Microsoft’s spending spree in recent years has somewhat changed the status quo in the first-party forum wars. Sony is still very much home to an elite roster of teams with an unmatched production pipeline, but in terms of scale, Xbox’s acquisition of Bethesda means that PlayStation Studios is now effectively dwarfed by its competitor.
Unlike some armchair analysts, however, the Japanese giant doesn’t appear to be panicking. As part of a Reuters report, boss Jim Ryan explained that the organisation will continue to “organically” grow its studio capability, meaning it’s going to facilitate the expansion of its best teams like Guerrilla Games and Sony Santa Monica.
In addition, Ryan admitted that it may also be possible to “bolster our in-house capability with selective mergers and acquisitions”. As has been the case for some time now, it doesn’t look like the Japanese giant is going to rush out with its cheque book and buy up anyone that’s available; it sounds like it’s going to continue to cherry pick teams that it has an existing relationship with.
We reckon that’s the right decision. Microsoft’s recent moves have certainly turned the industry upside-down, but Sony has been pumping out high-quality first-party content for well over a decade now, and it’s assembled an outstanding launch lineup for the PS5. Clearly it knows what it’s doing here, so let’s just wait and see how things develop over the coming years.
[source reuters.com]
Comments 116
Well they missed out on Leyou Tech to Tencent which would have got them Digital Extreme and Splash Damage.
Rumours are Sony may look to acquire IP's rather then out an out studios and publishers, IPs like Metal Gear and Silent Hill have floated around the rumour mill for example.
Bluepoint (providing Demon's Souls doesn't flop) needs to be signed up soon though before Sony risk losing them.
HOUSEMARQUE AND BLUEPOINT, PLEASE
KonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonamiKonami.
BUY KONAMI, YOU COWARDS!
Or, rather, buy their gaming division or IP...not the whole company, they're too big and make too much in other sectors to sell the whole company, but they're doing f**k all with their gaming IP or their in-house studios.
Hell yea, what else is he gonna say? Thats what Sony can afford is to grow internally and pray MS doesn't buy the rest of the third party publishers.
I wonder what IPs the studios will make (and IPs they'll revive).
Buy nobody. Keep third parties independent. Certainly employ them and publish their games on occasion but there’s no need to buy companies outright. Nintendo have the right idea, working alongside Tecmo Koei, Bandai Namco etc instead of having to buy them first.
@nessisonett Ideally yes but when MS are playing silly buggers Sony might have to make some moves to keep MS away.
@SaikoWaifu2003
Truth. Sony simply can't compete with MS $ for $. I'd still say it'd be smart to nab some of the smaller studios it works closely with, Housemarque for example, but it's not going to be buying Take 2, Sega, Ubisoft, EA, etc, and if MS decides it wants one of those publishers nothing can be done about it.
No brand loyalty here so I have no problem buying an Xbox to get those third party games, although I'd also like to see MS take a more organic approach as well and let these big publishers remain independent. One thing I've always respected about Nintendo, even if I haven't always loved its consoles is how the company has found a niche for itself despite its hardware being strictly a first and second party box since the start of the N64 era.
@AdamNovice Sony getting Metal Gear Solid would be just as good as acquiring a new studio. That is a really exciting rumor! I hope there is some truth to it.
Kojima, Bluepoint and Housemarque.
Any other would be unexpected and not needed.
@nessisonett what about second party that have always made exclusives?
@Jslade I hope so too but the rumour hasn't got much creditability yet but who knows.
@Royalblues Machop can break Mienfoo's legs
@Revengercm They’re second party for a reason. Gives them a measure of independence and control over their own projects. A look at Ubisoft shows the dangers of having so many studios across different countries.
@Royalblues Gen 5 copied gen 1 homework
@nessisonett They have kojima, lucid, bluepoint, housemarque and sumo digital I believe. Would like to know if I missed one.
I think they are still second party because of their games sales.
@Revengercm Clap Hanz who make the Everybody’s Golf series. Not the sexiest of game portfolios but they’re synonymous with Playstation.
@nessisonett Yeah. But I do not think SONY needs to spend millions for everybody's golf haha.
We have to wait for sales and scores of
SackBoy
D. All stars
Returnal
Demon Souls
Kojima's horror game
for sony to consider any of them.
Please just greenlight Bloodborne 2 before Microsoft abducts From Software.
(I wish that joke didn't feel so plausible)
@nessisonett but SONY should not go over 20 studios.
Some current ones need I'mprovement
@Enuo then buy an xbox.
I think with Bluepoint and SONY japan, sony may not need fromsoftware anymore.
@Royalblues Maaaan. I still cannot believe the pokedex is still not fully added with the second expansion. It seems they added more in the 1st expansion because of backslash and once they saw it is the best selling pokemon game, they reduce the pokemon added in the second one.
It makes me sad because I grew up with pokemon. When I barely had any friends during school, I always had pokemon there. Now they are not treating it like they used to.
If Sega ends up in Microsoft, Sony should acquire at least Konami from Japan or even Bandai Namco.
Sony is kinda like the guy that works for things in life and Microsoft is like the rich kid who’s parents buys them nice things. In the end PlayStation will make a name for itself and its products and Xbox will just have flashy things that don’t last.
