Which of these PS controversial initiatives would you cancel?

[anonpuffs]

All except VR.

But to me it's not about the extra things they are doin it's about the lack of significant expansion in investment on traditional games.

Eh, it never hurts to be able to pivot in case the market takes a total left turn. GAAS for example doesn't have to entail all the negatives of the EA/Activision/Bungie brand of mtx hell. It could be a simple thing like the ghost of tsushima multiplayer mode that's supported by a battlepass and a mix of unlockable and bought cosmetics. Legacy pc ports, as long as they're contracted out to external studios and not disturbing the work on the main projects, is fine and can keep the IP alive and occupying mindshare while sequels are worked on. Cloud gaming and portables are mostly hardware teams and shouldn't mean too much for the game studios. But the mobile games, they are a problem because they threaten to infect the rest of the company with shitty f2p lootbox-riddled, cash shop bullshit.

 

[Alabtrosmyster]

The Q is going to be launched into oblivion, what a useless piece of garbage. It works hand in hand with the cloud gaming thing.

Now, I am not against cloud gaming as it is now... But don't count on me to grow the market for it.

I hate GaaS, u would like that to not exist at all, but thinking that a business in gaming will not pursue some portion of that pie these days is not realistic. Just be happy you didn't grow up at a time when games were like casinos.

 

[JAHGamer]

All I see from Naughty Dog these days on Twitter is some PC patch announcement or some woke garbage. Neither of which are of interest to reasonably minded console gamers. PC ports out!

Same thing happened with Guerilla and Horizon Zero Dawn PC release, countless tweets of endless PC patches, and PS5 owners had to beg for a 60fps patch for HZD on PS5. What a waste of time, effort, and resources.

 

[ksdixon]

Mostly I wish PC efforts were better realised within a PS5/PS4 Portable ecosystem. Why split lower price with valve's percent, when you could have all that sale yourself? Or why lose anything to PC and tied-into it the portable aspect of various handhelds not made by Sony. I think Valve is making in roads and Sony's too goofed up to see it.

I wish it was paired with a BC/digital service that was worthy. Reliscence games from others and let us have what we in some cases already own.

And I think their GAAS is a travesty it's not already years deep into an assault lead by TLOU Online and SOCOM Remake/Remaster etc.

I'm dismayed at Q Lite seeming to be another not upto par product sent to die on its drawbacks.

Other than that, do whatever, just stop losing 3rd party relationships when people get gobbled up by not you. Do the important stuff before the other things, or at least at the same time.

 

[Nhomnhom]

Eh, it never hurts to be able to pivot in case the market takes a total left turn. GAAS for example doesn't have to entail all the negatives of the EA/Activision/Bungie brand of mtx hell. It could be a simple thing like the ghost of tsushima multiplayer mode that's supported by a battlepass and a mix of unlockable and bought cosmetics. Legacy pc ports, as long as they're contracted out to external studios and not disturbing the work on the main projects, is fine and can keep the IP alive and occupying mindshare while sequels are worked on. Cloud gaming and portables are mostly hardware teams and shouldn't mean too much for the game studios. But the mobile games, they are a problem because they threaten to infect the rest of the company with shitty f2p lootbox-riddled, cash shop bullshit.

All fine in theory but not in practice when you realize they pretty much will have frozen investments in tradicional games between 2019 and 2025.

This will result in a much smaller output of the games I like over time.

 

[JAHGamer]

Mostly I wish PC efforts were better realised within a PS5/PS4 Portable ecosystem. Why split lower price with valve's percent, when you could have all that sale yourself? Or why lose anything to PC and tied-into it the portable aspect of various handhelds not made by Sony. I think Valve is making in roads and Sony's too goofed up to see it.

I wish it was paired with a BC/digital service that was worthy. Reliscence games from others and let us have what we in some cases already own.

And I think their GAAS is a travesty it's not already years deep into an assault lead by TLOU Online and SOCOM Remake/Remaster etc.

I'm dismayed at Q Lite seeming to be another not upto par product sent to die on its drawbacks.

Other than that, do whatever, just stop losing 3rd party relationships when people get gobbled up by not you. Do the important stuff before the other things, or at least at the same time.

