-
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.
What do you think of PlayStation's direction as a business these last few years and why?
Men_in_Boxes
Snake Oil Salesman
The data says otherwise.
Most people don't like spending $70 dollars on a game and only playing 15 hours of it before dropping it due to boredom. That happens all too often in traditional games.
GAAS encourages developers to make games with hundreds, if not thousands of hours of nutritionally dense entertainment.
It's cotton candy vs a filet mignon.
Even if we can't agree on the above, we're quickly heading towards a market where Live Service constitutes 90+% of it while traditional games make up 10% or less. PlayStation has no interest in swimming in puddles. They want the ocean. That's bold leadership.
Last edited:
lastmessiah
Member
The only people who hate live service games are paunchy Gen X guys who suck at competition and post on forums more than they actually play games lol. Sony is not concerned with losing that demographic, I would wager.
Men_in_Boxes
Snake Oil Salesman
I am fascinated how few people can go "I don't care for GAAS but it's obviously where the market is headed."
Topher
Gold Member
Silly to characterize people like that just because you don't have the same views.
The hope I (and others I think) have is that Sony is simply broadening their offering. I really have no problem with that but they cannot afford to take those who love their traditional games for granted. Live service games are not an automatic slam dunk hit. Many of them are flat-out failures. So the question I have is can Sony produce live service games as well as continue to make top-notch single player experiences. I hope so.
Last edited:
EverydayBeast
thinks Halo Infinite is a new graphical benchmark
From a perspective of a gamer Sonys decisions since 2020 have not been good, their attention is on aggressively making money (raising prices, tiers, deals etc.)
simpatico
Member
On paper maybe. Xbox Live was the brand during PS360. People loved it. All they had to do was make a beefier 360 and PS would have struggled to catch up to the mindshare. The underpowered DVR box really set them back and they still haven't recovered. Will go down in history as one of the biggest gaming bag fumbles.
Last edited:
Monkfish877
Member
Depressing, Sony first party studios made playstation into what it is today and Jim Ryan is pissing it all away chasing after this GAAS nonsense. He really is a penny pinching, greedy prick. I honestly can't stand him. I only signed up to this forum because of the disgust I felt after what I saw at the playstation showcase. Make no mistake about it, I'll be cheerleading the failure of all their GAAS projects and I hope they all bomb to high heaven. To hell with Jim Ryan.
Fbh
Member
I'm not a fan of modern Sony....and yet I still play on Ps5 because I still think it's the best console out there.
Nintendo has better first party games but their hardware is very underpowered and they get very poor third party support because of it (aside from indies and smaller games), so my Switch is mostly relegated to a secondary system I use to play between 1-3 games a year. Xbox has competitive hardware but their first party output so far doesn't appeal to me and they still get less Japanese support which is a dealbreaker for me
Ideally I'd like to play on PC but right now I can't afford a decent one so I'll just stick with Ps5 for the time being. But with the current trajectory Sony is taking I'll probably be done with Playstation the second I can switch over to PC.
This too. I'm missing the excitement and ambition in their games.
God of War 2018 felt fresh and exciting, Bloodborne brought the Dark Souls formula to an awesome new setting, Horizon Introduced a cool new world and some interesting ideas, Ghost of Tsushima gave us that historical Japanese open world a lot of people wanted, stuff like The Last Guardian and Gravity Rush 2 feel like almost nothing else on the market.
This gen though has mostly been about samey sequels that feel unambitious in their gameplay and scope and are content just doing more of the same with better graphics. Returnal is the one game that at least felt like it was trying to do something new, and sadly it seems like only the GAAS studios are being allowed to do new stuff
Nintendo has better first party games but their hardware is very underpowered and they get very poor third party support because of it (aside from indies and smaller games), so my Switch is mostly relegated to a secondary system I use to play between 1-3 games a year. Xbox has competitive hardware but their first party output so far doesn't appeal to me and they still get less Japanese support which is a dealbreaker for me
Ideally I'd like to play on PC but right now I can't afford a decent one so I'll just stick with Ps5 for the time being. But with the current trajectory Sony is taking I'll probably be done with Playstation the second I can switch over to PC.