It's not enough to buy great developers, you have to manage it too, and on that point I don't have much trust in microsoft. I still remember rare go from the darling of nintendo 2nd party studio with golden eye and banjo, to what rare is now 😕
@GeneJacket although Konami doesn't make video games anymore. They still make tons of money on panchinko machines (sorry if I butchered the spelling) in Japan with Konami IP theme. It is virtually impossible outside of buying all of Konami, that Sony can get those IPs. In which case, it isn't worth it.
I think if demon souls does well, Bluepoint should be top of the list to become a first party, they don't even need to make a new IP. Sony has so many IP that are essentially collecting dust right now. They can pick any one, and make a winner for us.
I still wish Sony bought Atlus when they were struggling, not Sega. Don't get me wrong, Sega has done an admirable job allowing Atlus to remain mostly autonomous. But I feel Sony could have really benefited from nabbing a JRPG powerhouse to add to its portfolio while it was still relatively cheap at the time. Now it's impossible.
I honestly don't like either side buying up studios. Especially if they already have established franchises like Bethesda has for example. In the end gamers will be off worse.
@nessisonett @Revengercm You know that "second party" doesn't mean anything? These are independent developers that happen to work closely with Sony.
Also, if they're already working together, there's no reason to outright buy them.
@NomNom i agree. This is why i would love to see sony swoop in to save Level 5 when they have a chance. Beyond Ni No Kuni they were responsible for DQ 8, Rogue Galaxy, Dark Cloud and Dark Chronicle.
Maybe bungie? I'm not a huge Destiny fan but it is popular.
Maybe Rockstar for $50 Billion??????
" have certainly turned the industry upside-down"
Certainly. Because of a game series that comes out every 10 years.
By the time they get that cheque book out, everyone who is decent will have already been bought... Microsoft and others seem to be very keen to buy the best talent and biggest IP’s up and fast.
@Royalblues I did not know that, lol.
Seems rushed, and idk why Nintendo did not push it back. 2019 had a lot of other exclusives.
My favorite ones are either Gale of darkness from gamecube or fire red or emerald.
@louieverr No Japanese company will end up on xbox.
My brother plays no Japanese made games. Even the resident evil and final fantasy. Most xbox users are like that.
Japanese devs would be silly to miss sales from Nintendo and Sony.
Warner Bros was possible but that one is out for a good time.
I doubt any third party publisher would sell. They are all doing better alone. Bethesda was being held by a string that was iD
@Waffles12415 This is very true. Xbox users are green and proud about MS money instead of their talent.
The BEST acquisition that Sony can make is From Software. They already made 2 exclusive PS games, Demon's Souls and Bloodborne. Both games are hugely enjoyed and appreciated despite being exclusives, and both are straight-up console sellers. Getting their hands on the Souls franchise would deal a massive blow to Microsoft.
@Medic_Alert Sometime it's not enough just to leave alone devs, the one managing the 1st party portofolio has to have good instinct about games while it's still in development. Even sony didn't get it right at the start of the gen (knack and the order).
@Octane Except look at supermassive, quantic dream and ready at dawn.
Sooner or later they will leave sony, especially when they no longer need sony. Sony will have yet again find other close related studios to start nurturing, which takes time.
@NomNom That's the point, though. Konami doesn't make games anymore, and seemingly doesn't have any interest in doing so, so they're just sitting on some of the most prestigious, legitimately iconic IP in gaming history.
Contra, Castlevania, Gradius, Pro Evolution Soccer, Suikoden, Zone of the Enders, Lethal Enforcers, Bomberman, DDR, and obviously Metal Gear and Silent Hill...all just sitting on a shelf collecting dust or being bastardized for pachinko machines.
At best, Sony could snatch up those IP wholesale, at worst they could license then from Konami and develop/publish the games themselves, mitigating any risk that Konami might be adverse to.
@Revengercm Damn thats a lot of fantastic games that he is missing.
@Flaming_Kaiser
He either plays Ubisoft, EA, Microsoft, Bethesda, Rockstar or CDPR games.
No Bandai Namco, Square, Koei, Capcom, Sega etc...
No Activision or Warner Bros neither.
I mean it is an American console and they will not get the gamepass-xcloud subs they want if they and their users remain that close minded in taste.
Personally. I want my gaming library to be the most diverse. I may not like indie games, but I have open myself so much this current gen to new experiences. I used to think Souls games were good only because of their difficulty. Boy was I wrong.
I hope in Remedy. Even though they are not praised in mainstrean i really like their craft.
@Revengercm I have the same problem but the other way around the more US/EU big name companies. But its more about the quality then. If they make something i like ill still get it. Bethesda is the worst for me i just dont think their games are that great. I love my weird Japanese games.
@nessisonett to be fair, that engaging third parties to provide content was actually started by Sony in the PS1 era, and it is one they've pursued ever since. So it is hardly "Nintendo's" way or idea. You mention Nintendo's Koei Tecmo partnerships, which is ironic, as it was Sony who originally engaged them to produce games exclusively, starting with things like Dynasty Warriors and culminating with the Nioh franchise recently.
In terms of what Jim Ryan said though? I don't believe a word of it. I hate "rumours" but if various tittle tattle doing the rounds is correct Sony were seriously interested in both Ninja Theory and 4A Games, but missed out on both be wise of their strategy. Their slowly, slowly catchy monkey approach isn't going to work in an industry that is rapidly consolidating and that have serious heavy hitters like Amazon, Google, Facebook and even Apple (yeah it's a thing) moving into town. Sony right now could compete and snap up studios, but if they wait too long they could be looking at empty store shelves. Sony were apparently eying Sanzaru Games too, but I think it was Facebook who just came in and dumped the cash. I think Microsoft's acquisition of ZeniMax was more about Amazon and Google than Sony as well, I think Microsoft are gearing up for that fight.