Vast majority of PC gamers are fiercely loyal to Steam, if Sony made their own client they'd just be begging for their games to be pirated.

 

[Nhomnhom]

Vast majority of PC gamers are fiercely loyal to Steam, if Sony made their own client they'd just be begging for their games to be pirated.

As if they are not massively pirated already.

They should add Denovo and open their own store with Linux and MacOS support.

Blizzard does fine without their games being on Steam and with always online.

 

[flaccidsnake]

Cancel the "legacy" PC ports initiative, and launch a contemporaneous PC ports initiative.

 

[flaccidsnake]

People advocating DRM in this thread

People handwringing about Steam "taking 30%": guess how much the whole physical+retail pipeline takes. It's like 50% at full price. Do you want console vendors to end physical media? Valve taking a cut for Steam is both a business norm, and completely justified by the quality of Steam itself. Customers and publishers are both getting value from Steam, maybe more than any other digital storefront.

 

[Nhomnhom]

People advocating DRM in this thread

People handwringing about Steam "taking 30%": guess how much the whole physical+retail pipeline takes. It's like 50% at full price. Do you want console vendors to end physical media? Valve taking a cut for Steam is both a business norm, and completely justified by the quality of Steam itself. Customers and publishers are both getting value from Steam, maybe more than any other digital storefront.

Steam games also have DRM. Anti Denuvo people usually are pirates trying to gaslight people.

Pretty much all publishers can protect their games except Sony that has some of the highest profile single player games?

Single player games being heavily pirated leads to more GaaS.

 

[JAHGamer]

As if they are not massively pirated already.

They should add Denovo and open their own store with Linux and MacOS support.

Blizzard does fine without their games being on Steam and with always online.

i meant pirated even more so lol

 

[JAHGamer]

Cancel the "legacy" PC ports initiative, and launch a contemporaneous PC ports initiative.

yeah, make the console even more useless than it already is

 

[flaccidsnake]

yeah, make the console even more useless than it already is

why make up artificial uses for the console? my $70 spends just as well on Steam, maybe better.

 

[JAHGamer]

why make up artificial uses for the console? my $70 spends just as well on Steam, maybe better.

pc gamers become more and more disingenuous by the year, and yall barely buy games at $50, I can't imagine how pitiful the numbers would be at $70

 

[flaccidsnake]

pc gamers become more and more disingenuous by the year, and yall barely buy games at $50, I can't imagine how pitiful the numbers would be at $70

this is kind of deranged, friend.

 

[JAHGamer]

this is kind of deranged, friend.

How?

 

[flaccidsnake]

How?

In any context, it would be a bizarre failure of cognition to blame PC gamers for buying games legally on sales advertised by publishers.

In our actual context, where AAA PC games frequently launch with big delays, broken code, and missing features, it's unhinged to expect PC players to jump on $70 games as soon as they're available. Publishers have some trust-building to do.

 

[JAHGamer]

In any context, it would be a bizarre failure of cognition to blame PC gamers for buying games legally on sales advertised by publishers.

In our actual context, where AAA PC games frequently launch with big delays, broken code, and missing features, it's unhinged to expect PC players to jump on $70 games as soon as they're available. Publishers have some trust-building to do.

Your argument doesn’t hold any weight when Spider-Man was a great port of a great game of an already established character and it still sold terribly. 1/10th the sales it got on PS4. (15m year 1 vs 1.5m on PC)

 

[Alabtrosmyster]

Your argument doesn’t hold any weight when Spider-Man was a great port of a great game of an already established character and it still sold terribly. 1/10th the sales it got on PS4. (15m year 1 vs 1.5m on PC)

These is a point where this becomes reflexive.

Also, I think PC gamers tend to go MMO and other GaaS games. Many still play classic strategy games, which we rarely see on consoles. It's just a very different environment that happens to have many console like games in it.

 

[JAHGamer]

These is a point where this becomes reflexive.

Also, I think PC gamers tend to go MMO and other GaaS games. Many still play classic strategy games, which we rarely see on consoles. It's just a very different environment that happens to have many console like games in it.

I was only responding ?