Sony plans include PC Launcher, Cross-Buy, Cross-Save/Progression with PC, PS Plus on Fire Stick, Roku and Smart TVs

64bitmodels

Member
29 Sep 2022
42
37
As for things that might attract once-console players to PC, again we have already seen historical precedent of why. Better peak performance potential, free online, integrated Steam features (community forums, much better refund policy, etc.), PC-exclusive games, retro emulation, full Discord usability, robust streaming capabilities, cheaper game prices, tons of mod support, tons of I/O controller options, convenience (same system as for student studies for example, or multimedia production for a freelance artist + gamer as another example), etc.

There's quite a few strong reasons there, and it's why I've been suggesting if SIE (and to a lesser extent, Microsoft) want to make their console more competitive, they should be finding ways to integrate these types of features into the console experience while still retaining the universal benefits consoles tend to enjoy vs. PC (ease of use, simple/family-friendly UI, security, upfront costs).
A lot of those strengths are just due to the nature of PC as a platform.

Full discord usability? it's cause every PC has a keyboard and mouse built in. What would you do to remedy this, bundle a keyboard and mouse with every PS5?

Mod support? because the game files are open and accessible. You can't do this on console because the files are closed, and most companies aren't like bethesda where they will ask their players to make content for the game.

Retro emulation? That'd cause tensions between companies pretty quick if one of them (especially Nintendo) found out that people were using another system's competitor console to emulate their games. Look at what Nintendo does to rom sites on the daily.

Cheaper game prices? That already exists on console it's called the used physical market LOL

Extra controller options? that's thanks to all the drivers. Do you really expect Sony to code drivers to get an Xbox controller working on their console?

PC-exclusive games? The difference between exclusives on PC and exclusives on console is that PC exclusives just happen because of PC as a platform. Indies are PC exclusive because you don't need to pay to publish games (or it costs less) on PC. Others are PC exclusive simply because they take advantage of the platform too much, all those RT remasters of old games like Quake and Half Life 2. Or how Baldur's Gate 3 needed a month to get their game working on PS5 because of how KB&M focused the game is.

Better peak performance potential? Probably because you can upgrade a PC. Sony would probably have to manufacture a whole bunch of upgradeable parts and stuff just to get things working properly, or pay AMD to do it. That's a whole lot more cash for this operation that fundamentally undermines the point of a console....

Convenience of multitasking? That's thanks to software. Sony would have to create a fucking translation layer for the PS OS to get all that 30+ YEARS of Windows software running on their PS5, or convince major software developers to port over most of the relevant ones. Editing videos, 3d models, filling spreadsheets and music production on a fucking PlayStation? really man? :ROFLMAO:

You basically want consoles to become PC- you are fundamentally undermining the pros of a console. A lot of the "convenience" and "ease of use" people admire in a console goes out the window pretty quick when you throw in different components and an open OS into the mix with pretty much all of these suggestions you made.
At this rate, you're better off convincing Sony to make their own Linux distro a la SteamOS, a PC launcher and just advice that people play their games on those instead of PS consoles from now on.
 
Last edited:

mibu no ookami

Veteran
21 Feb 2024
895
723
you mean like how 50% of the PS userbase is still on PS4?

Also, please stop with the "ps4 quality PC" rhetoric. The most popular card on the Steam Survey is the RTX 3060, which is around equivalent to a PS5's GPU with Nvidia's featureset.
Most of the cards following up are plenty capable too

5fEjVhI.png


What percent of PS4 users should be on PS5 by now?

What does the most popular have to do with a lot of users being on PS4 quality cards?

People really struggle with logic.

6 out of 12 doctors are 6 feet tall. A lot of doctors are under 6 ft tall (5).

What does 6 out of the 12 being 6 ft tall have to do with the 5 who are under 6 ft tall?
 

mibu no ookami

Veteran
21 Feb 2024
895
723
Xbox is the evidence.

Yes, a company who hasn't put out a system seller in over a decade is evidence. This is laughable.

It's already happened. What do you think was happening near the end of the 360/PS3 generation? Why do you think the PS4 Pro was made (among other reasons)? And again, what have you literally seen happen with Xbox over the past 10 years?

See above. I'm going to stop humoring you. Your arguments are getting worse and worse. It's embarrassing at this point. For me, because I took you seriously at one point.

It's only beneficial if the number of new net customers is enough to collectively replace the 2-3 million who phase out from buying PlayStation hardware, most SIE peripherals and most 3P games through PlayStation to shift towards PC, Steam, and using a PS Launcher mainly for PS+ and 1P SIE games.

You made up the 2-3 million number in the first place...

The chances a single net new customer coming in through this pathway of a PS Launcher, will spend enough to replace a single of those 2-3 million high-ARPU hardcore/core enthusiasts who just naturally reduce their spend on PlayStation specifically, is very low. So, Sony'd have to count on just netting multiples of those types for every one high-ARPU hardcore/core enthusiast who "scales down".

See above.

Yes but mainly from 1P games. The PS PC Launcher would have to do a hell of a lot to convince PC gamers, to buy 3P games there instead of some place like Steam. Heck, it'd have to do a lot to convince many to buy SIE's own games on the Launcher vs. Steam, considering a PS Launcher on PC doesn't mean SIE will stop bringing their games to Steam.

Asked and answered. I'm not even going to bother responding to the rest.


At most it'd just mean the Launcher gets them first, and then they go to Steam maybe a year or so later. I don't think the element of FOMO will work for SIE on PC in that case to the degree it has (so far) in the console space.