This too. I'm missing the excitement and ambition in their games.
God of War 2018 felt fresh and exciting, Bloodborne brought the Dark Souls formula to an awesome new setting, Horizon Introduced a cool new world and some interesting ideas, Ghost of Tsushima gave us that historical Japanese open world a lot of people wanted, stuff like The Last Guardian and Gravity Rush 2 feel like almost nothing else on the market.
This gen though has mostly been about samey sequels that feel unambitious in their gameplay and scope and are content just doing more of the same with better graphics. Returnal is the one game that at least felt like it was trying to do something new, and sadly it seems like only the GAAS studios are being allowed to do new stuff
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
How do you derive this conclusion when all the devs working on GaaS are new acquisitions who've never worked on anything other than GaaS, or have never even shipped a game before?
EruditeHobo
Member
Not on paper... in sales. It took awhile, but they got it together with things like pricing, library, and once blu-ray had definitively won the HD war probably helped some. And consumers responded; PS4/XB1 were released in late 2013, but PS3 was gaining significant ground on 360 as early as 2010 and fully passing them before the launch of the new generation consoles.
arkhamguy123
Member
Boring. Corporate. Stale. They’ll release a good single player game with nice graphics and gameplay every blue moon now but, eh… meh. Ya know. Whatever.
The old days were better. Miss the PS3/PS4 days. Say 2007-2018ish
Also it’s all a big hit with the causals and very profitable so whatever. It’s succeeding in the ways they want it to
The old days were better. Miss the PS3/PS4 days. Say 2007-2018ish
Also it’s all a big hit with the causals and very profitable so whatever. It’s succeeding in the ways they want it to
Last edited:
Men_in_Boxes
Snake Oil Salesman
False.
Naughty Dog, Insomniac, Sucker Punch, Guerilla, Bend, London Studio, and Media Molecule are all working on multiplayer games.
simpatico
Member
Sales could be attributed to long awaited price cuts and people looking for newness at the end of a long gen.
Ar¢tos
Member
Because the devs that made AA games are either gone (PixelOpus) or moved to AAA games (like Housemarque), only team Asobi remains, probably for VR games.
Rawbutt Jellybean
Member
Making GAAS their main focus is my biggest complaint. They were already killing it and didn't need to pump out that predatory garbage. Especially since their traditional games offerings will suffer in the mean time while most of their investments are being sent to spam a bunch of GAAS games.
Constantly remastering PS4 games that are already playable on PS5 is annoying.
Games were always going to increase to $70 so I can't give them blame even if they were first.
Constantly remastering PS4 games that are already playable on PS5 is annoying.
Games were always going to increase to $70 so I can't give them blame even if they were first.
Rhazer Fusion
Member
I’m really enjoying the PS5 and Sony is still capable of creating those high quality, captivating single player experiences, but I dislike the current and I especially dislike the future trajectory.
GAAS/live service games aren’t for me and that seems to be a big part of their future. I don’t particularly care for VR. Their Japanese game’s output is basically nonexistent from a first party perspective and imo they seemingly play it safe now with most of their releases. Even Microsoft seems to be more experimental with their first party offerings than Sony, at least for now. Movies based on games? I don’t care about that either. Releasing old games and remakes? Ok fine, whatever but that’s one of the reasons I say they are playing it too safe. Do we really need something like Horizon and TLOU2 remasters when there are many other games that could use it?
We’ll see what the future holds for Sony and I don’t want to jump to conclusions before things are unveiled, but admittedly I’m concerned about this future they seem to be embracing. Honestly, the GAAS/multiplayer obsession is my biggest complaint by far.
GAAS/live service games aren’t for me and that seems to be a big part of their future. I don’t particularly care for VR. Their Japanese game’s output is basically nonexistent from a first party perspective and imo they seemingly play it safe now with most of their releases. Even Microsoft seems to be more experimental with their first party offerings than Sony, at least for now. Movies based on games? I don’t care about that either. Releasing old games and remakes? Ok fine, whatever but that’s one of the reasons I say they are playing it too safe. Do we really need something like Horizon and TLOU2 remasters when there are many other games that could use it?
