Playstation Studios [OT]: News, hype and rumors about PS Studios and Bungie

[kyliethicc]

Definitely the former, which is basically Nintendo. They are their own money maker and can only blame themselves when it goes wrong. That should be Sony's goal because there is a clear risk in the 3rd party strategy now we see how quickly they can be bought up

There's a reason why Nintendo doesn't spend anywhere near what Sony spends on game development. Sony is like Nintendo and Valve combined. An industry leading publisher of games AND a hugely successful platform holder running a highly lucrative store for 3rd parties. Valve has the store money, but doesn't make games. Nintendo doesn't have the same level of 3rd party revenue from their store.

Its why Sony has grown into such a big business. Their store fuels their product development. They can always delay their own games and spend enormous amounts of money on development (unlike Nintendo) because that CoD, FIFA, etc royalty money is reliable every single year.

They lose their store revenue from 3rd parties, they lose all their risk free revenue. So you'd see a reduction in investment and a hedging towards even safer investment. Its why Nintendo doesn't make new IPs.

 

[Yobo]

There's a reason why Nintendo doesn't spend anywhere near what Sony spends on game development. Sony is like Nintendo and Valve combined. An industry leading publisher of games AND a hugely successful platform holder running a highly lucrative store for 3rd parties. Valve has the store money, but doesn't make games. Nintendo doesn't have the same level of 3rd party revenue from their store.

Its why Sony has grown into such a big business. Their store fuels their product development. They can always delay their own games and spend enormous amounts of money on development (unlike Nintendo) because that CoD, FIFA, etc royalty money is reliable every single year.

They lose their store revenue from 3rd parties, they lose all their risk free revenue. So you'd see a reduction in investment and a hedging towards even safer investment. Its why Nintendo doesn't make new IPs.

I think that's just a result of Nintendo leaving the tech race and still finding success

You obviously want a mix of both but the more you rely on third parties the more exposed you are when the market changes. That's why Sony don't have a flagship FPS because they had all their eggs in the COD basket. And I would argue the same for RPGs with all their eggs in the Final Fantasy basket. All it would take for that to change is a change in direction at Square Enix to focus on Switch

 

[kyliethicc]

I think that's just a result of Nintendo leaving the tech race and still finding success

You obviously want a mix of both but the more you rely on third parties the more exposed you are when the market changes. That's why Sony don't have a flagship FPS because they had all their eggs in the COD basket. And I would argue the same for RPGs with all their eggs in the Final Fantasy basket. All it would take for that to change is a change in direction at Square Enix to focus on Switch

Sure but to be fair to Sony, they never expected Activision to get bought by their competitor lol (and it shouldn't even be allowed to be, but that's off topic).

They could suddenly shift eveything and build their entire business soley around 1st party games instead of their current primary source of revenue (3rd party games) but I don't think that's a PlayStation that would be as appealing as the current form.

 

[Yobo]

Sure but to be fair to Sony, they never expected Activision to get bought by their competitor lol (and it shouldn't even be allowed to be, but that's off topic).

They could suddenly shift eveything and build their entire business soley around 1st party games instead of their current primary source of revenue (3rd party games) but I don't think that's a PlayStation that would be as appealing as the current form.

I don't think it's unappealing to them, particularly with their current belief in transmedia IP as a growth area. Not something you can do with third party

You also have Nintendo leaning into that because they have strong IP. Even building theme parks.

 

[Yurinka]

No platforms were announced, number etc. Just usual Bungie have free will to publish where they want. It can mean bunch of things. It can mean ps5, pc, switch and no xbox. It can include xbox.

Bungie doesn't have free will to publish where they want, they are a fully owned SIE subsidiary and will do whatever their boss Jimbo tells them to do.

As of now, the idea is to continue releasing their games day one everywhere including PC and rival consoles.

 

[kyliethicc]

I don't think it's unappealing to them, particularly with their current belief in transmedia IP as a growth area. Not something you can do with third party

You also have Nintendo leaning into that because they have strong IP. Even building theme parks.

Yeah but nobody has yet seen the hypothetical Sony we're discussing.

Sony knows how serious a lost CoD will be.

That's why they're fighting so hard to block the merger. Its a serious issue for them.