If the amount of 3P games present is lacking then less of those 2-3 million will go to the PC Launcher and would just probably stick with the console, yes. But if what percentage "jumps over" isn't stricken with FOMO and already have PCs for some gaming anyhow...why would they not go with the launcher if it means (potentially) getting 1P games Day 1 there, with PSN and PS+ integrated in the experience?

They can use the Launcher for 1P games, and Steam for 3P games. It's really that simple.



I didn't say "all" console players. I estimated it'd be at most maybe 2-3 million of their high-ARPU hardcore/core enthusiasts, and that would depend on a multitude of factors. The more of those factors that manifest, the more of those 2-3 million that'd switch from a console to PC. And even that 2-3 million is not representative of the total number of high-ARPU hardcore/core enthusiasts on console. It doesn't include more casual core gamers, casuals or mainstream at all, either, which would easily outnumber hardcore/core enthusiasts in install base count.

However, the 2-3 million that'd switch bring with them amount of spending power, and a lot of that spending power would probably shift from outside of the PlayStation ecosystem and towards other ecosystems on PC. This isn't a radical concept. You remember the old measure of "software attach rates"? Well it's similar here; those 2-3 million would be the types in older gens with the highest software attach rates by far; there aren't many of them, but they do the most spending in the ecosystem. SIE losing out on a large portion (let's say 60-70%) of that spending from those 2-3 million is going to hit a bit different than losing a mainstream customer, because a single high-ARPU hardcore/core enthusiast probably spends the equivalent of 4-5 mainstream customers' worth in a console generation.

As for things that might attract once-console players to PC, again we have already seen historical precedent of why. Better peak performance potential, free online, integrated Steam features (community forums, much better refund policy, etc.), PC-exclusive games, retro emulation, full Discord usability, robust streaming capabilities, cheaper game prices, tons of mod support, tons of I/O controller options, convenience (same system as for student studies for example, or multimedia production for a freelance artist + gamer as another example), etc.

There's quite a few strong reasons there, and it's why I've been suggesting if SIE (and to a lesser extent, Microsoft) want to make their console more competitive, they should be finding ways to integrate these types of features into the console experience while still retaining the universal benefits consoles tend to enjoy vs. PC (ease of use, simple/family-friendly UI, security, upfront costs).



Right so I guess SEGA, NEC, 3DO, Atari, SNK etc. never existed and Xbox never existed? Or PS3 and PS Vita never existed? Or Wii U or GameCube? Got it o.0.



So why are you disagreeing with me on this? I've only been saying there is some lateral transfer. Not flat-out, full-on transfer of audiences.



I've acknowledged this, hence why I also said that it's very possible SIE could bring in enough new people (be they new from Xbox, new from Nintendo, new from mobile or new from PC) to make up for any "scaling down" of a 2-3 million high-ARPU hardcore/core enthusiast slice from PS to PC.

Maybe could even do both that and see large gains in addition to it while doing so. I never said that was impossible.



I wasn't bringing any of this up to suggest one is "greater" than the other, whatever that means. However, some folks are adverse to the idea that platforms like PC provide any competition, even indirect competition, to consoles like PlayStation despite the two sharing roughly 90% of the same library at any given time and 100% of the same library over the course of a generation thanks to SIE's PC porting efforts.

And if anything, it'd be PC with a library advantage at this point because of the many PC games that don't have ports on PlayStation. VALORANT was one such game and is only now getting a PS5 version four years after being a PC exclusive. So many, even SIE now apparently, have become warped in this idea that only direct competitors matter, and that the only actual competitor PlayStation console has is Xbox, an also-ran at this point.

They are either foolish to think this, to ignore that indirect competitors can be far more effective than direct ones in various instances, or they do not care. And if they don't care, it's likely because they (SIE) have reasons and plans to take a drastically more console-agnostic approach going forward. Which is well within their choice; I don't bring any of this up to suggest they should stop. None of us have that power.

I just mention my POV because, personally, I don't favor or gel with SIE's approach; even if it's what works best for them at the end of the day, my tastes just lay elsewhere. But I do at least accept that their approach is the reality of how they're going about things, and I acknowledge this is what they want to do.
 

Old Gamer

Veteran
Founder
5 Aug 2022
1,992
3,187
They could have come up with a PC strategy that would not play into their competitors, but they made everything harder for themselves. Releasing ports as Linux/SteamOS native only would have had a positive effect in the gaming industry, but instead, they are just helping MS keeping a grip on it. Idiots.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Amin_Parker

Yurinka

Veteran
VIP
21 Jun 2022
6,594
5,642
They could have come up with a PC strategy that would not play into their competitors, but they made everything harder for themselves. Releasing ports as Linux/SteamOS native only would have had a positive effect in the gaming industry, but instead, they are just helping MS keeping a grip on it. Idiots.
I'd say the reason of not releasing Linux/SteamOS ports is that amost all the PC gamers are on Windows instead, and Linux/SteamOS can already run properly their Windows games. So there's no point to waste resources on it.

Most PC game sales on Steam and most players only buy on Steam, so publishing on Steam is the way to reach most PC players. Makes more sense to start on Steam, build their PC library and fanbase and then later release their own store/launcher and slowly migrate their fanbase and library there as it keeps growing.

To build their own store, launcher etc. is so expensive and needs years to make it profitable specially if it doesn't start with a big library that can appeal customers.

To don't release their first PC games on Steam would have mean to have way less sales and way more costs, specially if also made Linux/Steam OS ports. So wouldn't have been as profitable as their current approach is.