So do I think Sony "need" to acquire more studios? Actually yes. Because there's a chance if they don't grow their size in terms of exclusive game footprint that they'll become collateral damage in the fight of the tech giants. Hearing the likes of Amazon and Google start to talk about being aggressive in buying up publishers to leverage for their game services means that the likes of Nintendo and Sony need to be more aggressive at staking out their patch, Sony possibly more so because it's more their patch in terms of content Google, Amazon and of course Microsoft are targeting. So while I'd normally say leave third parties independent, seeing more ZeniMax like acquisitions going to the tech giants would spell disaster for the console space for me, because Amazon and Google are definitely not interested in selling us hardware, and I think even Microsoft view it as a chore.
As to whom Sony should target? That becomes a far more difficult question to answer. I do feel there are holes in their line up of studios. The glaring holes being Western RPGs, JRPGs, First Person Shooters and online competitive / co-operative games. Sony have an embarrassment of riches when it comes to dormant IP as well, so acquiring the likes of Sumo Digital and others and growing them into competent studios able to take forward the likes of Sackboy, Sly Cooper or WipEout probably makes the shrewdest financial sense. We won't see Sony buying Capcom, WB Games or Ubisoft, they just don't have the liquid assets to do that, but those publishers are certainly targets for the tech giants, and gamers absolutely should be bracing themselves for these companies being bought out, and the likes of Bungie too.
PS. The mergers comment was interesting given a number of Japanese Studios and publishers (KoeiTecmo, SNK, Level-5, Capcom, Bandai Namco, Platinum and others I'm sure I've forgotten) have recently intimated that a way for them to survive might be via mergers to cut down on duplication of business structures. So hearing Jim Ryan say the same was at first bizarre, but maybe now not so much.
@SirAngry
Its mostly US based multinational companies that lock up everything. We all talk about the Chinese but i dont trust the US one bit. These companies get too big and control us completely.
MS/Apple/Google/Amazon/Disney they buy everything and monopolize everything. I see buying up everything quite a bit different then paying for a game too get developed exclusive.
And lets be honest here the way Sony uses their triple A studio's are quite nice. Not heavy on the MT and with a lot of freedom and trust.
We all know you cant beat big money. And Sony is big but these other big companies can kill them off in a second. How horrible would it have if Nintendo was bought by MS and they where quite close.
Quality>Scale
Sony should of bought kojima.bluepoint.remedy a long time ago.buy other studio.word up son
Xbox need to spend money on their actual owned developers and try and get Halo and gears developer to try and different game idea.
They are just showing off with money and Bethesda. Which goes to show they don’t have faith in the talent of their own studios like Sony does..
Elder scrolls and star field might be massive deals to some but just any BETHESDA game hasn’t really been mind blowing recently!
Dishonored won’t be touched again I doubt, Wolfenstein is coming to an end in my eyes. They did the same with Dishonored and Wolfenstein with both stand alone games. And let’s not talk about Fallout!
Personally I see some form of merger or acquisition of Kadokawa by Sony. Kadokawa’S businesses aligns with Sony’s. If they do that they can further strike a deal with Bandai to own the Dark Souls And Elden Ring IP
Sumo Digital would be a pretty good acquisition, Sackboy looks fantastic. A Sonic Racing Transformed 2 game is something i would love to see from them with some decent money going into it. Transformed was a brilliant kart racer.
@TheAdza they also did crack down 3, which was garbage. Then there is the buggy glitchy mess that was LBP3. They’re a mediocre studio at best. Not worth purchasing
@Rob_230 It's like you read my mind 🥰
This is the perfect time to grab level 5. Idk what is going on with them internally but they are financially tight right now. If not Sony it'll end up being Nintendo.
@GeneJacket by this logic Sony likely only sign an exclusivity agreement to use and publish their IP, not outright own it. It isn't worth it for Sony to acquire Konami.
@GarySan I believe From Software own all their IPs apart from the Sony published Demon's Souls and Bloodborne. Actually maybe Activision own Sekiro. However, I believe Dark Souls and Elden Ring are both From Software owned IPs.
Sony should try and form a partnership with Gearbox.
@Flaming_Kaiser
I think Bethesda has a problem with being appealing.
Elder Scrolls, Fallout, and DOOM will always sell well, but the rest of the games go and sell 1 to a few million.
An example
Dishonored has a weird art style for it to be appealing. Prey has shadows hunting you and you turn into objects.
I am getting Deathloop, but that game will not sell well because of the art style and graphics. All are good games, but I hope they can do something with Arkane. Seems they are stuck.
Evil Within is appealing, but the quality was not that great. Ghostwire looks weird to me. Like a first-person spellcaster.
Wolfstein needs a multiplayer or people will just be satisfied with call of duty or battlefield.
@SirAngry Meh.
They are tech giants but not gaming giants. Any third party publisher that gets bought by any of those so they only have their games on their streaming services is doa for those studios. MS entered the gaming space with Halo, Playstation with their own founded studios.
They will have to create 2 or 3 games and sell them before anything happens.
If they wanted or had a chance of buying publishers, it would have happened already.
