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
50
39
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
997
785
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
997
785
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
1,994
3,192
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.
 

Yurinka

Veteran
VIP
21 Jun 2022
6,677
5,704
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.
 

Nhomnhom

Veteran
25 Mar 2023
8,381
11,511
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.
It's pretty obvious at this point we couldn't expect that level of foresight from Sony leadership, they simply don't think that deeply and are always focused on short term results.

Meanwhile, Valve, a company that could very well be coasting on their success under Windows is the one that actually cares about Linux gaming and releasing Linux gaming hardware (pretty much all other manufactures and most publisher prefer to stick to MS and empower them).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Diah

Yurinka

Veteran
VIP
21 Jun 2022
6,677
5,704
You guys spent months kicking Microsoft’s back in for taking this route with Xbox.
The PS results are very different to the Xbox, like night and day, because the SIE strategy is very different than the MS Gaming divison one.
 
24 Jun 2022
3,536
6,077
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?

It'd literally cost like $10 at most for Sony to do that. Cheap, decent USB KB&M are very affordable. Better yet, just add a keyboard-based backbone accessory for the DualSense.

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.

Then get out there and start pushing quality curated mods for your games. Collaborate with modders in the PC space to get them on console versions,

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.

They didn't seem to have lawsuits to push against Microsoft for letting Xbox consoles run emulators in Dev Mode :/

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

That's one thing we can agree on, but I'm talking about digital games. Especially as digital gradually takes over physical with time.

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?

No. But I mainly meant stuff like KB&M. Even the Dreamcast had an official KB&M peripheral from SEGA back in the day. Given how hungry they are for peripherals, you'd think SIE would have a 1P KB&M option for console players of FPS games.

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.

Speaking of BG3, they wouldn't have needed that month if SIE, y'know, had an official KB&M option for PS5 owners.

But we'd be talking about an SIE that cares about innovating beyond just power & graphics, and I don't think that SIE exists anymore.

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....

It doesn't really undermine the point of a console this day and age though, considering Pro models are normal now and arguably already "undermine" the point of a console. It's probably why Microsoft will take a step in controlled upgrade modularity for the next Xbox hardware generation.

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:

SIE don't need Windows software. They could at least just port some of their productivity software over to the PS OS. That would be a start. Or take a page from the books of companies like Amiga back in the day, and make their own variants of other popular programs but specifically for PS OS.

People keep saying options are good, right? Why can't SIE innovate and add more value to PlayStation with these types of options? Expand it into a bit more of a microcomputer territory? But like I said, I don't think the SIE that cares about innovation beyond expected power & visuals exists anymore.

You basically want consoles to become PC- you are fundamentally undermining the pros of a console.

Again consoles ALREADY have seen feature creep over generations that arguably undermine your idea of what a "console" traditionally is. What are a few more features going to do, to upset that?

Especially if the company maintains ease-of-use, simplicity, security and stability while doing so? You know, the real conveniences of a console over a PC?

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.

It depends on the approach. The idea itself is neutral; the implementation would decide if it's executed well or not. Just like almost any other idea in this space.

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.

Hell at the rate SIE are going they won't need any convincing to do that; they'll jump at the opportunity themselves.

While letting Valve handle the hardware side.

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

If you think that's the only reason for Xbox's current state in the market, you're sorely mistaken.

Also, "system seller" != "quality game", inherently. Often they might, but there are a LOT of high-quality games that sell way less than a COD, GOW, Zelda etc. And arguably, MS did put out a few gems over the past 10 years. The Ori games, Cuphead, Forza Horizon 4 and Flight Simulator are good examples of this.

However, complications with brand association, and in the case of Forza & Flight Sim, lack of narrative or "hot" genre focus (in being too niche genre-wise), were bigger reasons why those games were either not big sellers or "system sellers" WRT Xbox consoles.

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.

You took me seriously when I withheld my complaints about SIE's corporate direction in gaming. Now that I've become more vocal about them, you disregard what I have to say. Time will tell who's right.

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

It was a realistic estimate based on what's known about the market. And FWIW, when that Goldman Sachs investor asked Herman & Hideaki about the PC strategy affecting consoles, it didn't seem like either of them had more data to go with than we do here in spaces like these forums online :/

The PS results are very different to the Xbox, like night and day, because the SIE strategy is very different than the MS Gaming divison one.

