Hermen Hulst Master Plan

[Nhomnhom]

AAA games take now more time and people to be made, this is why every single AAA team takes more time to release games than before, including Insomniac (even if they have a lot of devs so can afford to work in multiple games at the same time, unlike other AAA studios). And not only from Sony, from all companies.

AAA games for all companies are also way more expensive every new generation, so they become safer trying to minimize risks. To make sequels of their biggest hits it's the safest position, but Sony instead decided a very risky move: to bet the half on new IP, something that no other big publisher -specially platform holders- does.


This is your personal opinion, the number of games announced under development when launched is way bigger than it was for PSVR1 and included bigger brands than for PSVR1.


Some games sell well, and some games don't, like in any company or in any platform. The difference is that in Steam we can make a more decent sales estimate than in other platforms.

Also, I'd suggest to wait and judge PC ports performance in long term instead of a few days/weeks after launch, because specially in PC people many buys with discounts or price cuts, and in many cases the Sony PC ports are almost full priced ports of games originally released several years ago, so I assume many people may be interested in a game but may wait until discounted/price cutted until certain level.


My arguments come down to what Sony says, what Sony does, market numbers, known sales or number of awards etc because that is measurable factual data, verifiable facts, to try to show or explain reality with facts instead of baseless/biased personal opinion.


Same here, but I don't attack others because they don't agree what I say.

What you don't get is I'm also "PC people", I know what I'm talking about when it comes to PC. Sony entire GaaS/PC strategy is them digging their own grave.

These AAA single player games don't appeal to PC audience at all and are way too vulnerable to piracy. The answer is obviously GaaS like Sony is figured out, but you don't win the battle for GaaS mind share with the qualities that Sony has.

to be fair to the guy you might want to edit this lol

Housemarque make AAA games now. Returnal
Bluepoint are doing more than remakes
Firesprite are doing more than VR

We haven't actually seen any of that. At most I can give you credit on Housemarque making AAA games but even that is a bit of a stretch.

As for the rest, lets not fall for the same trap of Phil Spencer truthers and blade his predecessor for everything. If he can't be blamed for any of those decisions he also can't get credit for pretty much anything done so far (that makes things even worse for him because what is coming looks worse than what we had so far).

We knows from Shawn Layden that someone in his position have a say in these deals and the deals Herman made so far paint a clear picture.

 

[Plextorage]

Yes. There is no doubt about this, you must be completely ignorant of PlayStation history if you think a year with a single release is normal

Which single release? Explain

less AAA single player games than ever
- less new IPs AAA single player than ever

We haven't actually seen any of that. At most I can give you credit on Housemarque making AAA games but even that is a bit of a stretch.

Less AAA and less new IPs.......but we haven't actually seen any of that.

 

[Swift_Star]

 

[Nhomnhom]

Which single release? Explain





Less AAA and less new IPs.......but we haven't actually seen any of that.

Spider-man 2 is the only game from Sony releasing in 2023 other than a VR game.

Less AAA and IPs is already a reality now. It's precisely about what we aren't seeing, where are the games?

 

[Zzero]

and Japan studio didn’t really get closed. it got renamed Team Asobi and bunch of people got fired. still the same studio head running the same team in the same office making the same game.

This is a distinction without difference.

Not sure why that guy is complaining about the tv deal though, thats been nothing but a success and has led to increased sales of TLOU back catalog titles.

 

[Nhomnhom]

This is a distinction without difference.

Not sure why that guy is complaining about the tv deal though, thats been nothing but a success and has led to increased sales of TLOU back catalog titles.

Yet has lead to nothing positive for me, why should I count it as a positive thing? Just looks like them again focusing on stuff I don't care about.

I never liked the idea of TLoU Part I remake to begin with even if the game ended up being good, time that could've been used making a new game.

 

[Kereke12]

Because it sucks that they are making content for Xbox players while I don't get what I want from them.

It's understandable that you may feel frustrated if you're a non-Xbox player and feel like you're not getting the content you want from certain developers or companies. However, it's important to consider a few points:

Platform exclusivity is a common practice: Platform exclusivity deals have been a part of the gaming industry for many years. Companies often make agreements with specific platforms to release exclusive content or timed exclusives as a way to attract players to their platform. This strategy helps foster competition and drives innovation among different platforms, ultimately benefiting the industry as a whole.