@Gamer83 Those companies' shareholders would have to be willing to sell their stake. Bethesda happened because they've had a strong standing with MS for years, so no one is surprised really that it happened despite it being a screwed up thing to do to the industry. However, I doubt Ubisoft, Sega, or EA are interested in being bought out as they are neither struggling nor does it really makes sense for their business. Not to mention there are anti-trust laws that exist for a reason to prevent monopolies. All in all, no, MS can't just buy any company outright.
@AdamNovice I'd like them to reach out to EA and offer to buy BioWare. They're doing sweet sod all with both DA and Mass Effect but both series would thrive on PS.
A man can dream though.
@Mafia_Man19 Gearbox wouldn't be a bad shout. They need a decent FPS studio, but Gearbox seem to have designs on becoming a publisher.
@SuperSaeko I think people are seriously underestimating the the clout Microsoft first party studios now have. It'll take time for Xbox Studios to gel and get into their groove, but I actually expect really good things from them over the next 5 to 6 years. The ZeniMax purchase has the potential to seriously shift the landscape of the gaming industry, but it's down to Microsoft to execute on that promise.
@Rob_230 I suggested Level-5 weeks ago, mainly because it is known they are looking for a partner / merger / buyout as they're not financially secure. There are a fair few Japanese studios in a similar position.
@Col_McCafferty I do wonder whether EA would be willing to part ways with BioWare. There's been a breakdown between the two, and I'd rather EA offloaded them than just shutter them like they did with Visceral Games amongst others.
@Revengercm I think you underestimate the tech industries power / money and desire for monopolization at your own peril. I do not think someone like Amazon buying say Ubisoft would mean Ubisoft are DoA. Both Google and Amazon seem like they're here to stay, and both seemingly are willing to throw money at the industry to buy a seat at the table. Gamers absolutely should fear a fragmentation of gaming content, much like has happened in the movie/TV streaming space.... and I haven't even got onto both Huawei and Tencent who both seem to be toying with the idea of a Chinese console.
@SirAngry
You said it yourself. Too many services. People will not spend on all of them. They will go with the usual 3. Microsoft has nothing to worry about in the streaming space. MS will destroy those 2 in that regard.
Even if Google and amazon bought Ubisoft, they still need the rest of the third party games and people's blessing, if you wanna call it that.
@Revengercm Microsoft has plenty to worry about, both Google and Amazon have consistently spanked Microsoft in spaces they should've already locked down. They're in a strong position, but so to were Internet Explorer, Skype, their server business and many other sectors they've been muscled out of market leading positions in. They currently have no need to be concerned, but as Satya Nadella has said himself Microsoft should absolutely not be complacent. Maybe I have a very different view on things because I've seen the reps and courting both Google and Amazon have done with third parties. Both of their charm offensive games are strong, as are the earnings to be made from their revenue models... plus in terms of actual streaming tech? Stadia and Luna both have a leg up on XCloud right now technically speaking, and I quite like xCloud.
@Gamer83 Microsoft is not going to let their newly purchased studios be independent and put their games on PlayStation. Sony would not have let the studios be independent either, why should Microsoft? 🤣
I would much rather Sony invest in their current studios. SIE has world class developers. That $250 million they invested in Epic would have generated much greater returns invested internally than any ZeniMax purchase ever could.
@SirAngry This is gaming.
No, they do not. They are just scared because of their net worth. Nothing else.
People buy 1, 2, and very rarely 3 consoles or a gaming pc.
Google and Amazon have to steal if anything. I do not see people leaving Xbox or PlayStation because google or amazing has UbiSoft.
@lacerz yes, but more studios in more locations gives access to that particular thing you want.
@lacerz it's not an either or situation. Growing a studio has to be a steady thing, you can't just dump $250m into a studio and say "go employ staff, make more game yes". Doesn't work like that, if you have a successful studio / chemistry an influx of new people can throw all of that out of whack quite quickly.
Whereas buying a team / studio that gas that chemistry nets you the same end result with less if the risk and more value if they have their own technology / IP. That's why I look at some of the studios mentioned and raise an eyebrow. Sony generally by studios with interesting IP, technology or both.
@Revengercm I'm old enough to remember people saying similar things about Sony and Microsoft entering the gaming industry. Sony wouldn't last a year, and Microsoft wouldn't launch a second console.
@SirAngry was way cheaper to enter gaming back then and gaming is more established between the 3 more than ever.
There is only room for so many. That is all I am saying.
People said mobile will take over. All this this is the future talk usually never happens.
@Revengercm it might've been "cheaper" but Amazon and Google have the money. That's the point. In fact money isn't an issue to Amazon, they've been willing to eat billions upon billions in losses just to establish market share. I might be too close to it to see it, but what I see up close is a willingness to throw more money at things than the industry is used to.
This is the rare occasion I actually agree with Jim's stance.
I think a lot of people are reading too much into MS's Bethesda buyout. They have had to resort to nuclear options for building a real first party engine because of past mismanagement. In the OG X-BOX era, they had amazing first party content....they funded and supported development, not just of things like Mass Effect 1 (remember when that was an XB exclusive?) but also big Japanese games like Tales of Vesperia and Blue Dragon. But their problem was they were too hands-off. They didn't actually own most of the IPs they funded and pushed, they worked strictly second party as a publisher. So all the brands they helped foster, they ended up losing to other companies following other acquisitions
And then Matrick happened who actually laid off and shut down nearly all of their own internal studios as part of his wayward strategy.