It's different in the how & when, but same in the what.

Which basically means, the only real difference between MS and Sony at this point when it comes to PC, is the timing cadence of their games to the platform. Otherwise, they've both seemingly committed to all their games there (or the vast majority of them). They've both committed to all their ports being on Steam Day 1 when it comes to PC launchers.

That is the what, and it's the same for the both of them.
 
Last edited:

mibu no ookami

Veteran
21 Feb 2024
997
785
Again consoles ALREADY have seen feature creep over generations that arguably undermine your idea of what a "console" traditionally is. What are a few more features going to do, to upset that?

Especially if the company maintains ease-of-use, simplicity, security and stability while doing so? You know, the real conveniences of a console over a PC?



It depends on the approach. The idea itself is neutral; the implementation would decide if it's executed well or not. Just like almost any other idea in this space.



Hell at the rate SIE are going they won't need any convincing to do that; they'll jump at the opportunity themselves.

While letting Valve handle the hardware side.



If you think that's the only reason for Xbox's current state in the market, you're sorely mistaken.

Also, "system seller" != "quality game", inherently. Often they might, but there are a LOT of high-quality games that sell way less than a COD, GOW, Zelda etc. And arguably, MS did put out a few gems over the past 10 years. The Ori games, Cuphead, Forza Horizon 4 and Flight Simulator are good examples of this.

However, complications with brand association, and in the case of Forza & Flight Sim, lack of narrative or "hot" genre focus (in being too niche genre-wise), were bigger reasons why those games were either not big sellers or "system sellers" WRT Xbox consoles.



You took me seriously when I withheld my complaints about SIE's corporate direction in gaming. Now that I've become more vocal about them, you disregard what I have to say. Time will tell who's right.



It was a realistic estimate based on what's known about the market. And FWIW, when that Goldman Sachs investor asked Herman & Hideaki about the PC strategy affecting consoles, it didn't seem like either of them had more data to go with than we do here in spaces like these forums online :/



It's different in the how & when, but same in the what.

Which basically means, the only real difference between MS and Sony at this point when it comes to PC, is the timing cadence of their games to the platform. Otherwise, they've both seemingly committed to all their games there (or the vast majority of them). They've both committed to all their ports being on Steam Day 1 when it comes to PC launchers.

That is the what, and it's the same for the both of them.


Can you give me the difference between AMC A-List and MoviePass?
 

Yurinka

Veteran
VIP
21 Jun 2022
6,677
5,704
And FWIW, when that Goldman Sachs investor asked Herman & Hideaki about the PC strategy affecting consoles, it didn't seem like either of them had more data to go with than we do here in spaces like these forums online :/
Yes, they have the data and mentioned it in their reply: their PC strategy isn't canibalizing users, it's providing new ones instead and they hope to use it to grow.

It's different in the how & when, but same in the what.

Which basically means, the only real difference between MS and Sony at this point when it comes to PC, is the timing cadence of their games to the platform. Otherwise, they've both seemingly committed to all their games there (or the vast majority of them). They've both committed to all their ports being on Steam Day 1 when it comes to PC launchers.

That is the what, and it's the same for the both of them.
Nah, the strategy is very different:
  • MS releases all their games on PC and a game sub day one, Sony doesn't: some of them never are ported/included in the sub, and when they do it for most of them isn't day one
  • Every year the number of Sony PC ports of old games is smaller than the new (1st+3rd) PS exclusives games they release that year. That year there are also multiplatform console only games never released on PC, or released there after a timed exclusive. Meaning, every year the number of games that can be played on PS but not in PC increases
  • Sony has a bigger and better catalog of old classics from previous generations on their console not available in PC
  • Other than the PS games not available on PC, Sony also has every year the biggest and better selection of console exclusives(so keeps growing every year): games that may be on PC but aren't in other consoles temporally or permanently. That even includes VR games
The "what" is different: Sony keeps increasing their number of total and console exclusives every year, and also increases the difference compared vs their competition. That makes their console more appealing than the other, and even more considering it has more and better console exclusives.

PS doesn't have any problem: both their console and PC business/revenue/userbase grow. MS only grows via acquisition, adding the revenue from acquired companies on top.