We’ll see what the future holds for Sony and I don’t want to jump to conclusions before things are unveiled, but admittedly I’m concerned about this future they seem to be embracing. Honestly, the GAAS/multiplayer obsession is my biggest complaint by far.
Last edited:
yurinka
Member
Good, makes sense and I like it.
Regarding VR, not wireless and not standalone is mandatory to feature high end games/visuals.
Didn't like them but I understand them.
Someone has to pay the cost of the upgrades. Huge inflation, fuel/shipping costs and components costs rised prices for console and accesories. Games had to rise price to catch up inflation, but considering inflation games are now cheaper than they ever have been since the '70s. Every generation games become more and more expensive, so makes sense they make late PC ports or GaaS.
Regarding GaaS, makes sense to invest on them because they generate the majority of game revenue and are the fastest growing business model, but Sony had a weak presence in this area. So I think Sony does it right investing more on GaaS and non-GaaS than before, specially when doing it with devs who worked on AAA GaaS and new IPs that were record breaking performers (Bungie, Firewalk, Haven etc).
Not true. On top of that, they inclluded most of their games in PS+.
You guys should stop parroting this flatearther level lie.
Japan Studio was restructured and split into two separate offices under new managemts: their internal game development teams were merged into one of their Japan Studio teams: Team Asobi, which has been growing since then.
The 2nd party pubilshing part of Japan Studio was branched out into a new office to become the XDEV office for Asia, doing the same move previously made in EU where the XDEV european office was branched out from Liverpool Studio and as it was made in USA where the XDEV american office was branched out from Sony Santa Monica. This Asian office is also growing and not only publishes Japanese games, but also from other Asian countries. They published Death Stranding Director's Cut and are working on Death Stranding 2, Rise of the Samurai, Stellar Blade, Lost Soul Aside or Convallaria.
Last edited:
yurinka
Member
GaaS isn't their main focus. The majority of the multiple dozen games they have under development aren't GaaS. They will also increase their investment on non GaaS games. And they also increased their investment in any other single area (2nd party deals, 3rd party AAA and indie deas, accesories, eSports, PC ports, mobile games, movie/tv adaptations, VR, growing all their internal teams, acquisitions, etc).
The investment growth in GaaS is bigger than in non-GaaS. This makes sense because GaaS generate the majority of the game revenue and it's the fastest growing business model, but Sony had a very little and weak presence in GaaS. So Sony had to make an effort to improve their presence in GaaS with big investments, hirings and acquisitions.
0neAnd0nly
Member
The Last of Us TV show was shit.
Objectively good for everyone but the most diehard fanboys.
Mixed to good. It made business sense to utilize the PS4 install base and is also nice for owners of older PS4 hardware to still be able to play the latest games. It's impressive seeing some of these games run on 1.84 TFLOP hardware. However I wonder if any compromises needed to be made to the PS5 versions to allow it to happen. Sony also went around concealing some PS4 version's existence in the worst possible way eg. a GT7 port being announced a long time after the game's reveal as a PS5 exclusive.
Scrooge-like behavior when so many publishers do it for free.
With inflation it's no more expensive than it was last generation. The console is identically priced to the nearest competitor in most regions, who also raised their prices too. Rumor is there is going to be a price cut soon anyway.
Haven't noticed this. The Days of Play and holiday sales are still decent enough.
PSVR2 is an excellent piece of hardware. Its only issue is that it needs a bit more exclusive software (something which people complain about if Sony don't do, but also complain about if they showcase PSVR2 games at their conferences).
Platform holders have been doing this since time immemorial.
Good. More consoles should make games available on newer hardware. The movie industry released films on VHS then DVD then Blu-ray and now UHD, yet movie fans don't get ass mad about it in the way some gamers do.