Diverse content for different platforms: Developing content exclusively for one platform can have benefits for both developers and players. By focusing on a specific platform, developers can optimize their games to take full advantage of the hardware and capabilities of that platform. This can result in a better gaming experience for players on that particular platform. Furthermore, different platforms may have unique features or technologies that enable developers to create content that wouldn't be possible otherwise.

Availability of alternatives: While it's disappointing to miss out on specific content, it's important to remember that there are numerous other games and experiences available across various platforms. Each platform has its own exclusive titles and strengths, so you can still find plenty of content that caters to your preferences on the platform of your choice.

Exclusivity benefits the industry as a whole: Exclusive content deals help drive healthy competition between different platforms. This competition can lead to technological advancements, better games, and more innovative experiences. It also encourages developers to push their creative boundaries and deliver unique content that sets them apart from their competitors. Ultimately, this benefits all players, regardless of their preferred platform, by raising the overall quality and diversity of gaming experiences.

The gaming landscape is constantly evolving: The gaming industry is dynamic and constantly evolving. While certain content may be exclusive to a particular platform initially, it's not uncommon for games or features to become available on other platforms later. Sometimes, exclusivity deals are timed, and content may become accessible to players on different platforms in the future.

In conclusion, while it can be frustrating when content is exclusive to a specific platform, it's important to understand the reasons behind these decisions and consider the broader context of the gaming industry. There are still plenty of games and experiences available on various platforms, and platform exclusivity can ultimately drive competition, innovation, and better gaming experiences for all players.

 

[Yurinka]

What you don't get is I'm also "PC people", I know what I'm talking about when it comes to PC. Sony entire GaaS/PC strategy is them digging their own grave.

These AAA single player games don't appeal to PC audience at all and are way too vulnerable to piracy. The answer is obviously GaaS like Sony is figured out, but you don't win the battle for GaaS mind share with the qualities that Sony has.

In PC, like in console or in mobile most of the top grossing and most played games are GaaS. As an example, during the last decade or more the top two (occasionally top 3) worldwide PC games have been almost always League of Legends and Dungeon Fighter Online.

GaaS became big in PC (and mobile) before than in console. And not only in console, but in the whole gaming market across console+mobile+PC there's the global trend of game sales revenue going down and the addons revenue going up.

This is not my personal opinion, it's the market, what 3 Billions gamers did in recent years so it's what it's projected to continue happening.

When looking at this, publishers like Sony don't want to see their sales and revenue shrink, so they also invest in GaaS because they see that this is where players put their time and money.

So they aren't digging their own grave by also betting in GaaS. In any case, they could dig it if now investing in GaaS, in addition -as they are doing- continuing investing into what already works for them.

If you ask my personal opinion, I'll tell you I prefer single player games that aren't too long. I'd prefer to see Sony focused on SP games that are 10-20 hours long with other 10-20 hours for extras. With the exception of SF, I prefer to get tons of free updates and free content, and season passes than as having to pay full games for minor gameplay updates and a few extra character. Same goes with PC, I'd keep all their games PS exclusive forever.

But as dev who worked in a big ass publisher with friends in many other big ass companies, and as someone who likes to research about the industry numbers, I know that to compensate the skyrocketing costs they need to grow, invest in GaaS and expand to PC, mobile, movies/tv shows and any other area where they can get revenue from.

Because big AAA are becoming too insanely expensive and even big publishers suffers when one of them tanks or needs to be cancelled when they already spent a ton of money on it. Which ended with the career of several people and shutted down companies / studios or forced some people to sell their company studio to avoid having to shut it down.

I know it and understand it. So I'm fine with it because know that even if I personally won't play some of these games or ports, they are needed to keep getting the games I like and play and keep their teams safer.

 

[Nhomnhom]

In PC, like in console or in mobile most of the top grossing and most played games are GaaS. As an example, during the last decade or more the top two (occasionally top 3) worldwide PC games have been almost always League of Legends and Dungeon Fighter Online.

GaaS became big in PC (and mobile) before than in console. And not only in console, but in the whole gaming market across console+mobile+PC there's the global trend of game sales revenue going down and the addons revenue going up.

