Sony COO Totoki: "A big problem of SIE is they don't have a deep understanding of how their work is being translated to growth
- Thread starter Gamernyc78
- Start date
I agree with the what he’s complaining about game development. I dont agree with the idea of PC ports he’s shown interest in.
The pivot to live service isn’t a bad idea it’s actually smart to establish yourself in live service the issue was doing live service but not bolstering first party for singleplayer content output most studio they bought where live service while MS was bolstering first party by buying publisher increasing singleplayer output. Xbox this year has 4 singleplayer game in 2024 & in 2025 & 2026 theyl continue to have a minimum of 4 singleplayer games a year
On top of buying GaaS studios they also put many of their AAA studios to work on GaaS, that was the biggest mistake. AAA GaaS is a tough business and more prone to failing that anything else.
This is standard corporation speech on how to translate personal or departmental goals to feed into company objectives. Most organization have granular goals and use systems Fifteen Five for a visibility matrix on how everyone is contributing to growth goals.
Seems like they don't have tightly defined growth targets for each departments. this is worrying if there is visibility...
But its more process and procedural changes across the department and not difficult to implement, but introduces micro management.
Seems like they don't have tightly defined growth targets for each departments. this is worrying if there is visibility...
But its more process and procedural changes across the department and not difficult to implement, but introduces micro management.
OP
OP
The micromanagement will hurt more than help. I remember new blood coming into our department trying to implement kpis and micromanage lol it did more bad than good and was out the next year, it's just not how my company works.
Disagree, otherwise their margins wouldn't be so low. My personal guess is that the studios are being wasteful with money. There's no way spiderman 2 should have cost over 300m to make.
Spider-man is their most profitable product, how can it be blamed for their lack of profits? What games are making more money for them than Spider-man 2? it was also produced in a fraction of the time other teams are taking by a studio that has already released 3 games this gen.
Ohhhhhh...
I basically said that today morning here (of course I'm not good at word like him).
It is not hard to understand.
This quarter showed their grow was not good.
A big grow in revenue that results in less profit is terrible to be fair... it is the nightmare of all CEOs... his phone is probably ringing right all day long.
PS. I already saw some guys here trying to say but it is record revenue
just hint... don't become sad Xbot losers... revenue means nothing alone...record revenue only good when you have profit increasing too.
If revenue alone was so important every company should just sell their $500 product at $300 to have record revenue (due the amount of units sold) but big loses instead profits
I basically said that today morning here (of course I'm not good at word like him).
It is not hard to understand.
This quarter showed their grow was not good.
A big grow in revenue that results in less profit is terrible to be fair... it is the nightmare of all CEOs... his phone is probably ringing right all day long.
PS. I already saw some guys here trying to say but it is record revenue
just hint... don't become sad Xbot losers... revenue means nothing alone...record revenue only good when you have profit increasing too.If revenue alone was so important every company should just sell their $500 product at $300 to have record revenue (due the amount of units sold) but big loses instead profits
Last edited:
I didn't say it's not their most profitable product. But if it's their most profitable product and it cost $300m on a studio that put out 3 games this gen, how much do you think they're spending on studios that sell less copies and haven't put out shit this gen?
It remains to be seen how good and popular these games are going to be, Horizon Zero Dawn sold over 20m+, even Days Gone sold pretty well.
My question is, what is Sony going to do? These are the studios they have and they are only suited to pretty much making the games they already make. Those games are profitable, so what is the problem? Production value for some time has been a big draw for many of Sony games, if they cut the budget or rush them out they could be sabotaging these games.
Sony leadership is the one responsible the current drought they are in, they are the ones who should've managed the team better and their pace of releases and made the necessary investment if the timeline of releases didn't suit them. Things have been weird on the internal game releases front for years at this point.
The people who would play the game on PC if ported already emulate it instead of buying a Switch. It's fairly irrelevant on the Nintendo front to talk about ports when I play Switch games on my steam deck for instance.
Judging by your comments here sounds like PS is about to collapse and go third party! But we know that's opposite to the reality, so take your spin back to whatever Xbox forum you come from.
How will PlayStation not be third party if Xbox is dead and all their games are going to PC already? They are not third-party because they don't put their games on Switch, plenty of third-party publishers don't release their games on Switch as well.
It also doesn't help that PlayStation has no PC store and PS5 is selling less units than PS4.
Because they still produce hardware, they still have a platform and ecosystem, games are exclusive to that hardware and ecosystem for a period of time.
So does Xbox apparently, except for the temporary exclusivity part (with that said PS5 latest game was day one on PC). Pretty arbitrary definition, since other third-party devs also releases that end up being timed exclusives (either paid or not).
It’s not all about ROI…500% profit on a pc port sounds good until you realize it’s only 500k sales, paltry revenue (that Valve takes 30% of), and leads to less console sales, and less market share = less 3rd party revenue. Every time a game is ported, they’re giving their 30% cut to Valve.
And Gaas is just as bad, 200m for Factions 2 flushed down the toilet
4 billion spent on Bungie with nothing to show for it, while being extremely expensive to maintain a studio of that size. Gaas is nothing but a trap. It’s especially stupid when you already have the largest install base and are already raking in tons of money from already successful gaas games. You and these Sony execs really can’t think more than 3 inches ahead.
Real ROI = Ragnarok, 200m to develop and generated over 1 billion in revenue
Real ROI = doing nothing and making billions from Fortnite, CoD, apex, genshin, roblox, etc
If you want healthy ROI, you focus on the console and nothing but the console.
It's not even just money wasted as well, imagine the opportunity cost of having wasted so much of ND's time.It’s not all about ROI…500% profit on a pc port sounds good until you realize it’s only 500k sales, paltry revenue (that Valve takes 30% of), and leads to less console sales, and less market share = less 3rd party revenue. Every time a game is ported, they’re giving their 30% cut to Valve.
And Gaas is just as bad, 200m for Factions 2 flushed down the toilet
You and these Sony execs really can’t think more than 3 inches ahead.
Real ROI = Ragnarok, 200m to develop and generated over 1 billion in revenue
Real ROI = doing nothing and making billions from Fortnite, CoD, apex, genshin, roblox, etc
If you want healthy ROI, you focus on the console and nothing but the console.
There is also the cost of having your flagship studio being demoralized by having their game canceled.
If you can't make a TLoU AAA GaaS developed by ND work then please, give up on all future big budget GaaS going forward.
But Xbox and PlayStation are not comparable. One of these companies trends worse and worse every gen and sells less hardware for their platform, the other doesn't. One of these companies has 10m people purchase first party games on their platform, the other doesn't. It's the equivalent of saying two trees are both plants while one is dying and the other going on fine.
Sony doesn't own Arrowhead so if anything it's the fact they don't have enough first party games releasing that they rely on timed exclusives and console exclusives that is the issue - not that a 3rd party partnered dev put the game on PC.