Please, stop with this logical arguments, they make the "easy" money look not so "easy" anymore.
[LEAK] PlayStation Games PC Port Budgets Revealed! Spider-Man 2 PC Port to Release in FY 2025
- Thread starter Gamernyc78
- Start date
Please, stop with this logical arguments, they make the "easy" money look not so "easy" anymore.
so don't decrease the quality...
system warriors are not playstation's "main userbase" and no one else gives a shit if the games they play on PS5 are also available on Steam.
For me, it's like a pc fan got control of the strategy of PlayStation and started making policies to push people off PlayStation consoles and framed the strategy presentation in the most biased way to convince people that pc ports would advance their business interests rather than undermine the entire ecosystem and model that has got them to the top position in the industry.
Throw it all away so we can play the games on pc... A selfish decision that shows they don't care about the customers that put them on top.
I can't help getting angry about it tbh.
And the justification was "they will fund more games and we will get higher quality" but now we get LESS games and more bugs.
This. Ever since their PC port strategy began I've noticed a lot more bugs in their games. I'm sure that's a coincidence, as everything else.
The need for never ending financial growth will be the destruction of this once smart gaming brand. Rougher times ahead
Also, once the decision to port to PC and transition all their devs to make/port/support PC games the people that made that decision have a big incentive to try and make it look good in any way they can. Just think about it, pretty much all their studios had no experience releasing games to PC and the engines themselves they worked with had never shipped a game to PC, it was a huge transition for them to make.
Does anyone honestly think they expected games that sold 20m+ on consoles to end up selling a few millions at best on PC? Contrary to MS, Sony doesn't own Windows, doesn't have a PC store, PS+ is not available on PC and they don't have any of that sorted out. 30% of what they make on PC goes to Valve. Sony doesn't even have a native portable device solution that Valve now does does (including their own OS that later could be put in console like devices that will compete even more directly with PlayStation).
The consequences are already being felt, their studios became less productive and more focused on appealing to the PC market (GaaS/F2P is what PC is all about). PS4 marketing slogan once was "The Best Place to Play" now PS5 isn't even the best place to play PlayStation games.
Jim Ryan's vision for PlayStation might be still selling consoles for the time being but it fucking sucks long term for people that are invested on the PlayStation ecosystem and that appreciated the solid work Sony had done in previous generations. It's not a coincidence that they released more games on PC in 2023 than they did on PlayStation (all of which were previous PS5 only games).
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 223
Guest
I think this forum and the discussions that it has fostered (the back and forth with ideas and takes) has created a mature core of users with the proper understanding of the issue at its core and essence. It's nice to see some users now have multiple responses and multiple takes to bat any bullshit that is typed by the PC support zombie crew - whether those are the corporate slaves sucking Sony's tits, or the platform warriors on PC and Xbox who understand that it's in their benefit that this policy exist.
Gratifying to watch the maturity process in the arguments from this core group. It has only gotten stronger, and more refined, and you all know who you're.
And we have yet to engage in petty trolling, cause the policy is so devoid of sound logic you can simply make the case and go down the list, that PC porting should not only happen but that it should happen day and date, and moreover, using the same logic, so should Xbox porting, and Nintendo porting. When the competition stops being seeing as the competition and is no longer properly defined as the competition the logical barriers disappear. You also have a clown show. What you have here is the leadership core of a platform holder selectively choosing who their competitors are, as opposed to the market deciding that based on its structure. Wild.
The policy is simply bankrupt, in any way that it's looked at and analyzed from a platform holder's perspective.... whose ecosystem rest on hardware and works within a defined and finite market. Now if you're an idiot and think you can transition your ecosystem beyond the hardware, and that somehow you're going to be the first ever exception and figure out how that is done - if you think you're the special and chosen ones and that somehow you're not going to hurt your hardware business long term, or that some competitor will not exploit the weaknesses and openings, now or in the future....I got news for you. PlayStation is not too big to fail. The policy is a cancer, and the more it spreads within SIE as a business institution, the worse it gets, the more it infects. Eventually the host will be ripe for the fall, and it will be sudden and hit like a brick. All it takes is a proper competitor and the right circumstances to push the bricks, and sure enough, the bricks will fall. You never eat away at the foundation of a home... to the contrary, if you want to build on top of it, you reinforce that foundation.
Gratifying to watch the maturity process in the arguments from this core group. It has only gotten stronger, and more refined, and you all know who you're.
And we have yet to engage in petty trolling, cause the policy is so devoid of sound logic you can simply make the case and go down the list, that PC porting should not only happen but that it should happen day and date, and moreover, using the same logic, so should Xbox porting, and Nintendo porting. When the competition stops being seeing as the competition and is no longer properly defined as the competition the logical barriers disappear. You also have a clown show. What you have here is the leadership core of a platform holder selectively choosing who their competitors are, as opposed to the market deciding that based on its structure. Wild.
The policy is simply bankrupt, in any way that it's looked at and analyzed from a platform holder's perspective.... whose ecosystem rest on hardware and works within a defined and finite market. Now if you're an idiot and think you can transition your ecosystem beyond the hardware, and that somehow you're going to be the first ever exception and figure out how that is done - if you think you're the special and chosen ones and that somehow you're not going to hurt your hardware business long term, or that some competitor will not exploit the weaknesses and openings, now or in the future....I got news for you. PlayStation is not too big to fail. The policy is a cancer, and the more it spreads within SIE as a business institution, the worse it gets, the more it infects. Eventually the host will be ripe for the fall, and it will be sudden and hit like a brick. All it takes is a proper competitor and the right circumstances to push the bricks, and sure enough, the bricks will fall. You never eat away at the foundation of a home... to the contrary, if you want to build on top of it, you reinforce that foundation.