This is not my personal opinion, it's the market, what 3 Billions gamers did in recent years so it's what it's projected to continue happening.

When looking at this, publishers like Sony don't want to see their sales and revenue shrink, so they also invest in GaaS because they see that this is where players put their time and money.

So they aren't digging their own grave by also betting in GaaS. In any case, they could dig it if now investing in GaaS, in addition -as they are doing- continuing investing into what already works for them.

If you ask my personal opinion, I'll tell you I prefer single player games that aren't too long. I'd prefer to see Sony focused on SP games that are 10-20 hours long with other 10-20 hours for extras. With the exception of SF, I prefer to get tons of free updates and free content, and season passes than as having to pay full games for minor gameplay updates and a few extra character. Same goes with PC, I'd keep all their games PS exclusive forever.

But as dev who worked in a big ass publisher with friends in many other big ass companies, and as someone who likes to research about the industry numbers, I know that to compensate the skyrocketing costs they need to grow, invest in GaaS and expand to PC, mobile, movies/tv shows and any other area where they can get revenue from.

Because big AAA are becoming too insanely expensive and even big publishers suffers when one of them tanks or needs to be cancelled when they already spent a ton of money on it. Which ended with the career of several people and shutted down companies / studios or forced some people to sell their company studio to avoid having to shut it down.

All Sony AAA single player games are selling more than ever so it's a matter of doing more of them. Same goes for third-party publisher the ones actually capable of making good AAA games are having great success in sales.

GaaS should not be expanded at the cost of single player games like what we are witnessing.

Did Sony fail to properly invest in PlayStation to avoid the current situation? Why is MS comfortable spending so much on Xbox while it fails miserably but Sony is scared to invest more money on a console that we'll sell more than 120m+ units?

They are taking their fan base for granted and are going to pay the price when the time comes.

 

[Plextorage]

Spider-man 2 is the only game from Sony releasing in 2023 other than a VR game.

So, not a single release. Also, there is a HFW expansion and MLB.

Less AAA and IPs is already a reality now. It's precisely about what we aren't seeing, where are the games?

Like you've said : We haven't actually seen any of that.

We don't know nothing about new games from Housemarque, Bend, Suckerpunch, Bluerpoint etc...

 

[Nhomnhom]

So, not a single release. Also, there is a HFW expansion and MLB.

MLB the game that releases day one on Gamepass every year? DLC? You can't be serious by even be bringing that up.

Spider-man 2 is pretty much all they have, doesn't even have a release date as of yet. So I was correct and you just can't admit it, Less AAA and new IPs is already a reality.

 

[Kereke12]

All Sony AAA single player games are selling more than ever so it's a matter of doing more of them. Same goes for third-party publisher the ones actually capable of making good AAA games are having great success in sales.

GaaS should not be expanded at the cost of single player games like what we are witnessing.

Did Sony fail to properly invest in PlayStation to avoid the current situation? Why is MS confortable spending so much on Xbox while it faild miserable but Sony is sacred to invest more money on a console that we'll sell more than 120m+ units?

While it's true that Sony has seen great success with their AAA single-player games and that they continue to sell well, it's important to consider a few points:

Variety and diversification: The gaming industry thrives on diversity and catering to different player preferences. While single-player games have their dedicated fan base and have been very successful for Sony, it's important to remember that not all gamers have the same preferences. Some players enjoy multiplayer experiences, cooperative play, or competitive online gaming. By offering a mix of single-player and multiplayer experiences, Sony can cater to a wider audience and ensure that different gaming preferences are met.

Expanding audience and market reach: The gaming industry has evolved over the years, and there has been a rise in the popularity of games with a "Games as a Service" (GaaS) model. This model allows for continuous updates, expansions, and multiplayer experiences, often with ongoing monetization. By embracing GaaS, companies like Microsoft have been able to tap into a different market segment and attract players who enjoy ongoing engagement and social aspects of gaming. It's not a matter of one model being superior to the other but rather offering a variety of experiences to capture a broader audience.