So coming from the X1 failure, MS has had less than one generation to build a studio system up from almost nothing, from Matrick's ashes, and try to build in some IPs after they basically gave away all the ones they paid for in the past.
It looks oppressive because it is oppressive. Any other company would have had to simply get out of the gaming market years ago after the failure of the X1 and the internal mismanagement of their entire development organization. No other company could really buy their way out of that deep a hole. But I think people keep interpreting it as some spending spree for total industry dominance. In reality it's mostly that spending money is the only way to repair the damage fast enough to right the ship and get back on track, and also fend off the coming onslaught of streaming services from the big data companies. Google sabotaged themselves because that's what Google does. But Amazon and Apple are coming.
I think some "console war" PS fans also miss the bigger picture that having two strong console companies (3 if you include Nintendo) cements the idea of consoles as a product category. If it went the other way and XBox vanished, Sony would also have a much harder case to make for defending the existence of consoles in general while the big data companies move to make it all hosted services. Especially when one of those is one of their own retail partners.
Sony can grow its studios organically because it actually owns IPs, and actually has studios to build on. Past blunders and then Matrick specifically torched all that at MS. They had to rebuild it all in the space of a few years. So they bought a mid-tier publisher. Maybe they'll buy something else big, maybe they won't, but I don't see a bottomless spending spree to gobble the industry happening. Just what they need to anchor their relevance both against Sony & Nintendo but also against the coming streaming war. I'm not nearly as worried about MS buying out the industry as I am about Amazon, Google, and Facebook buying up the industry. One can always buy an XBox to play those games you can't get on other platforms. But do you really want to have to subscribe to Luna & Prime or buy into the Apple ecosystem if you're not already in it to play some games you used to play on a shoehorned phone dock?
Besides, it's not even necessarily about market share in they few years, if you think Amazon, Google, Facebook and Apple don't all have it within n them to be seriously disruptive in the industry you've not seen how they behave in other sectors. Sony need to be on their toes. Neither Amazon or Google need to become market leader to do substantive damage to Sony or Microsoft's gaming businesses.
@NEStalgia I agree, it's what I've been saying. Amazon and Google are here, and trust me, they're going nowhere, if anything they are going to be buying companies too. The fragmentation of the industry is a concern. I'm not worried necessarily about MS, but the big tech firms? Yeah. They concern me. Apple is absolutely coming to play as well.
@SirAngry
It has been a year since this was in the talk.
Tell that to Stadia.
Let them try and steal console gamers.
@Revengercm Yeah but if they wanted to leave Sony, it wouldn't make sense to buy them and force them to work for you. Because they can easily quit and join another studio; and a hostile takeover may only accelerate that process.
Bluepoint doesn't have much to offer in terms of IP, it's only talent. And it's really difficult to buy talent when they can leave just as easily. It may negatively impact the team. They're better off as a standalone company I'd say.
@Octane Maybe they want to be bought by Sony to feel secure, but since sony does not want them, they will go to another publisher and sell their games on 3 platforms.
Exactly. It should be cheap. Sony needs more talent, not IPs.
Insomniac would be worse without Sony. Naughty Dog would probably be worse too. Naughty Dog became ND under Sony. Sony just has that superior game management.
@Octane just like to point out Bluepoint do have a hell of a lot to offer in terms of technology, although your point about hostile takeovers is well made. People in studios can just walk, ask id and Tangoworks... key staff leaving apparently.
@Revengercm you just don't have the perspective I do and that's fine. Not saying you are wrong. However, Google had been courting publishers since 2012, and Amazon not long after that. Ubisoft Games are going day and date to Luna streaming service. That's arguably better than MS and Game Pass but nowhere has really picked that up.
@SirAngry Yep! And then there's Tencent....
One doesn't need to look much farther than all of the above and what they're turning TV & film into to get a glimpse of Christmas Future for the world of video games.
@Revengercm Google's track record with subscription services is spotty at best. It's not their strong suit and many of their launches fail. They're persistent, and Google is a threat, but I don't think Google is necessarily the most realistic threat to marketshare. I do think they're a realistic threat to the industry itself though in terms of changing norms, payment models, etc.
Amazon, Apple, Facebook, however have a terrifying track record of entering a market, undercutting everyone, laying out an onslaught of advertising and product co-placement and rewriting the entire working concept of that industry forever, in a span of a year or two. If they've set their targets on gaming, gaming is in trouble. Amazon is already starting. If you thought Microsoft had a lot of money to throw around to loss-lead, recall that Apple is the world's wealthiest company and already has an iron grip on mass market "gaming" to an entire generation of gamers/potential gamers. And while MS has a history of playing relatively nice, at least post 90's, within their markets Apple, Google, Facebook, and Amazon do not play nice....and arguably do not play legally, but whoever has the gold makes the rules. It's been noted that Apple could buy Disney and Walmart in the same day and not even have to explain the opex blip at the shareholder meeting. Buying EA, Ubisoft, Take 2, or all of the above wouldn't even grossly affect a quarterly.
And all of that ignores Tencent, which by definition is an arm of China's government. Who needs Apple money when you have a whole GDP to spend? They've only recently started entering the Western market in force, but take a look at their activities in Asia over the past decade for a look at their idea of dominance.
