Pro doesn't need to sell like hotcakes, base ps5 is what the casuals who make up the vast majority of the console user base will buy.
Sony Downplays the Risk of PlayStation Users Switching to PCs in a Recent Q&A.
- Thread starter Puff
- Start date
By the way, just realized the trick you pulled tugging at the least important string of information as much as you could. Argument went from being about the first party brand strength of SONY before PS3 vs now to... haggling the definition of first party so that Wild Arms can remain in your amazing list of games. Even if you kept Wild Arms, though, you're still arguing games like Wild Arms, Arc the Lad and the Getaway have more to do with SONY's brand being strong on PS1 and PS2 than stuff like Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy and Grand Theft Auto (not first party!) which is absolutely delusional.
Buddy, you've been tricking yourself the whole time. It's normal you are starting to feel dizzy with all your spinning.
See? The whole "it's not first party" argument wasn't started by me, it was you who continued it by being wrong. Keep on spinning.
Nope. Clueless user A, in all of his cluelessness and bullshit-fullness, made the silly comment how PlayStation first-party output was nearly non-existent pre-PS3. I refused it with a list of 1st party titles. Why you want to share the L's with him, is a bit of a mystery to me, but I guess to each their own.
Never said PlayStation's fortune wasn't built on the initial 3rd party support they had and obviously needed when launching a new console.
In fact, this was my very first sentence in my answer to clueless user A.
Now, clueless user B, if you want to continue to look ridiculous, you are welcome to continue grasping at straws, spinning and moving goalposts.
The argument was initially about games developed internally at Sony studios but now it's about whether Sony owns the IP or not.
The argument was that Sony never really focused on internal development much in the ps1 and ps2 days and even the games they were published were coming from studios outside of sony, which they still do today, but because Sony doesn't own the IP, these are different lol.
To know if a game is first party or not, you need to look up the trademark AND find legal documentation on ownership of the IP.
Imagine the backwards pretzel you have to put yourself into to suggest that Spider-Man 2 isn't a first party game because Sony doesn't own the Spider-Man IP. Bloodborne is a first party game because Sony owns the IP even though it was developed by FromSoftware. Sony doesn't own the IP for MLB The Show either nor did they own the rights to F1 when they used to make F1 games.
Goldeneye was always considered a 2nd party game because Rare made it. No one cared whether or not Nintendo owned the Bond IP. No one considered Mario RPG a 1st party game because Nintendo owned the Mario IP.
It's crazy what an agenda will get you to say.
Sony started to invest in internal development late into the PS2 era. Their first major first party title that wasn't Gran Turismo was God of War, which came out in 2005. Uncharted would follow in 2007, but it wouldn't reach it's heights until Uncharted 2 in 2009. The successes of God of War and Uncharted is what got Sony to invest in AAA cinematic single player games after franchise failures like Primal, The Getaway Black Monday, and Syphon Filter Omega Strain.
Sony gets a ton of praise for the golden era of PS gaming during the PS1-PS2 era, but it was not marked by internal development. The only difference for these games now is that developers push to own the rights of the games.
It's so easy to see who knows what they're talking about and who doesn't. Who was there at the time and who wasn't. Who has rose colored glasses and who doesn't.
Back in the day, I wished Sony would buy these companies and cultivate franchises. I loved Arc the Lad and was so happy Working Designs translated and published it when SCEA refused to, but I also knew G-Craft wasn't part of Sony and that there was no guaranteed future for the franchise. I was happy when they brought it to PS2, but Cattle Call did a subpar job rebooting the franchise. I bought both Arc the Lad PS2 games though.
I also loved Alundra and was devastated with Alundra 2. I thought Sony should have built Alundra into a more of a Zelda type franchise. Then Dark Cloud came out and it was clear that was what they were trying to do, but for all the love and respect Sony Japan gets, they never invested in studios, which lead to the closure of Japan Studios, which didn't even exist formerly during the PS1 era and most of the PS2 era.
If you want to talk goalposts they'd be set by me in my post that you responded to. I wasn't originally speaking to you, you decided to interact with me and decided to link me to another thread where you had had a similar argument. To you the two arguments were close enough to warrant linking but now you're asking me to abide by the rules and goalposts of an argument I wasn't a part of even though by your own TACIT admission via linking it it actually DOES fit the rules/goalposts of what my argument was! Funny that!
Personally I think exclusivity is all that really has ever mattered, including timed exclusivity. Arguing over what's developed by who, who owns what IP... it's all kinda nonsense when you need a Playstation to play games like Silent Hill 2 remake, FF7R or Stellar Blade, they're not on XBOX or Switch are they? lol
This is weird nonsense that only nerds argue, the average person is going to see they can play these games on one platform (please leave me alone about PC, if we're saying PC invalidates exclusivity then the console war ended ages ago and we're arguing over nothing) and not another and associate PS with the good times they had with those games. End of story.
Please back-up this statement.
You talked about first-party titles, not first-party studios.
As reading seems too difficult for you, it's obvious you fail to see the clear indication at the bottom of each game on the PSN store.
Correct. You are the perfect example of agenda driven corporate slave.
Correct clueless user A, you are starting to admitting you're own deficiencies. You get a
today.I don't see anything wrong with my initial answer to you:
Seems pretty much correct.
In a recent Q&A from a G&NS segment, Sony downplayed the risk of users switching from PS5 to PC, stating that they do not consider it a major concern.
The PC gaming market is a serious threat. Sony may be confident now, but the rise of PC gaming will shift the balance in the future
I can't keep the narrative on this board straight in my head. Which is it?
>PC gamers are cheap fucks who don't buy games
>The PC market is going to rise exponentially so as to destroy PlayStation
Some of you guys are so out of touch that it's laughable. Steam has been around for close to 20 years at this point and still has yet to break 40M CCU across the entire platform. That's not even 2/3 of what PS5 has managed to sell in less than 5 years.
And let's assume that of those 40M Steam players, maybe 10-20% are "hardcore" gamers that are willing to invest the $1,000+ it takes for a "true" PC experience. And the rest are casuals who are playing on $400 rigs with iGPUs, or $500-$600 rigs with years-old cards and processors.
So, at most, you're looking at <10M players on Steam who are supposed to be a "threat" to the clear market leader in the video game space? Come on.
::cue the Omniman think meme::
Lulz okay if u say so
Just don't come cry and act surprise when there will be no hype at PS6 reveal and announcement
Just don't come cry and act surprise when there will be no hype at PS6 reveal and announcement
The PS6 will have massive hype and will be sold out everywhere day 1.
And they are correct. The only people who make a big deal out of multiplatform games are those insecure, and deeply rooted in platform warring because exclusives was the entire identity of consoles until around PS3 gen where most games came to most platforms more often than ever. During that gen it became a bonus.
Those of you expecting a giant console to PC shift are going to be quite disappointed. Sane people do not beef with corporations for making their media more broadly available, let alone make a $1500 purchase of it
Those of you expecting a giant console to PC shift are going to be quite disappointed. Sane people do not beef with corporations for making their media more broadly available, let alone make a $1500 purchase of it
That's what Xbox players were saying about next Xbox when MS started porting everything to PC
That's what Xbox players were saying about next Xbox when MS started porting everything to PC
Microsoft destroyed all their goodwill with consumers at the XBO announcement. PC ports and Play Anywhere had nothing to do with it.
Difference is Xbox has not had a good content pipeline since 2010. Sony has been consistent.That's what Xbox players were saying about next Xbox when MS started porting everything to PC