These are my main grievances with Sony, but also major ones.
Expansion into GaaS at the level they are doing is going to be a colossal failure. The offerings shown so far range from the generic (Helldivers 2) to the putrid (Fairgame$). The only thing i'm looking forward to is Marathon, which isn't even exclusive. The fact that Sony are investing in 12 of these titles over the next few years is disconcerting both from a quality POV but also because some level of cannibalization between the titles is inevitable. There is barely enough time and money in the world for players to be interested in Fortnite, Minecraft and Warzone, let alone another dozen of these service games. They will be a distraction for a few weeks before their player count sinks to 0 and they get abandoned, like so much of the other GaaS shite released.
The attempted closure of the legacy stores was shameful. It was a purely cost cutting measure to save some bandwidth with zero respect for those platform's rich history. It paints an apocalyptic picture of what the digital-only future will look like, where thousands of games will be routinely lost to time as soon as the platform holders decide they've outlived their usefulness in ten years time. It's hardly surprising though when their own CEO Jim Ryan's opinion of old games is: "why would anyone play this?"
The closure of Japan Studio was another nail in the coffin of the Sony legacy and arguably the darkest day in the company to date. The once Japanese company has now been almost totally usurped by Westerners. Their only Japanese studios left are Polyphony and Team Asobi, who are dedicated to just making a couple of games for the platform. Some of the best and most creative IP in gaming are now basically lost, and what do we get in their place? Korean vaporware looking shit, a GaaS obsession, and buying up unproven studios which have so far only shown a logo (Haven, Firewalk, etc).
An English studio putting a bunch of kanji in their name isn't going to fill the gap left by killing off Japan Studio.
One of the best detailed takes in here, by far.
I only really disagree with you on making games available on other platforms. To me, for console companies - it doesn’t make sense. Exclusives are very important to make people WANT to buy your console over a competitors.
If you make your major games available everywhere else, why buy the console?
Outside of that, you hit the nail on the head especially in the finale of your post.
0neAnd0nly
Member
Ozzy Onya A2Z
Member
Very little interest in their games, walled ecosystem or business practices. I have little respect for Sony and how they operate in recent years. Loved them back in the days of Walkman, PS1/2, outside of that shite for me.
Rawbutt Jellybean
Member
They're investing more in GAAS than traditional games and it's going to widen. It's not their only focus but it's the "main" one right now.
And as I said, GAAS is predatory and unnecessary for Sony who has been dominating the competition without it.
Sanepar
Member
A few points with my taste on the center of my opinion:
- I don't like Sony communication. 2 years without event, their last showcase a disaster, no clear roadmap of games coming to PC.
- Focus too much on gaas and greenlighting games that obvious will be a failure(like london studios super hero gaas), their lack of experience shows most of their gaas will be a total failure, only one I think will be a success is Marathon.
- bad strategy in terms of M&A, they know for more than 3 years that MS would have an agressive with the strategy of acquisitions. They could have done a better job. PS is the most important business for Sony, so put your efforts to survive and make good acquisitions to have a good flow of games(at least 1 per quarter) and 16 studios is not enough for that. Tbh in terms of M&A is too late everything relevant is extremely expensive now(cdpr, from after elden ring, capcom, square) only cheap gem out there is Larian.
Imo future of PS depends if they can survive consolidation. MS will not stop there. Hw is 30% of their revenue. Their ecosystem depends of hw. To change that would need a lot of time. I think ps future will be by the side of other big tech or on a more agressive scenario selling ps studios to someone.
One more thing i think their games deserve a premium price because their single players are the best out there in terms of value of production. They are on their league and since I love sp games I don't mind to pay $70 for the sp games and I don't want their games day one on a service because I know this quality of pure aaa sp games is not possible on that model.
- I don't like Sony communication. 2 years without event, their last showcase a disaster, no clear roadmap of games coming to PC.
- Focus too much on gaas and greenlighting games that obvious will be a failure(like london studios super hero gaas), their lack of experience shows most of their gaas will be a total failure, only one I think will be a success is Marathon.