Yes, streaming is coming, and it's a threat to Playstation, Nintendo, XBox, and even PC gaming as we know it. Against that backdrop, I'm assuming Jim Ryan is probably XBox's biggest fan. Having a juggernaut like that seriously spending to reinforce the current market dynamic as a buffer between "big data" and your own market would be a very comforting buffer if I was sitting in his chair.
@SirAngry but it is normal for devs to rotate.
@NEStalgia I mentioned Tencent and Huawei earlier on. They're sniffing, make no mistake. I actually think they want a Chinese console. As to Google etc? They could all by Sony in a blink of an eye and not even make a dent in their respective bank balances for very long. Jim Ryan's discussion or mention of mergers is really interesting in the light of some of the players moving into the market, and Epic Games Sweeney and Randy Pitchford at Gearbox all seemingly saying similar things around mergers to stave off the big predators. I do think WB Games, Ubisoft and Capcom are all vulnerable. The lines of Bungie and CDPR too if they (tech giants) wanted to make a splash / statement if intent.
@SirAngry
Ubisoft is very pro streaming. They want games to just be streamed. I do not like them and do not like them that much in general. I think they are the definition of an averages games publisher. I barely listen to them what they have to say.
I am just saying. What incentive is there for me to stream my games? I will lag, miss shots, combos, and whatnot. Nobody wants it. Even if it is a cheaper rental like gamepass, my experience will be worse.
@NEStalgia mmm
Nah. Streaming is no threat
I will quit gaming if that ever happens. Stick with my consoles.
@Revengercm not really sure what your point about rotating Devs is. However, every studio I've worked at tries to maintain what is referred to often times as the spine and brain. Key personnel in positions to maintain the organisation going forward, losing key parts of the brain and spine can literally kill a developer for years.
Hate to say Google and Amazon don't care about you, and that is precisely why you should be concerned. You don't like Ubisoft Games... Good for you. Plenty of people do. Rainbow 6, Assassin's Creed, Far Cry and The Division are all relatively big industry franchises, losing any of them from the PC, PlayStation or Xbox ecosystem would absolutely damage those ecosystems. I hate to break it to you, but the games industry doesn't revolve around you, or even people like you.
@NEStalgia
and I am not giving up God of War for Apple fruit ninja.
Apple can kiss my mtx ass
@SirAngry Nobody is going to stream just for Ubisoft games. Especially if it is streaming.
@SirAngry People cannot afford 3 consoles. It is why you have console fanboys. Much less 4 upcoming streaming services. Third publishers would want to publish their games on all 8 platforms instead of being exclusive to one fragment.
Third publishers want control too.
EA would looove that
@Revengercm facepalm, it's not just Ubisoft Games, there's support from EA, Capcom, Activision, Take Two and pretty much everyone. Plus having actually tested Stadia since Google rolled out better support and Luna a few months ago I have to say I am massively impressed with what I saw. The point isn't about core gamers who'll notice a few ms of latency, it's about shifting a chunk of the 60m or so casual gamers away from places like PlayStation, and expanding the market to new segmentations. Do you think Sony's PlayStation business would look so healthy with it's install base cut by a third? Do you think they could support the first party studios they currently do in that scenario? Looking at their financials and where the money comes from (mostly license fees from third parties) I don't.
@SirAngry I can play those games on consoles, lol. No need to stream them.
You would get it for Ubisoft exclusives, just like it works on consoles.
Add more players to it and you will start to see connection issues. Warzone has them just base pure on playerbase, imagine streaming issues on top of it.
You are ignoring the fact that people want to play the most comfortable way to win games, tournaments etc...
A lot of those casuals are very competitive.
And single player dudes like me, would not want to play games that can and should be played offline.
It is niche.
Tencent would be more successful if they made a console than any of those 4 big companies.
Well xbox was success with almost 50m, but gaming is becoming more expensive to make and we still cap at 100m consoles sales. Sooner or later, yeah. If there are not enough gamers, games will not go that far in quality, or games will remain how they are, which is fine by me.
@Revengercm I think there's no point talking any further to you. The points are sailing so far above your head it's not worth it. For the record I think the infrastructure both Google and Amazon are putting in place are formidable, and as someone with some experience of building netcode for AAA games I'm impressed.
@SirAngry You are not listening to my points either.
You are doing the exact same thing hahahah
@Revengercm no I have listened to them. You think the games industry is you and your tastes. Cool. So explain why things you don't like are popular and financially successful.
@SirAngry but they are not popular and financially successful lol. Stadia failed.
@SirAngry Is their tech so special Sony can't do the same? I mean, I bet ND or Santa Monica can make a brilliant remake, it's just not their priority. Unless Bluepoint has access to some top secret stuff I'm not aware of
@Revengercm Ubisoft. Try and keep up.
Your entire argument is "this is my world view, it is the only world view, and therefore there are no potential problems whatsoever"
I'm trying to get you to see your worldview might not be the only one. A few years back there was no space in the market for other streaming services than Netflix, now look at it.
Also Google do not view Stadia as a failure, it actually worked, and it got better as they rolled out datacenters. It achieved what they wanted, they now need a business plan because their infrastructure and technology is there. Luna is in a different space, they've got the business plan and they now need the infrastructure.
@Octane actually yeah, lol. They've built some damn fine tools. Some of which I'm sure Sony might actually own. Bluepoint are actually a very technically gifted bunch, put a decent design team in their and a good creative director and I do think they'd rapidly get up to speed.