Sony has the biggest console active userbase they ever had, MS instead has the worst market share they ever had. In the only region where PS5 isn't performing better than PS4 in hardware sales they are outperforming Xbox by a huge marging that keeps increasing as PS continues eating Xbox market share.
 

64bitmodels

Member
29 Sep 2022
50
39
It'd literally cost like $10 at most for Sony to do that. Cheap, decent USB KB&M are very affordable. Better yet, just add a keyboard-based backbone accessory for the DualSense.
well for one thing that's extra packaging costs, and that extra "$10" for Sony is probably gonna be upcharged to 30 or 50 on the user end.
But also, what type of console gamer wants to see a mouse and keyboard on their console packaging? that'd drive away or upset people as they go here to avoid the PC experience. I doubt many people would end up using the packaged KB&M either, probably a 20% or 30% out of the user base. That's a whole lot of e-waste to account for.


Then get out there and start pushing quality curated mods for your games. Collaborate with modders in the PC space to get them on console versions,
I just said most companies don't want that.

On PC removing mods is a lot harder because it's an open platform and more community focused, so trying to strike down mods is trying to strike down a hydra. But on Console where corporations have more say, I don't think Sony's going to be able to just convince these guys to not only enable but promote and curate mods


They didn't seem to have lawsuits to push against Microsoft for letting Xbox consoles run emulators in Dev Mode :/
The whole Dev Mode thing on MS's part was wishy washy at best, for a while people could use it, then all of a sudden it got disabled, than renabled again. I'm willing to bet that a lot of the reason on why they even disabled that was due to legal tensions from Nintendo on letting emulators freely be usable.

It doesn't really undermine the point of a console this day and age though, considering Pro models are normal now and arguably already "undermine" the point of a console. It's probably why Microsoft will take a step in controlled upgrade modularity for the next Xbox hardware generation.
Pro models are an all in one optimized second sku for the console where the only customization needed is like the fuckin ssd

Modular upgrades are a lot more than just that. They are curated accessories that are to be inserted into the console and used accordingly. They modify the specs of each system. More work for Sony to do on optimizing the games to get the most out of each component (not to the same extent as PC) but more importantly more money on their part, AMD's part, pretty much everybody manufacturing this shit. Cerny would not only have to accomodate the IO but also design a modular system that's easy to upgrade and change and- THIS IS JUST A FUCKIN PC ALL OVER AGAIN. JUST DO THE LINUX BASED SONY PC OS MAN IT SAVES YOU HASSLE


People keep saying options are good, right? Why can't SIE innovate and add more value to PlayStation with these types of options? Expand it into a bit more of a microcomputer territory? But like I said, I don't think the SIE that cares about innovation beyond expected power & visuals exists anymore.
It's a brand named PlayStation. That's not a name that sparks "Personal Computing device that Games but also files your taxes, 3d models, does spreadsheets and all that other junk"- it's a 90s gaming console name meant for a gaming console that games. And in Xbox's case the name is even worse. ECKSBAWKS. Try to convince businesses or even home families to buy that shit.

Not to mention the whole Amiga/Atari ST 80s concept of being different computers and different OSses... it's a dead approach for a reason. Only Apple has been able to do it well and even then they still lack the software compatibility and market share of Windows/PC. More OSes for devs to optimize their software for, different interfaces that need to be documented, etc. How would Playstation succeed with their hat in the ring- what would they offer to make their product worth buying not just in the console space but comptuers as a whole??? This isn't a rhetorical question or anything, I genuinely want to hear your explanation as it seems like a fun alternate reality to discuss how they'd (somehow) break into the PC market


It depends on the approach. The idea itself is neutral; the implementation would decide if it's executed well or not. Just like almost any other idea in this space.
Open OS means a lot more moving parts need to be accounted for. People can break the system, install viruses, cheats, easily pirate games, and all that other stuff. And keep in mind that while PC has had safety measures to combat those sorts of stuff, (DRM, Anticheat, Antivirus) Playstation hasn't because it never needed them- it's a closed platform and that detracts that other stuff by nature.
Hell at the rate SIE are going they won't need any convincing to do that; they'll jump at the opportunity themselves.

While letting Valve handle the hardware side.
It would get you everything you wanted out of modern Playstation with a fraction of the work and expense on Sony's part.