Long-term sustainability and profitability: While single-player games may be successful in terms of sales, they often have a limited lifespan. Once players complete the game, they may move on to the next experience. On the other hand, GaaS titles can provide ongoing revenue streams through expansions, microtransactions, and subscriptions, allowing for continued support and updates to keep players engaged for an extended period. From a business perspective, diversifying revenue streams and embracing GaaS can contribute to the long-term sustainability and profitability of a platform.

Different strategies for different companies: Sony and Microsoft have different approaches and strategies when it comes to their respective platforms. Sony has focused heavily on delivering high-quality, narrative-driven single-player experiences, which has been successful for them. On the other hand, Microsoft has emphasized building a strong ecosystem, including services like Xbox Game Pass and investing in acquiring studios to increase their portfolio of games. Both strategies have their merits and cater to different player demographics.

Competition and innovation: Healthy competition between Sony and Microsoft benefits the industry as a whole. Both companies pushing boundaries and experimenting with different approaches leads to innovation and drives each other to deliver better gaming experiences. It's important to have a diverse gaming landscape that offers different options for players, and this includes both single-player and multiplayer experiences.

In conclusion, while Sony has seen great success with single-player games and there is certainly a demand for them, it's important to recognize the value of diversification and embracing different gaming models. The industry is evolving, and companies like Microsoft are investing in different strategies to capture a wider audience. By offering a mix of single-player and multiplayer experiences, companies can cater to various player preferences, ensure long-term sustainability, and drive innovation in the gaming industry.

 

[voke]

Man this forum is a lot harsher than i thought it would... Idk what you guys were betting on

 

[Kereke12]

Man this forum is a lot harsher than i thought it would... Idk what you guys were betting on

We just got to hit them with stats and facts. That is it.

 

[Nhomnhom]

Pertinent question, was this the first time we actually saw Jim Ryan and Hermen Hulst vision for PlayStation?

4 new GaaS, PlayStation games being announced as PC/PS5, a movie trailer in the middle of a showcase, PlayStation studios making games for Xbox, one single AAA game for 2023 (still without a date), PlayStation WiiU-like gamepad.

All of this would sound completely crazy just a few years ago.

 

[KnittedKnight]

Nhom don't fall for the idiocy of the conformist and brand cheerleaders. It's endless idiocy of people that spend more time talking about BS than playing games.

They will attack your opinions to shield a fucking brand from criticism they believe is "misplaced", but deeper than that, they're just fearful BETAS, comformists at their core without a single ounce of uniqueness in critical thought. It's all confomity, conformity to the "plan", conformity to the "brand". Then there are the bad faith actors, accounts which are easy to spot.

In other words, you're wasting your time royally. They will thrive on your replies legitimizing their "right" to an opinion - whether it's utter stupidity or not and they will demand you to take them serious. It's crazy and it will turn you crazy. They will rather pick a beef with you and enforce conformity than see the brand and its suits get some heat - or as some position themselves, arbiters of when it should be appropriate - almost never. It's pure unfiltered BS from nobodies.

There are too many fucking snakes on this motherfucking plane. It will always be that way. And that's just this forum. Step outside and there are millions of them. You gotta ignore all of that. 120 million on the PlayStation ecosystem alone, while only a tiny fraction of a fraction of that really matter and get it right. You need that sort of perspective to deal with this shit successfully. It's why the hardcore Xbox fanbase failed - it's not easy to deal with so much excrement .....all that's left is human corporate slavery, barring those who have given up and just go with the flow because they have absolutely no choice (some here who are good posters - and play their fucking games).

 

[Kereke12]

Pertinent question, was this the first time we actually saw Jim Ryan and Hermen Hulst vision for PlayStation?

4 new GaaS, PlayStation games being announced as PC/PS5, a movie trailer in the middle of a showcase, PlayStation studios making games for Xbox, one single AAA game for 2023 (still without a date), PlayStation WiiU-like gamepad.

All of this would sound completely crazy just a few years ago.

The developments and announcements you mentioned, such as the focus on Games as a Service (GaaS), PlayStation games being released for PC and PS5, a movie trailer in the middle of a showcase, PlayStation Studios making games for Xbox, a single AAA game for 2023 without a confirmed release date, and the mention of a WiiU-like gamepad, do represent significant changes and shifts in the strategies and approach of PlayStation.