@SirAngry Yours is your own world view too hahahaha
Just because a company has a view, does not mean it will happen.
and I am telling you the reasons why it is only a possibility.
Movies do not have interactivity or longevity. Different things.
Stadia failed. Move on
@SirAngry your world view is simply defined like this.
Money and what a company wants you to believe, hahaha.
@SirAngry
Just remember this. MS is worth x16 what sony and Nintendo are.
Still lost.
I do not see Stadia getting 7.6m new subs before of March 2021 like ps5 consoles will sell. Correct me if I am wrong.
and MS will report xcloud subs like gamepass subs because it it same, even if people are just getting it for gamepass to play their games on consoles.
MS reports numbers in a very fishy way. Battletoads 1 million unique players, but that does not mean they liked and they would have bought it. MS has not reported any game sales for their first party titles.
@Revengercm no, I'm a gamer, my worldview is I like dedicated hardware because it is thus far the best way to play. I however am also a developer of roughly 20 years and I know full well that a majority of gamers just do not care about how they play, where they play, just as long as they can play. They're just looking for value for money, it's why Game Pass subscriptions are growing so rapidly. I'm not blinkered enough not to see that just like Sony bought it's way into the industry in 1995 that significantly larger corporations couldn't do the same now. You apparently are, and that's cool, maybe you're right, just trying to get you to see that it's not just your perspective that is valid, and that large companies even if they aren't runaway successes could still be disruptive to the industry you currently like and change things for the worse for people like you and me. I can see both sides, and that's why a really do feel Sony also need to be aware of the threat posed to their current business model, and act accordingly.
@SirAngry They are fully aware. It is just not the right time to worry. Like I said.
Oh. So you know majority of gamers then? You are just doing the same thing I am doing. We are predicting what will happen. We will not change our minds.
I do not see streaming having 100m subs at the end of this gen and that is where I am basing my prediction off.
@SirAngry Hell. Sony was the one that was the most aware. They made ps now. It has ps4 downloadable games too. Kind of like gamepass.
but nobody cares so sony does not promote that.
Their business model is doing better.
MS did not report profits today for a reason.
@Revengercm yeah actually, having worked for major publisher like EA and Ubisoft and having seen their market research I do think I have an understanding of the market, and the various segmentations, and value is a key driver in the industry. It's why I'm concerned about the rise in prices of next-gen games.
You also completely miss the point about Stadia or Luna or even Game Pass. So Sony sells 7.6m PS5s, those EA analysts I know think it'll be closer to 9m actually, Stadia and Luna don't need to match those figures to substantively damage Sony's business. If just 500k of those same consumers choose to access Ubisofts 3 upcoming games (WD Legion, AC Valhalla and FC6) via Luna, those are lost sales and revenue for Sony. That's the disruption. Sony will lose money on those 7.5 to 9m PS5's. They need everyone to buy games in their ecosystem, just a small proportion choosing to go to other services to get those games dramatically impacts Sony's business plan, and if you don't see or understand that then cool, we agree to disagree.
@SirAngry
Sony, Nintendo or Xbox will not get hurt by losing 500k. or 5m in the long game. Gaming is growing. All 3 consoles are growing.
Those 500k will have to get a ps5 to play with everyone still. Streaming will be good for a thing I am thinking. Converting non gamers to stream gamers to console gamers.
I understand what you are saying brother. I just do not see ms, nin or ps need to worry. Just aware.
You see, by your answer I don't think you do get what I'm saying. Sony don't lose those 500k customers, they lose those sales of games to those customers, and 92 to 96% of Sony's profits come from sales of third party games on their platforms, year depending.
Let's take those, let's say 9m PS5 sales. Those same analysts think roughly 3m of those consumers will also have an XSX. MS is saying roughly a third of their console users will be Game Pass subscribers by March 2021, that might be an overestimate, but growth patterns suggest it's a considerable underestimate, but let's say 1m of those PS5 owners own both systems, and have Game Pass. Any multi-platform games on Game Pass are pretty much guaranteed lost sales on PS5, the very thing Sony rely on.
It all adds up, and reduces their revenue stream, which reduces their ability to act, and their ability to compete within the space. So, Sony need to understand that yes, their current business plan works great, but disruption is coming whether they or you like it or not.
To which I'd like to point out that just because no one cares or cared about PS Now, that doesn't mean people aren't interested in subscription services, just that they aren't interested in Sony's subscription service. The growth of Game Pass proves that they can be popular when the service is good and attractive.
Nintendo won't be harmed as much, because they moved to being primarily supported by their first party studios a couple of generations ago, Sony are nowhere near that position. That is why if they wish to support their current structures, activities and model they do need to look at their two services PS+ and PS Now as well as securing a bigger stream of guaranteed content on their platform. The status quo will lead to diminishing returns and revenue.
@SirAngry I think Huawei wants a Chinese console. Tencent is more or less the "data" arm of Beijing. I'd say the Chinese Facebook, but Facebook is already the Chinese Facebook. They appear to be more interested in spreading their data gathering tendrils and controlling the platform market more invisibly.
It's bad enough what they have been doing through their control of Epic, but when I took notice they started funneling money into Nintendo, that became more worrisome, IMO it makes a bit more transparent where their trajectory is headed.
CDPR may have a saving grace in that they're partially government-owned, themselves, IIRC.
"really do feel Sony also need to be aware of the threat posed to their current business model, and act accordingly."