- bad strategy in terms of M&A, they know for more than 3 years that MS would have an agressive with the strategy of acquisitions. They could have done a better job. PS is the most important business for Sony, so put your efforts to survive and make good acquisitions to have a good flow of games(at least 1 per quarter) and 16 studios is not enough for that. Tbh in terms of M&A is too late everything relevant is extremely expensive now(cdpr, from after elden ring, capcom, square) only cheap gem out there is Larian.
Imo future of PS depends if they can survive consolidation. MS will not stop there. Hw is 30% of their revenue. Their ecosystem depends of hw. To change that would need a lot of time. I think ps future will be by the side of other big tech or on a more agressive scenario selling ps studios to someone.
One more thing i think their games deserve a premium price because their single players are the best out there in terms of value of production. They are on their league and since I love sp games I don't mind to pay $70 for the sp games and I don't want their games day one on a service because I know this quality of pure aaa sp games is not possible on that model.
Last edited:
ChorizoPicozo
Member
i can see how this has been a problem
we can only speculate. but is not normal at all.
I'm fine with this. PC releases should be cherry picked
you can't blame them at all. (especially with your next point)
The fact that sony is investing so much in GaaS shows exactly why sony keeps being the market leader.
If sony absolutely NEEDS to buy a publisher, they will.
I think people get too scared about the "consolidation". But i think PS's future depends on their ability to keep making successful AAA games, nail down their GaaS strategy and make smart investments of all kindz.
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
GaaS =/= MP games
And SP games with a MP component =/= MP games.
Also, BS... only ND is confirmed to be working on TLOU factions.
Men_in_Boxes
Snake Oil Salesman
Multiplayer = GAAS.
There are no multiplayer games released today that aren't GAAS. It aint 2007 no mo'.
Robb
Gold Member
Everybody 1-2 Switch launched last month.
Men_in_Boxes
Snake Oil Salesman
Well, if you think the PlayStation that says "We're planning on releasing 12 Live Service games by FY 2025" is planning on releasing a bunch of non Live Service multiplayer games...I have a bridge to sell you.
Robb
Gold Member
I don’t disagree, but multiplayer =/= GAAS.
TGO
Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
Everything up to the release of the PS5 was fantastic but was pre-laid out by their predecessors so I can't give Jim & Hermen credit.
Since then they seem to be distracted and unfocused on their prime directive with the only things related to the actual PS5 being poorly executed and phoned in.
This includes
PS+ Premium
Dualsense Edge
PSVR2
Playstation Q Lite.
After 3 years this is all they've produced.
Luckily 3rd party support is fantastic and they are really riding on that.
But they need to buck their ideas up and refocus
Because in the time it would take for them to notice it'll be too late.
Since then they seem to be distracted and unfocused on their prime directive with the only things related to the actual PS5 being poorly executed and phoned in.
This includes
PS+ Premium
Dualsense Edge
PSVR2
Playstation Q Lite.
After 3 years this is all they've produced.
Luckily 3rd party support is fantastic and they are really riding on that.
But they need to buck their ideas up and refocus
Because in the time it would take for them to notice it'll be too late.
Last edited:
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
Housemarque isn't making a GaaS game.
Again, what examples can you cite of Sony shelving AA games for GaaS?
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
A MP game implies MP-only. Not every GaaS game is MP only.
The only SP studio making an MP-only game is ND and that's a separate team from the one working on their next big SP title. As you know, factions were supposed to be the tacked-on MP mode of TLOU2. So was never originally conceived as a GaaS game, but over time morphed into it, because they wanted to make it a standalone MP game.
So, no. Sony is not shifting development over to GaaS from SP games.
Outside of the second ND team, all the other major GaaS projects are by brand-new studios or from Bungie.
semiconscious
Member
same. really dislike the 'dark/mature/feels' obsessed, blatantly manipulative storytelling...