 

[Yurinka]

Yup, I believe honestly the main thing they are scared of is MS buying publishers. Or ballooning to the point in subscriptions that other Third party publishers can't ignore that and start leasing their games on the service. But I think we are years away from that being a threat to Sony.

I think if they get just a couple of MP games released that have a decent enough playerbase, I think those will bring in enough revenue between Playstation/PC that ABK deal will be a nothing burger.

Also no one is talking about what a restructured AKB will look like let alone how MS mobile storefront will be like. It could be complete shit like Windows mobile was.

Nah, Sony is too distant from MS in many areas and ABK will only help them be a bit less distant. Sony will continue dominating them in console userbase, MAU, amount of game subbers, game subs revenue, amount of games sold for their console, 1st party game sales and awards, 3rd party support, etc.

I think the only scared peope here are the forum posters. Sony knows their numbers and plans, and they expect to increase their lead over MS in the following years. Unlike MS they are growing well in all areas and have a big, steady output of great exclusives. Organic weed growth, grown with the dollars generated from their good products.

MS instead is growing inorganically, via acquisition using the money from other divisions. The Zenimax games + Halo + Forza Horizon + Double Fine only did help them grow from 18 to 25M and no big growth in console sales. To include old ABK games on GP won't cause a big jump, and pretty likely we won't see new CoD games day one on GP during years due to the current deal with Sony because they may have an antiGP clause like RE Village.

 

[kyliethicc]

Bungie doesn't have free will to publish where they want, they are a fully owned SIE subsidiary and will do whatever their boss Jimbo tells them to do.

As of now, the idea is to continue releasing their games day one everywhere including PC and rival consoles.

Actually, Sony has explicitly said the exact opposite is true. Its probably even contractually guaranteed.

"Bungie will continue to operate independently, maintaining the ability to self-publish and reach players wherever they choose to play."

SONY INTERACTIVE ENTERTAINMENT TO ACQUIRE LEADING INDEPENDENT VIDEOGAME DEVELOPER, BUNGIE

<p>- PlayStation and Bungie Continue Focus on Growing the Gaming Community, while Bungie Remains Multi-platform - SAN MATEO, Calif., January 31, 2022 – Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC...</p>

www.sony.com

 

[Yurinka]

Actually, Sony has explicitly said the exact opposite is true. Its probably even contractually guaranteed.

"Bungie will continue to operate independently, maintaining the ability to self-publish and reach players wherever they choose to play."

SONY INTERACTIVE ENTERTAINMENT TO ACQUIRE LEADING INDEPENDENT VIDEOGAME DEVELOPER, BUNGIE

<p>- PlayStation and Bungie Continue Focus on Growing the Gaming Community, while Bungie Remains Multi-platform - SAN MATEO, Calif., January 31, 2022 – Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC...</p>

www.sony.com

No, Sony said exactly what I said: Sony bought the 100% of the Bungie stocks and Bungie is now a fully owned SIE subsidiary.

But even if they are now under SIE, they'll use the Bungie publishing label instead of the PS Studios publishing label. And they'll continue releasing their games multipaltform.

 

[kyliethicc]

No, Sony said exactly what I said: Sony bought the 100% of the Bungie stocks and Bungie is now a fully owned SIE subsidiary.

But even if they are now under SIE, they'll use the Bungie publishing label instead of the PS Studios publishing label. And they'll continue releasing their games multipaltform.

Jim Ryan makes it clear here that Bungie controls where they publish. Not Jim Ryan.

"The first thing to say unequivocally is that Bungie will stay an independent, multiplatform studio and publisher. Pete [Parsons, CEO] and I have spoken about many things over recent months, and this was one of the first, and actually easiest and most straightforward, conclusions we reached together. Everybody wants the extremely large Destiny 2 community, whatever platform they're on, to be able to continue to enjoy their Destiny 2 experiences. And that approach will apply to future Bungie releases. That is unequivocal.

"[Bungie] will operate autonomously within the Sony Interactive Entertainment organisation, and they will continue to publish on other platforms.

PlayStation: Bungie deal is about multiplatform, live-service games

PlayStation's acquisition of Bungie may not result in exclusive PS5 games, but it will allow the platform holder to sig…

www.gamesindustry.biz

 

[Yurinka]

Jim Ryan makes it clear here that Bungie controls where they publish. Not Jim Ryan.

Jim Ryan is their CEO. And like anyone in any company, they'll do what their CEO wants and will follow his strategy or will get fired.

"The first thing to say unequivocally is that Bungie will stay an independent, multiplatform studio and publisher.

"[Bungie] will operate autonomously within the Sony Interactive Entertainment organisation, and they will continue to publish on other platforms.

Yes, exactly like PS Studios but multiplatform.

 

[kyliethicc]

Jim Ryan is their CEO. And like anyone in any company, they'll do what their CEO wants and will follow his strategy or will get fired.



Yes, exactly like PS Studios but multiplatform.

Actually Pete Parsons is CEO of Bungie.

 

[Yobo]

Yeah but nobody has yet seen the hypothetical Sony we're discussing.

Sony knows how serious a lost CoD will be.

That's why they're fighting so hard to block the merger. Its a serious issue for them.

In the end these are hypotheticals. Sony should have a strong third party presence while pushing their own first party ambitions. Relying on just one or the other is the wrong move

 

[Yobo]

Jim Ryan is their CEO. And like anyone in any company, they'll do what their CEO wants and will follow his strategy or will get fired.



Yes, exactly like PS Studios but multiplatform.

Actually Pete Parsons is CEO of Bungie.

In the end it's clear the current direction of Bungie is fully multiplatform. What we can assume or already know:

- They are a self managed subsidiary like Sony Online Entertainment of yesteryear
- They've committed to releasing "wherever people play"
- In standard subsidiary relationships, the parent company (or Jim Ryan as head of SIE) retains some power to remove people from the board and company if he needs to exercise power
- it's highly, highly unlikely that Sony agreed to remove these powers via a contract but not impossible
- Sony still has other soft powers like control of funding, bonuses, stock options etc. If they want Bungie to go a certain way
- Sony see Bungie being like a Blizzard or Epic Games and don't want to limit them for the time being anyway
- Pulling Bungie games off Xbox will likely require use of soft power like indicated above and Bungie have the autonomy to say no to Sony.
- There are likely some contractual contingencies like Bungie can't go and sign an exclusive contract with a competitor
- There may be a time limit on their arrangement after which Sony can take on more control if they wish

 

[kyliethicc]

In the end these are hypotheticals. Sony should have a strong third party presence while pushing their own first party ambitions. Relying on just one or the other is the wrong move

Yeah of course on that we agree. That's why losing the biggest 3rd party game is such a major concern.

 

[Yurinka]

In the end it's clear the current direction of Bungie is fully multiplatform. What we can assume or already know:

- They are a self managed subsidiary like Sony Online Entertainment of yesteryear
- They've committed to releasing "wherever people play"
- In standard subsidiary relationships, the parent company (or Jim Ryan as head of SIE) retains some power to remove people from the board and company if he needs to exercise power
- it's highly, highly unlikely that Sony agreed to remove these powers via a contract but not impossible
- Sony still has other soft powers like control of funding, bonuses, stock options etc. If they want Bungie to go a certain way
- Sony see Bungie being like a Blizzard or Epic Games and don't want to limit them for the time being anyway
- Pulling Bungie games off Xbox will likely require use of soft power like indicated above and Bungie have the autonomy to say no to Sony.
- There are likely some contractual contingencies like Bungie can't go and sign an exclusive contract with a competitor
- There may be a time limit on their arrangement after which Sony can take on more control if they wish

The contractual contingencies is that Sony bought the 100% of Bungie and Jimbo is their boss and has full power over them. They must follow the strategy, policies and orders of their owner and who doesn't follow them gets fired.

Like the other SIE studios, they have creative freedom. But SIE now will have 2 publishers: the console exclusive PS Studios and the multiplatform Bungie. Because Jimbo wants to get moneys from non-PS platforms but wants to keep PS Studios console exclusive. And he saw the projects they have in the works, liked them and trust them in the same way he gives a good amount of creative freedom to PS Studios and their teams.

If tomorrow Jimbo changes his mind he can rebrand Bungie to Fartie Studios and mandate them make Souljaboy exclusive Knack sequels only. And they will obey because Jimbo is their owner and boss. In fact, as their boss he can fire and replace anyone he wants and to change their whole strategy if desired. But doesn't do it because he liked their plans before buying them and these plans are in line with what he wants from them, so he'll give them time to achieve them.

If he sees they don't deliver, that their next games are a turd, underperform he'll make any changes he consider there. Like Phil Spencer with Mojang, Zenimax, ABK etc. Phil bought these companies and gives them certain freedom but whenever he considers will change whatever he wants from them because he bought them. They are fully owned subsidiaries so their owner can do with them whatever he wants. He can even shut them down if desired.

 

[KnittedKnight]

Thinking it's contractually guaranteed as an "educated guess" is not the same thing as being factually contractually guaranteed. I think we can establish that since no one here can produce or has access to any of the Bungie/Sony acquisition agreements.

Gentleman agreements are always loophole rich - a form of corporate double speak.

Multiplatform can also = many different things. Multiplatform is literally > 1 single platform. There are 5 relevant platforms: PS, Xbox, Nintendo, PC, Mobile.

Multiplatform is true if > 1 platform.
Multiplatform is still true if only = 2 platforms.
Multiplatform is still true if only = 3 platforms.
Multiplatform is still true if only = 4 platforms.
Multiplatform doesn't necessarily have to be all 5 relevant platforms.

Platform exclusion exists within the multiplatform label.

You would think the MS acquisition saga would enlighten folks on this very topic of corporate double-speak and BS regarding multiplatformarity (yes I just made that term). "It will stay multiplatform and reach this many million new gamers" (while fucking PS 10 yrs down the line - initially 3).

I also have a hard time believing Sony will sign an acquisition agreement that has an stipulation that says Bungie can walk out and split from PS if Sony were to exercise executive control on such matters. It's not impossible but as an educated guess... big skepticism on that. If I were Sony's CEO I wouldn't allow Jimbo to acquire Bungie with such stipulation.... lets put it that way.

 

[Zeroing]

Anyone excited for the new ps5 slim ?

 

[Yobo]

Thinking it's contractually guaranteed as an "educated guess" is not the same thing as being factually contractually guaranteed. I think we can establish that since no one here can produce or has access to any of the Bungie/Sony acquisition agreements.

Gentleman agreements are always loophole rich - a form of corporate double speak.

Multiplatform can also = many different things. Multiplatform is literally > 1 single platform. There are 5 relevant platforms: PS, Xbox, Nintendo, PC, Mobile.

Multiplatform is true if > 1 platform.
Multiplatform is still true if only = 2 platforms.
Multiplatform is still true if only = 3 platforms.
Multiplatform is still true if only = 4 platforms.
Multiplatform doesn't necessarily have to be all 5 relevant platforms.

Platform exclusion exists within the multiplatform label.

You would think the MS acquisition saga would enlighten folks on this very topic of corporate double-speak and BS regarding multiplatformarity (yes I just made that term). "It will stay multiplatform and reach this many million new gamers" (while fucking PS 10 yrs down the line - initially 3).

I also have a hard time believing Sony will sign an acquisition agreement that has an stipulation that says Bungie can walk out and split from PS if Sony were to exercise executive control on such matters. It's not impossible but as an educated guess... big skepticism on that. If I were Sony's CEO I wouldn't allow Jimbo to acquire Bungie with such stipulation.... lets put it that way.

They didn't say multiplatform they said "anywhere people play games"

Q. Bungie has future games in development, will they now become PlayStation exclusives?
No. We want the worlds we are creating to extend to anywhere people play games. We will continue to be self-published, creatively independent, and we will continue to drive one, unified Bungie community.

Q. I play Destiny on Steam, Xbox, or Stadia – will my platform still be supported?
Yes.

 

[KnittedKnight]

That's a broad and vague term (incidentally, loophole rich). I still play games on my SNES from time to time.

If you don't have a factual acquisition agreement to read through with a clause that provides specificity on which platforms will be supported, like literally naming them by name.... if you don't have that you can't say either way that for future titles they'll go to this platform or that platform. It's literally up in the air. As it stands, everyone can believe what they want to believe.

Instead of "anywhere people play games" they could have listed the platforms Bungie intends on supporting with future titles but they didn't and that was intentional by whomever wrote that QA response. That is, not promise in print what may not be deliverable in the future and then end up with a mini-PR shitstorm. Competence.