It's worth noting that the gaming industry is dynamic and constantly evolving, and companies adapt their strategies to meet changing market demands and trends. Jim Ryan took over as the President and CEO of Sony Interactive Entertainment in April 2019, and Hermen Hulst became the Head of PlayStation Studios around the same time. Since then, we have seen some notable changes and announcements, which reflect their vision and strategic decisions.

The focus on GaaS aligns with the industry trend of providing ongoing engagement and monetization opportunities for players. Expanding to PC can help reach a wider audience and tap into a different market segment. Collaborations and partnerships with other platforms can also provide new opportunities for growth and exposure.

It's important to remember that while there may be shifts in strategy and new initiatives, these changes are part of the broader context of an evolving industry. Companies like PlayStation continue to deliver a variety of gaming experiences, including single-player games, while also exploring new avenues and approaches to stay relevant and cater to changing player preferences.

In conclusion, the developments and announcements you mentioned do represent significant changes and reflect the evolving vision of PlayStation under the leadership of Jim Ryan and Hermen Hulst. However, it's important to view these changes as part of the broader industry landscape and the company's ongoing efforts to adapt to market trends and cater to a diverse range of players.

 

[Nhomnhom]

While it's true that Sony has seen great success with their AAA single-player games and that they continue to sell well, it's important to consider a few points:

Variety and diversification: The gaming industry thrives on diversity and catering to different player preferences. While single-player games have their dedicated fan base and have been very successful for Sony, it's important to remember that not all gamers have the same preferences. Some players enjoy multiplayer experiences, cooperative play, or competitive online gaming. By offering a mix of single-player and multiplayer experiences, Sony can cater to a wider audience and ensure that different gaming preferences are met.

Expanding audience and market reach: The gaming industry has evolved over the years, and there has been a rise in the popularity of games with a "Games as a Service" (GaaS) model. This model allows for continuous updates, expansions, and multiplayer experiences, often with ongoing monetization. By embracing GaaS, companies like Microsoft have been able to tap into a different market segment and attract players who enjoy ongoing engagement and social aspects of gaming. It's not a matter of one model being superior to the other but rather offering a variety of experiences to capture a broader audience.

Long-term sustainability and profitability: While single-player games may be successful in terms of sales, they often have a limited lifespan. Once players complete the game, they may move on to the next experience. On the other hand, GaaS titles can provide ongoing revenue streams through expansions, microtransactions, and subscriptions, allowing for continued support and updates to keep players engaged for an extended period. From a business perspective, diversifying revenue streams and embracing GaaS can contribute to the long-term sustainability and profitability of a platform.

Different strategies for different companies: Sony and Microsoft have different approaches and strategies when it comes to their respective platforms. Sony has focused heavily on delivering high-quality, narrative-driven single-player experiences, which has been successful for them. On the other hand, Microsoft has emphasized building a strong ecosystem, including services like Xbox Game Pass and investing in acquiring studios to increase their portfolio of games. Both strategies have their merits and cater to different player demographics.

Competition and innovation: Healthy competition between Sony and Microsoft benefits the industry as a whole. Both companies pushing boundaries and experimenting with different approaches leads to innovation and drives each other to deliver better gaming experiences. It's important to have a diverse gaming landscape that offers different options for players, and this includes both single-player and multiplayer experiences.

In conclusion, while Sony has seen great success with single-player games and there is certainly a demand for them, it's important to recognize the value of diversification and embracing different gaming models. The industry is evolving, and companies like Microsoft are investing in different strategies to capture a wider audience. By offering a mix of single-player and multiplayer experiences, companies can cater to various player preferences, ensure long-term sustainability, and drive innovation in the gaming industry.

Variety and diversification: "so lets make a bunch of indistinguishable GaaS games that don't even bother to explain what they are going for."

Long-term sustainability and profitability: "lets bet it all on GaaS that could easily all flop instead of the more secure AAA games that we already have proven success with."

Different strategies for different companies: "lets become an exact copy of everything Xbox did to be where they are now."

Competition and innovation: "lets get outclassed by Valve of the portable space, let's fail to support PSVR2 properly."

Nhom don't fall for the idiocy of the conformist and brand cheerleaders. It's endless idiocy of people that spend more time talking about BS than playing games.