Sony games used to be must plays for me, but for the past 10 or so years, most of the games have fallen flat or been very "one and done" affairs. Glad others can enjoy them and find many things to love about the direction their studios have taken. For me, however, it feels a bit disappointing that we don't get the variety that we had in the latter half of the PS3 Era.
I still pick up the first party games, but I do so at a steep discount or borrow them from friends.
The future of GAAS titles down the road leave me a tad worried.
I still pick up the first party games, but I do so at a steep discount or borrow them from friends.
The future of GAAS titles down the road leave me a tad worried.
Ar¢tos
Member
I said AAA not GAAS...
Their small studios have grown to AAA (Bend, Housemarque is nearly there) and they didn't put new studios filling the gap, new studios went straight to GaaS production.
In Cold Blood
Banned
Sony has been reacting to shifts in the market, and shifts in their own gameplan.
Sony had missed the boat in creating any multiplayer GAAS games of note, as all their efforts were in developing quality single player games.
On top of that, Sony's decision to release more and more games on PC has meant that they have had to gain more ability to convert games to PC.
So, while Sony has spent alot of money in aquisitions, a large chunk of that has gone into PC conversion studios and studios that will make GAAS games.
For instance, their biggest aquisition in Bungie, has brought the typical PlayStation gamer nothing.
The push to PC and GAAS games gives loyal PlayStation gamers nothing new for them.
Sony had missed the boat in creating any multiplayer GAAS games of note, as all their efforts were in developing quality single player games.
On top of that, Sony's decision to release more and more games on PC has meant that they have had to gain more ability to convert games to PC.
So, while Sony has spent alot of money in aquisitions, a large chunk of that has gone into PC conversion studios and studios that will make GAAS games.
For instance, their biggest aquisition in Bungie, has brought the typical PlayStation gamer nothing.
The push to PC and GAAS games gives loyal PlayStation gamers nothing new for them.
crackajack
Member
My thought too. The PS4 was already quite safe in regards to games. Big Budget and now and then some controversial writing/content but nothing really experimental and genre expanding. The HW was very okay until XBox One X was the superior one, but overall it was succesful because MS fucked up and the momentum built with late PS3 and Plus was there.
Now they have some blockbusters but practically all are third person over the shoulder. Even coming Helldivers 2 and arcade specialist Housemarque needed to fit that mould. I guess they were not forced by Sony suits, but in the greenlight process Sony suits should have asked for more variety and keeping some lower budget games in the line up. I am not even against these games, but almost everything?
Where are FPS? Firewall Ultra? Is that going to be also non-VR? And actually good, without VR? Those GaaS better have some SP content too... and be able to replace CoD...
Where is a WRPG? The Decima engine should work for that just fine. Especially after the MS acquisitions they need a team for that.
Where is a horror game? Beside RE those don't sell bonkers, but still there must be someone in the their teams who wants to do one. On a lower budget. Kojima?
Where is a Forza Horizon like arcade racer? Driveclub failed, but built on the GT engine it should be an easy cash grab. Bikes...
Where is a Mario Kart like racer? LBP Karting/Modnation Racer done by Sumo Digital with PS stars branding.
Where is a Smash Bros like fighter? Also give it to Sumo Digital. Just because the first one was not immediately competing with the numbers of Nintendo's juggernauts, people have to associate your brand with those games before the numbers get there.
Where are regular ass MP games, which are necessary foundation before trying to do GaaS? Fat Princess or maybe other obscure niche games should accompany the big blockbuster games.
Where are puzzlegames like Echochrome?
Have maybe an entire "Sony Junior" publisher label for smaller titles that don't align with the grand PS Studios branding.
And where are fucking VR games for that new platform that was sent out to die? Does Sony have a team porting VR1 games? Does Sony have a team making unofficial PC ports of shooters official in cooperation with the IP owners?
Crystal & Eidos would have been a fine fit for their third person fetish.
I guess Remedy and IO want to be independant for now but they should make sure that they provide all their games to PS which already failed with IO.
Sumo Digital would have been a good get for several genres.
Quantic Dream, Supermassive, Dontnod, Deck Nine whatever, buy or built one team for such games.