Last edited by a moderator:
OP
OP
Guess PlayStation really is going the way of Xbox. As in, little identity or uniqueness in the market as a console product, and where the only people still buying the console are idiots who want to overspend when they can get the same games for much cheaper on another platform.
I dunno if this is just with the Marvel games or all games going forward but, assuming the leaked information is still relevant (it could be outdated for all we know, in terms of some of these plans), chances are it also applies to the latter. We're going to see the exact same sales collapse for PlayStation systems that we've seen with Xbox. The ONLY reason it'll be somewhat less severe is due to the size the PlayStation brand already reached during earlier generations.
As always I'll wait for official confirmation, not potentially outdated mentions from stolen data. But assuming this is true...then PlayStation's best times as a console powerhouse are in the past.
I dunno if this is just with the Marvel games or all games going forward but, assuming the leaked information is still relevant (it could be outdated for all we know, in terms of some of these plans), chances are it also applies to the latter. We're going to see the exact same sales collapse for PlayStation systems that we've seen with Xbox. The ONLY reason it'll be somewhat less severe is due to the size the PlayStation brand already reached during earlier generations.
As always I'll wait for official confirmation, not potentially outdated mentions from stolen data. But assuming this is true...then PlayStation's best times as a console powerhouse are in the past.
This is exactly what Jim Ryan and others think though. They really think they can't fail and the financial decisions and greed of this generation says it all. I'd really want to know what really went down in 2019 because that's when the shift / coup happened within the company from the European branch that forced out American leadership.
It's been downhill since.
Once the PlayStation identity/differentiation is lost the console market will be wide open for Steam to dominate it (or even worse MS with Windows if they ever become minimally competent and realize they had a massive advantage all along that they never managed to leverage because of Xbox).
I bet the crossroad was between following Xbox lead and continuing as they were. Clearly those wanting to follow Xbox lead won.
I think there's a whole lot of over exaggeration in here.
You are right, PlayStation users are PlayStation's main userbase. If Sony starts to lose them, I doubt they can be replaced by Steam users.
I personally don't care if the games I play are available elsewhere, but I care if the games I play start to have more and more technical issues which weren't there in past releases.
By adding more platforms into the development process you automatically have to
make compromises (engines need to be adapted and become less specialized for a single-target platform; QA costs increase OR the worst but more probable scenario, the same budget is split between platforms; etc.)=> reduction in quality
distribute resources differently => reduction in quality
We have seen it with cross-gen first-party games, we are continuing seeing it with current releases of multiplatform games. People were willing to accept them at the beginning, because of the pandemic, but are already starting to not accept such sloppy work anymore.
D
Deleted member 223
Guest
They didn't leverage it properly cause they're Microsoft. Their greed supersedes everything, and so they take shortcuts and half-assed solutions to problems in the most dumb of ways imaginable. Valve has literally shown that, in Microsoft's own house. Mind you I think Xbox as a sabotage tool is still something that they should be lauded for in the strategic sense - Sony still has yet to go back to PS2 market share dominance, and kick them out but their performance on PC in the meantime, while the Xbox strategy was being deployed and up to present day is nothing short of atrocious.
Last edited by a moderator:
They didn't do it because of Xbox and how focused they were on replacing Sony. As you said, they are unable to think long term and keep trying to find a shortcut to beat PlayStation, in a lot of ways they are a lot like their fanboys (in a good part because they are the ones feeding them the lines).
The game market is extremely lucky someone as incompetent as Phil Spencer has been the top executive for Xbox for so long. No one ever made Sony as much money as Phil Spencer.
D
Deleted member 223
Guest
Dude literally planning corporate sabotage on the down low to get Nintendo to go third party.
He's what you call a dangerous fool.
Nintendo should hire him since he knows better than them what is good for Nintendo. He has the resume, look at the fine work he was done at Xbox for over 15 years.Dude literally planning corporate sabotage on the down low to get Nintendo to go third party.
He's what you call a dangerous fool.
Yep you make an interesting point. I think Valve's steam machine idea was poorly marketed and executed (relying heavily on third parties), but a first party version of that could come along and eat sony's lunch if they're not careful.
Since the Index and Deck, Valve have been sharpening their hardware muscles for years now, while also sneakily being the only platform that can play both Xbox and Playstation exclusives.
The moment Valve decides to make a first party steam console marketed to casuals, and at a affordable price point like the deck, Playstation could be in trouble.
PC gaming is Playstation's only competitor at this point. As it is only growing and becoming popular in regions Playstation once was (Japan)
"According to the report, there were 1.1 billion PC players and 611 million console players in 2022. The 2.2% decline was mostly due to a 4.2% drop in the console gaming market, as the PC games market increased by 1.8%."
We are seeing the consequences of all of this live in front of us with Xbox:
Decline in sales (both hardware and software)
Decrease in quality of their first-party games
Yet we still have naysayers.
Decline in sales (both hardware and software)
Decrease in quality of their first-party games
Yet we still have naysayers.