They will attack your opinions to shield a fucking brand from criticism they believe is "misplaced", but deeper than that, they're just fearful BETAS, comformists at their core without a single ounce of uniqueness in critical thought.

In other words, you're wasting your time royally. They will thrive on your replies legitimizing their "right" to an opinion - whether it's utter stupidity or not.

There are too many fucking snakes on this motherfucking plane. It will always be that way. And that's just this forum. Step outside and there are millions of them. You gotta ignore all of that.

I'm letting it all out and then I'm taking a break from forums and game news. I'll play my FFXVI, BG3, FFVII Rebirth and older games and just move on accepting that things have changed and I'm not the target demographic for PlayStation anymore.

The entire direction they are going sucks and I feel exactly how I felt with Xbox when they went after Kinect. It's looking like a disaster you don't recover from specially when going against PC.

I don't hope to change anything, I don't care about Sony that much. I dislike what is happening but ultimately it not my problem, it's just sad to see it happening to one of the best publishers at last.

 

[Zzero]

Why is MS comfortable spending so much on Xbox while it fails miserably but Sony is scared to invest more money on a console that we'll sell more than 120m+ units?

Microsoft is a 3 trillion dollar company, Sony is a 110 billion dollar company. Assuming the AB deal goes through Microsoft will have spent something like 4 5ths of Sony's total value on buying gaming stuff. Sony literally cannot do that without betting the farm on one segment of one segment of the company.


I also think that "AAA but not AAAA" gaming is currently overvalued too. I expect a market crash when people figure out that gaming doesn't have the extremely long tail that films do after leaving the theater.

 

[Kereke12]

Variety and diversification: "so lets make a bunch of indistinguishable GaaS games that doesn't even bother to explain what they are going for."

Long-term sustainability and profitability: "lets bet it all on GaaS that could easily all flop instead of the more secure AAA games that they already have proven success with."

Different strategies for different companies: "lets become an exact copy of everything Xbox did to be where they are now."

Competition and innovation: "lets get outclassed by Valve of the portable space, let's fail to support PSVR2 properly."


I'm letting it all out and then I'm taking a break from forums and game news. I'll play my FFXVI, BG3, FFVII Rebirth and older games and just move on accepting that things have changed and I'm not the target demographic for PlayStation anymore.

The entire direction they are going sucks and I feel exactly how I felt with Xbox when they went after Kinect. It's looking like a disaster you don't recover from specially when going against PC.

I understand your concerns and criticisms regarding the approach and decisions made by PlayStation in certain aspects. It's important to acknowledge that every strategy has its own set of risks and potential downsides. Here are some counterpoints to address your arguments:

Variety and diversification: While it's true that some GaaS games may appear similar or lack distinct explanations, it's important to remember that not all GaaS titles are the same. Each game has its unique mechanics, gameplay loops, and target audience. Additionally, offering a variety of gaming experiences, including both GaaS and AAA games, can help cater to different player preferences and expand the potential player base.

Long-term sustainability and profitability: While AAA games have proven success, they also require significant investments in development, marketing, and production. GaaS models offer opportunities for ongoing revenue streams through expansions, microtransactions, and subscriptions. This model can potentially provide a more stable income over time, allowing for continued support and updates for players, and contributing to long-term sustainability.

Different strategies for different companies: While PlayStation may have adopted certain elements from Xbox's strategies, it's important to note that competition and learning from each other are common practices in the industry. Companies often observe successful approaches and adapt them to their own context. PlayStation still maintains its unique lineup of exclusive titles, its focus on storytelling, and its dedication to providing high-quality gaming experiences.

Competition and innovation: The gaming industry is highly competitive, and companies continuously strive to innovate and offer new experiences. While there may have been certain shortcomings in specific areas like portable gaming or PSVR2 support, it's important to recognize that the industry is constantly evolving, and companies often face challenges and learn from them to improve their offerings.

In conclusion, it's important to have a balanced perspective when evaluating the strategies and decisions of gaming companies like PlayStation. While there may be valid concerns or criticisms, it's also essential to consider the broader context of the industry, the challenges companies face, and the potential benefits of different approaches. Ultimately, the goal is to provide diverse gaming experiences and evolve in response to changing market demands and player preferences.