Buying Kyloton, Milestone, Kunos Simulazioni for either supporting GT or do arcade racers for them might be a cheap investment.
Gearbox would have been a decent get for those GaaS plans, at least cheaper than Bungie.
Insomniac was a perfect buy, but they let some affordable fitting studios slip.
Betting on some "new" successful stuff, the current fad, is fine, but 10 GaaS? Especially weird after dropping H1Z1, Planetside, SW Galaxies and Everquest, their Sony Online Entertainment arm. And now everything else should come from third parties while having cut fat left and right and almost doing only one type of game just with different skins?
First Party is supposed to have the best games, showing off the limits of the platform, but that requires more variety to really shine.
I dislike MS, but if and once they get their obvious mismanagement in order their variety seems much better.
Sony has GT, Sackboy, Astrobot, MLB, (Dreams) sure but not much else. They should invest in true variety and don't focus entirely on just cinematic experiences and GaaS whale hunting.
TheGodfather07
Member
It was a good start but I'm not liking the live service push. It's having an impact on their traditional output.
PharaoTutAnchAmun
Member
So you dont answer my steatment. So you know it is a lie, but you dont want to admit it.
Thirty7ven
Banned
Aside from selfish wish of wanting them to double or triple in studio size and deliver SP Sony IP three or four times a year, they are doing exactly what’s expected of them.
They tried with VR which despite Silicon Valley’s propaganda, it was always going to fail, but they gave it a good shot.
They tried with VR which despite Silicon Valley’s propaganda, it was always going to fail, but they gave it a good shot.
EruditeHobo
Member
Whining about GAAS... far as I can tell, there's zero reason to think that's having significant impact on other game production. Complaining about that, especially without seeing the games, is incredibly myopic IMO.
Sure, that's possible. But it's irrelevant to my point. The only thing that matters is Sony caught up, and surpassed, 360 before the next gen launched. The story isn't 100% about xbox fumbling the bag. Sony had the groundwork for a tremendously successful generation... and they capitalized on that groundwork.
Seems to be happening again with PS5, which built very clearly and obviously on PS4.
Sure, that's possible. But it's irrelevant to my point. The only thing that matters is Sony caught up, and surpassed, 360 before the next gen launched. The story isn't 100% about xbox fumbling the bag. Sony had the groundwork for a tremendously successful generation... and they capitalized on that groundwork.
Seems to be happening again with PS5, which built very clearly and obviously on PS4.
Chuck Berry
Gold Member
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
Your original premise was that Sony was sacrificing AA development to push GaaS.
Sony's AA studios moving to AAA development is just the general progression of studio development. The studios themselves have ambition and don't want to be making AA games forever. Those who have proved themselves making quality AA games, when offered a AAA dev budget will jump at the chance to build a AAA game with broader scope and ambition.
This seems like a pretty bizarre thing to be upset over. Both devs and the majority of gamers at large want devs to make AAA games over AA games.
Ar¢tos
Member
AA games are often more creative than AAA games that are increasingly boring, bloated and repetitive.
I much rather play a fun creative 4h game than a boring bloated 20h game.
By not letting new studios test the AA games water and putting then straight into the GAAS factory line, they are sacrificing the AA game development.
Last edited:
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
Sony doesn't need to fund AA games. They get a tonne of AA games from independent 3rd parties. There's no shortage of them.
AA games can be self-published by the studios, which comes with significant benefits for the studio in question, e.g. IP ownership and a bigger share of the profits.
It makes more sense for Sony to focus their FP publishing dollars on AAA games which is a category that's entirely unreachable by AA indie devs. And it especially makes sense for Sony to fund historically AA devs moving up to AAA development. NOBODY else is doing this, and with the slow attrition of AAA devs across the industry, if successful AA devs aren't being backed to take on larger AAA projects, then we'll see fewer and fewer AAA games until all that's left are the AAA first party studios and those 3rd parties under big publishers that shit out annualized sequels.
So again, I don't really see any issue.
Similar threads
- Poll