Exactly. The problem with this whole discussion is that one says "why would they have their A studios working on live service" and the replies are "but they need live service", failing to understand that the argument isn't against live service, but rather against having the likes of Naughty Dog or Insomniac turned into Live Service studios.
Nah, PlayStation NEVER needed a live service game....I don't know where this lie started from, but it's become generally accepted for some reason. There is no such thing as "relying on 3rd party", 3rd parties rely on PlayStation, idk how everyone seems to have forgotten that. I guess during the ABK deal, everyone was worried about CoD becoming Xbox/PC only and that nonsense was ingrained in their brains. But the concept of relying on 3rd party never had any basis in reality. The fact is they have the largest AAA gaming storefront by far with the strongest install base (Switch doesn't get most 3rd party games). When you get 30% of every other live service game, you don't need your own, that's just a fact. Apple and Google make the most money from "gaming" and don't even make games. This gaas push is purely out of greed and not necessity, they did perfectly fine last generation without a big live service game....
There is basis on not relying on 3rd party for live service that’s literally the reason Sony is doing live service. If Sony sees 3rd party make hundreds of million if not billion & a majority of this is massive profits as a platform & storefront owner who would earn 100% of profits why would you make live service? Not only can you make live service but you can rely less on 3rd party.Nah, PlayStation NEVER needed a live service game....I don't know where this lie started from, but it's become generally accepted for some reason. There is no such thing as "relying on 3rd party", 3rd parties rely on PlayStation, idk how everyone seems to have forgotten that. I guess during the ABK deal, everyone was worried about CoD becoming Xbox/PC only and that nonsense was ingrained in their brains. But the concept of relying on 3rd party never had any basis in reality. The fact is they have the largest AAA gaming storefront by far with the strongest install base (Switch doesn't get most 3rd party games). When you get 30% of every other live service game, you don't need your own, that's just a fact. Apple and Google make the most money from "gaming" and don't even make games. This gaas push is purely out of greed and not necessity, they did perfectly fine last generation without a big live service game....
Jim, Hermen, and Totoki are just greedy shortsighted idiots that don't care about PlayStation and just want to squeeze as much money out of SIE as they can, no matter how much it harms PlayStation in the long run. Which explains the stupid gaas push, punching pennies on 3rd party deals, and the failed PC initiative.
I'm not against gaas where it makes sense (mlb/gt7/hd2), but Sony went about it in the worst way. They threw billions into the gaas pit overnight without a clear plan, and now the entire generation is screwed because of it. This generation would be a lot better if 75% of that live service investment instead went into single player game investment. Let 3rd party try and fail chasing GAAS ghosts.
That’s not even the problem aswell. The problem isn’t that Naughty Dog or Insomniac where making live service games actually that’s a great thing because if Naughty Dog or Insomniacs had a live service game under there studio there studio wouldn’t have layoffs as much & the profits brought from the live service game could’ve went to singleplayer games.
Which of Sonys A studios are doing gaas? ND was one but they have history with multiplayer, TLOUO made perfect sense. You still have SSM, Insomniac, Sucker Punch, and Guerrilla making AAA single player games. Firewalk is brand new and they decided on multiplayer... bungie is also multiplayer
Fuckin hell I have answered this before.
So SIE is falling apart because Bend isn't making a single player game? Guerilla is going back to it's multiplayer roots? Sucker Punch will have the GoT Legends mode (again) at launch? Is it joever for GoT2 becuase of this? This all seems like business as usual honestly.
you forgot Sony London had to be shut down because their live service game sucked. Maybe they'd have released a banger already if they were working on a 1p game.
Sucker punch wasnt relevant before ghost of tsushima. Insomniac was barely relevant before spider-man.
The same Sucker Punch that made Sly Cooper and Infamous? The same Insomniac that made Ratchet and Resistance? Are we gonna compare them to the folks behind the hit game...... EyeToy?
If what they have planned this year is only as "good" or even worst than the Showcase last year, and considering they're aware of the community feedback from that one...then yes, they will skip having a Showcase this year.
Better to just throw those announcements into a SGF, Gamescom, TGS and the VGAs than have all the pressure, and take all the heat, for a PlayStation Showcase that might end up disappointing again. Or worst, confirming more than a few worries about the future direction of the brand, focalized to a single event with all eyes watching.
EDIT: Oh as to the bet? Wanna make it a two-week account ban for who's wrong? I'm game for that.
Are you able to argue without a massive strawman? I proved you wrong, take the L and move on.
Why did you list last of us part 1 but not the original last of us and its remaster?
