

Sometimes I wonder if SIE (and even Xbox, for that matter) would have been better off as a spun off, privately owned entity. I can't shake the feeling that some of the decisions they've made which are setting the stage to destabilize and decline their console brand over the long-term, are going to be aggressively accelerated maybe even starting this year. Little reason for me to be optimistic for otherwise unless (or until) SIE start showing it through actions & initiatives.

Just keep bringing their games to PC and I’ll be happy. Hopefully day one instead of years down the line.
I do have a PS5 but PC is my fav platform.

While I don't think that's the best path for maintaining peak relevancy of their console hardware, it feels more and more likely that Sony will do as you're hoping.

So congrats on the games that'll likely start coming your way a lot quicker.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom