Rumor/Assumptions, Firesprite-Sony first party studio is collapsing.

[nongkris]

Nintendo is selling outdated piece of hardware for $300 the moment it released the Switch for immediate profit.

Nintendo is charging $60 for a fucking platformer that would be rated 72-72 on Metacritic if it didn't have Mario in the name

All of you parroting the same message like bots are proving the point. High quality low development cost games with great marketing is making Nintendo more profitable than GAAS PC first Xbox and GAAS chasing Sony.

Sony is trying to emulate the last place competitor instead of the first place. Do you see how illogical that is?

 

[Johnic]

All of you parroting the same message like bots are proving the point. High quality low development cost games with great marketing is making Nintendo more profitable than GAAS PC first Xbox and GAAS chasing Sony.

It's a sound argument. Nintendo's projects don't cost as much as PS ones. Sure, the quality is good but it's nowhere near the same production values.

Voice acting, motion capture, soundtracks, graphical fidelity, AI all require MUCH more work and resources in a Sony title.

The argument that Sony can do what Nintendo does is not a good one. If we go that route, you can forget top AAA production values. You'll get fine games but they won't be industry defining.

 

[nongkris]

It's a sound argument. Nintendo's projects don't cost as much as PS ones. Sure, the quality is good but it's nowhere near the same production values.

Voice acting, motion capture, soundtracks, graphical fidelity, AI all require MUCH more work and resources in a Sony title.

The argument that Sony can do what Nintendo does is not a good one. If we go that route, you can forget top AAA production values. You'll get fine games but they won't be industry defining.

That's exactly the point. Nintendo is selling games WITHOUT having to have all the extra. Sony should figure out how that's done (mostly the advantage of having a handheld and having smaller 2nd parties develop spin off games) and emulate it.

You think multiplayer only games won't come with drawbacks to motion capture, graphical fidelity, AI etc? Hint: they do for networking reasons. What's even worse is that the GAAS will cost the same hundreds of millions or more and sell worse than their single player stuff.

 

[Darth Vader]

Nintendo is selling DLC tracks for a 2014 game as we speak

And Sony could do the same, but decided to spend time and money to port games to PC so they can sell 5 copies.

 

[Remember_Spinal]

That's exactly the point. Nintendo is selling games WITHOUT having to have all the extra. Sony should figure out how that's done (mostly the advantage of having a handheld and having smaller 2nd parties develop spin off games) and emulate it.

You think multiplayer only games won't come with drawbacks to motion capture, graphical fidelity, AI etc? Hint: they do for networking reasons. What's even worse is that the GAAS will cost the same hundreds of millions or more and sell worse than their single player stuff.

Playstation fans dont want nintendo sized games. Its already been proven

 

[Luffy123]

All of you parroting the same message like bots are proving the point. High quality low development cost games with great marketing is making Nintendo more profitable than GAAS PC first Xbox and GAAS chasing Sony.

Sony is trying to emulate the last place competitor instead of the first place. Do you see how illogical that is?

I do not want those kind of games

 

[riesgoyfortuna]

All of you parroting the same message like bots are proving the point. High quality low development cost games with great marketing is making Nintendo more profitable than GAAS PC first Xbox and GAAS chasing Sony.

Sony is trying to emulate the last place competitor instead of the first place. Do you see how illogical that is?

The day Sony do all the bullshit Nintendo does its the day i will leave the ecosystem

 

[Danja]

It's a sound argument. Nintendo's projects don't cost as much as PS ones. Sure, the quality is good but it's nowhere near the same production values.

Voice acting, motion capture, soundtracks, graphical fidelity, AI all require MUCH more work and resources in a Sony title.

The argument that Sony can do what Nintendo does is not a good one. If we go that route, you can forget top AAA production values. You'll get fine games but they won't be industry defining.

Sony should be able to do it though. Not every game they make has to follow that formula but that's also what's bogging them down as they don't have any of those kinds games to help bridge the gap.

They use during the PS3 era but they went all in on big budgets only PS4 and especially this gen.

 

[Systemshock2023]

I love the brain dead take that Sony can't miss the GaaS / Live Service bullshit because they'll lose on big money.

Yey the most profitable of the three big ones is Nintendo, who doesn't partake in that shit.

Nintendo can pack a few roms and sell them for 60 USD to legions of millennial western manchilds and eastern salaryman playing on their train commute. They also have the Mario movie and theme parks.

Sony and MS don't have that advantage.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

Playstation fans dont want nintendo sized games. Its already been proven

Most PlayStation fans are proving to me that they don't know what the hell they want. Except if it makes Xbox look bad, without stopping to ask if it makes PlayStation look good (or does any good for the platform).

Case in point: Quantum Error (lol), Abandoned (lol), Baldur's Gate 3 (turned out amazing but how many PlayStation folks were hyping the game before finding out it wasn't coming out on Xbox due to development problems with Series S?), etc.

Fact is: Sony needs better variety between AAA and AA games. They can't survive as a published doing only massive-budget AAA games and hoping timed exclusive 3P deals cover the gaps. They need a balanced portfolio of 1P AAA traditional, GaaS/live-service (but a modest number, no more than 4-5 at a time), 3P exclusives (with meaningful exclusivity windows, not the joke of a 3-month window they have for Rebirth) and 1P AA traditional.

Those of you trying to knock Nintendo like they're some joke, or downplaying AA benefits for 1P, are getting it all wrong. It almost reeks of envy if not ignorance. As for this acquisition they announced? I don't care. Not only is it nothing pertaining to gaming IP that any subset of people actually care about, it doesn't seem like anything that will help notably shorten AAA development time or resource load. Those are the two things SIE should be focusing on for M&As and this acquisition does neither, so I don't care.

Nintendo can pack a few roms and sell them for 60 USD to legions of millennial western manchilds and eastern salaryman playing on their train commute. They also have the Mario movie and theme parks.

Sony and MS don't have that advantage.

You're talking about nostalgia and yes, they don't have the specific advantage the way Nintendo does. But Sony have much more potential on that than Microsoft; they are just allergic to their own gaming legacy it seems.

And usually, when they try bringing something back, it's a half-assed measure. They probably wrote off the PS1 mini console as a fail because no one wanted it, when in reality it's because they packed in a shit emulator with shit PAL ISOs. But these companies will blame anything other than their own flawed execution for an underperforming product.

 

[Remember_Spinal]

Most PlayStation fans are proving to me that they don't know what the hell they want. Except if it makes Xbox look bad, without stopping to ask if it makes PlayStation look good (or does any good for the platform).

This i 100% agree with

I think some people here are more invested in winning console wars than what actually benefits them as gamers

 

[Systemshock2023]

Most PlayStation fans are proving to me that they don't know what the hell they want. Except if it makes Xbox look bad, without stopping to ask if it makes PlayStation look good (or does any good for the platform).

Case in point: Quantum Error (lol), Abandoned (lol), Baldur's Gate 3 (turned out amazing but how many PlayStation folks were hyping the game before finding out it wasn't coming out on Xbox due to development problems with Series S?), etc.

Fact is: Sony needs better variety between AAA and AA games. They can't survive as a published doing only massive-budget AAA games and hoping timed exclusive 3P deals cover the gaps. They need a balanced portfolio of 1P AAA traditional, GaaS/live-service (but a modest number, no more than 4-5 at a time), 3P exclusives (with meaningful exclusivity windows, not the joke of a 3-month window they have for Rebirth) and 1P AA traditional.

Those of you trying to knock Nintendo like they're some joke, or downplaying AA benefits for 1P, are getting it all wrong. It almost reeks of envy if not ignorance. As for this acquisition they announced? I don't care. Not only is it nothing pertaining to gaming IP that any subset of people actually care about, it doesn't seem like anything that will help notably shorten AAA development time or resource load. Those are the two things SIE should be focusing on for M&As and this acquisition does neither, so I don't care.

I agree with all that but in a way I think Sony cornered itself into that position: Around the PS3 launch, they started focusing way more on specs, comparing the console with gaming PCs and the games just followed suit with that same logic. All about high production values and graphics. But it got way too expensive, and will bite them in the ass. If you need the GDP of a small country to produce a game you can beat in 10 days or less with little replay value, something's wrong.

They educated their fanbase to react positively to high end graphics and production values and dismiss everything else. Will the fanbase that weaponises Metacritic the most, accept AA games? Games that without the Nintendo MC boost, might score in the 70s and low 80s because they took risks that might not please reviewers or don't have best in class production values?

BG3 simping out of nowhere was hilarious. You could see from a mile away it was being used for the war.

 

[anonpuffs]

Most PlayStation fans are proving to me that they don't know what the hell they want. Except if it makes Xbox look bad, without stopping to ask if it makes PlayStation look good (or does any good for the platform).

Case in point: Quantum Error (lol), Abandoned (lol), Baldur's Gate 3 (turned out amazing but how many PlayStation folks were hyping the game before finding out it wasn't coming out on Xbox due to development problems with Series S?), etc.

Fact is: Sony needs better variety between AAA and AA games. They can't survive as a published doing only massive-budget AAA games and hoping timed exclusive 3P deals cover the gaps. They need a balanced portfolio of 1P AAA traditional, GaaS/live-service (but a modest number, no more than 4-5 at a time), 3P exclusives (with meaningful exclusivity windows, not the joke of a 3-month window they have for Rebirth) and 1P AA traditional.

Those of you trying to knock Nintendo like they're some joke, or downplaying AA benefits for 1P, are getting it all wrong. It almost reeks of envy if not ignorance. As for this acquisition they announced? I don't care. Not only is it nothing pertaining to gaming IP that any subset of people actually care about, it doesn't seem like anything that will help notably shorten AAA development time or resource load. Those are the two things SIE should be focusing on for M&As and this acquisition does neither, so I don't care.



You're talking about nostalgia and yes, they don't have the specific advantage the way Nintendo does. But Sony have much more potential on that than Microsoft; they are just allergic to their own gaming legacy it seems.

And usually, when they try bringing something back, it's a half-assed measure. They probably wrote off the PS1 mini console as a fail because no one wanted it, when in reality it's because they packed in a shit emulator with shit PAL ISOs. But these companies will blame anything other than their own flawed execution for an underperforming product.

That's just incorrect though. Playstation fans have overwhelmingly liked Sony's current direction. Otherwise Ragnarok, SM2, Horizon, GT7 wouldn't have sold millions. We on this and other forums are like <1% of Sony fans.

People in general werent hyping up BG3 either because no one knew if the full release would be any good. But Larian blew expectations out of the water.

 

[Darth Vader]

Nintendo can pack a few roms and sell them for 60 USD to legions of millennial western manchilds and eastern salaryman playing on their train commute. They also have the Mario movie and theme parks.

Sony and MS don't have that advantage.

Sony's first party sales have literally been growing steadily since the end of the PS3 generation. You now have PS Studios games reaching 20M sales and beyond. If they released a Bloodborne remake, for example, it would sell gangbusters. They had TLOU show, which was one of the most watched shows in recent years and likely helped move millions of game copies.

Comparing Sony to Nintendo makes way more sense than comparing Sony with Microsoft, whose games are barely played even when offered on a subscription service.

Sony only had to keep doing what they were doing, but they decided to enter the ports bandwagon (which has been a disaster for the most part) and the Live Service one (which has yielded fuck all).

 

[Systemshock2023]

Sony's first party sales have literally been growing steadily since the end of the PS3 generation. You now have PS Studios games reaching 20M sales and beyond. If they released a Bloodborne remake, for example, it would sell gangbusters. They had TLOU show, which was one of the most watched shows in recent years and likely helped move millions of game copies.

Comparing Sony to Nintendo makes way more sense than comparing Sony with Microsoft, whose games are barely played even when offered on a subscription service.

Sony only had to keep doing what they were doing, but they decided to enter the ports bandwagon (which has been a disaster for the most part) and the Live Service one (which has yielded fuck all).

But Sony has to spend a truck of money to develop and market those games that sell millions. Also those first party games drop in price pretty fast for the most part. Specially on physical where folks buy them, beat them and sell them to recoup some money.

Nintendo can sell you Mario Kart (Now with new hat) have it looking like a PS3 game and sell 50M at full price.

Why didn't Bloodborne and the Demons souls remake sell gangbusters then? They won't unless release on the platform where the main audience is.

 

[Darth Vader]

Why didn't Bloodborne and the Demons souls remake sell gangbusters then? They won't unless release on the platform where the main audience is.

Bloodborne never had its numbers updated, but it likely sold multiple millions of copies. Demon's Souls doesn't have nearly the same mindshare as Bloodborne, and it released on a console that had just released to the market. You can't seriously be trying to make this argument.

But Sony has to spend a truck of money to develop and market those games that sell millions. Also those first party games drop in price pretty fast for the most part. Specially on physical where folks buy them, beat them and sell them to recoup some money.

Besides the point. They are profitable games and are bringing more and more money, due to them selling more and more.

 

[Systemshock2023]

Bloodborne never had its numbers updated, but it likely sold multiple millions of copies. Demon's Souls doesn't have nearly the same mindshare as Bloodborne, and it released on a console that had just released to the market. You can't seriously be trying to make this argument.

Demons Souls remake sales were poor there's no way around it. Souls likes are not niche anymore and this is a full fat remake, one of the best looking games on the console. Also the highlight of the console reveal. Yeah, install base was low, but there weren't many next gen games to compete against. Breath of the Wild also released on a console that was new to the market.

Bloodborne also sold poorly. Sony loves to show sales numbers, Why wouldn't they show them if the game was a success sales wise? The truth is that with the exception of Gran Turismo, PS greatest IP BTW, first party games that sell a lot follow this pattern for the most part lately:


Western - Third person action - Story based - Ubisoftian Open world.

They have to break the mold and put together blockbuster games outside of this template otherwise its too risky, disco records eventually stopped selling (and no, returnal and ratchet are not near the same level of sucess)

 

[Danja]

We know Bloodborne had over 10 million players after being in PS+... I'd say the game never sold more than 4.5 - 5 million copies.

Demon Souls Remake sold poorly because it was a launch title that had to compete against Spiderman Remaster + Miles.... Basically every launch game got pushed aside mindshare wise because of those games.

But it still sold over 1.4 million last we know which was 2+ years ago. It's a shame they never pushed it more the way they did Forbidden West.

 

[Danja]

Demons Souls remake sales were poor there's no way around it. Souls likes are not niche anymore and this is a full fat remake, one of the best looking games on the console. Also the highlight of the console reveal. Yeah, install base was low, but there weren't many next gen games to compete against. Breath of the Wild also released on a console that was new to the market.

Bloodborne also sold poorly. Sony loves to show sales numbers, Why wouldn't they show them if the game was a success sales wise? The truth is that with the exception of Gran Turismo, PS greatest IP BTW, first party games that sell a lot follow this pattern for the most part lately:


Western - Third person action - Story based - Ubisoftian Open world.

They have to break the mold and put together blockbuster games outside of this template otherwise its too risky, disco records eventually stopped selling (and no, returnal and ratchet are not near the same level of sucess)

Sony isn't gonna announce sales for a Game unless it crosses an internal milestone for them. At the time it needed to sell more than 1+ million in 8 days to get a sales update.

Then few months later Uncharted 4 came out and did huge numbers, there was no way they were gonna make a sales update for the game.

Days Gone never got an update but we know it sold extremely well, just not as the pace of the record breakers. At the time it had the 7th biggest US launch for a Playstation exclusive.

 

[Darth Vader]

Sony isn't gonna announce sales for a Game unless it crosses an internal milestone for them. At the time it needed to sell more than 1+ million in 8 days to get a sales update.

Then few months later Uncharted 4 came out and did huge numbers, there was no way they were gonna make a sales update for the game.

Days Gone never got an update but we know it sold extremely well, just not as the pace of the record breakers. At the time it had the 7th biggest US launch for a Playstation exclusive.

Came here to say this. Thank you.