The unfortunate part here is I see Sony doing the opposite, retreating into old methods and doubling down on them as though by insisting they will work, they will. And in the very short term, they will. It's frustrating to watch how they keep proceeding. Rather than proposing a better value they're trying to position deep into "premium" - I can't imagine that being a winning battle in this environment in the long term. It's a "very Sony solution", and I think they really could use some of their 2012-2015 leadership on deck for this.
@NEStalgia Sony's response to external business threats has always been go luxury / premium.
Hifi - that didn't work out great because they suddenly weren't competing with Phillips but people like Arcam, Cambridge Audio and Rega.
TV / projector - there weren't as many competitors in the premium TV marketplace... because there wasn't much of a market for it and price like Samsung, LG etc. still offered good midrange and low price options, so Sony just ignored market points.
PCs - Their Vaio laptops were actually really well built, with nice features and good solid specifications. Just as they started getting market share they decided they could suddenly charge Apple prices for a Windows based product
You can see similar patterns in their phone, Walkman and camera divisions. I'm not saying they didn't actually offer great products. They absolutely do. I had a Vaio laptop for work, it still bloody works which is more than can be said for its multiple replacements over the intervening decade. The issue is they target smaller markets and try to sweat more out of the smaller customer pool, that's a highly risky strategy.
As someone who sees Sony as the only current co sole manufacturer whose vision of what gaming should look like, that fully aligns with my own, I find their leadership terrifying. Jim Ryan does not instill me with confidence. Not in the slightest. Sony need to change just a little and realise that doing so now will guarantee they remain in control of not only their future, but a market trajectory that still supports the types of gaming experience I want to play and produce.
@SirAngry So, so, soooo painfully true!
In every category, sooooo true. Hifi especially rings true with me. More hysterically they often charged more than the kingpin audio brands do for otherwise nice products that don't really play in the same ballpark. And their cameras. Really nice pieces....some cool tech. But they price themselves waaay out of the market and have a certain niche, only as a result.
One theme that tends to recur with them, you're right, they target that smaller market and try to milk it at high margin, but one thing that's also "classic Sony" is the tend to misunderstand the market when they do, and tend to get most of the touch stones wrong, ending up with an even more niche customer than they initially appear to be targeting. And then they have to charge even more to make it profitable. (Which is why Playstation had to float most of the company last decade....) They see themselves as a prestige brand as a result, rather than seeing that they miss their markets and end up serving only niches at premium.
I think the 2012-2015 executives at PS really "got" it. Well, no, they didn't fully get it. But they got it moreso than is tradition at Sony. The image I'm getting from what we hear and see and the rumors and patterns is basically they've kind of closed up, Nintendo-style, and retreated into ignoring the market, and pulling PS back into that traditional "Sony product"/pattern you describe. Ryan doesn't seem like a bold visionary for the industry. He seems like a please-the-president guy who doesn't actually know the games market. He's comes across as product guy and a company man. And Ken Yoshida is a veeeeeeeery conservative Japanese CFO-turned-president who expects people to say "yes". Not a good combination. Especially when company traditional approach is...well, awful.
Year 1 will be off the charts, which I think will send them the wrong message and they'll think their weaknesses are strengths. I can see them starting to bleed sales for years before they really realize a problem is happening, because the numbers won't reflect the problems initially, and them missing key junctures changes had to be made as a result. I'm not so worried about PS5, I think it will have its own momentum and the problems will remain mostly corporate-facing problems this gen. But my worry if it pans out that way is they'll end up starting PS6 on their back heel without ever realizing they were losing ground, even if it becomes clear to us at some point, and after they've already made a lot of decisions that poison the consumer interest well.
In some ways a monumental thrashing by XB and even Amazon, early on, could be the best thing that could happen to them. I think they need a bucket of ice water on their heads to wake up and reevaluate.
@NomNom I don't expect it to ever happen, but it would absolutely be worthwhile. Sony having exclusive rights to Contra, Castlevania, Silent Hill, Metal Gear, etc., would be MASSIVE for them.
@kingv84
You misinterpreted what I meant. By 'letting studios remain independent' I meant I'd like to see MS stop buying up big name dev houses and publishers. I'm not a fan of watching big companies that don't need to be bought up get bought out by giant tech companies and will be worse if these American conglomerates be it, MS, Amazon or Google start taking over Japanese companies as well and bringing them into 'Western culture.' I'm also not for Sony making these kind of purchases. Small, talented indie studios that may be low on funds and need to be bought out to stay in business? No problem seeing a company step in and make a purchase to save that studio but I'd like see all the big name companies continue to operate on their own.
@SirAngry
Maybe with smaller multiplatform games, yes.
But bigger multiplatform games will not be on xbox day one and people will buy the game where most of their friends are. Plus, devs would prefer to sell their games for 70 instead of gamepass money, unless it is a small unknown dev. Cannot gain a lot of gamepass money if you do no sell consoles neither.
You make a good point, but I do not think Sony should worry that much. They will work harder, which is a plus.
I think sony has the same amount of first party output as nintendo. Both MS and nintendo will lose revenue too if the big 4 enter the gaming space.
@Gamer83 If the publisher does not need to be bought, they will not get bought. They will get much more revenue as gaming grows, game sales are higher than ever and there are less big games coming out, letting others breathe and sell.
Bethesda was starting to have economic problems. Look at their last e3. All they had was doom e.
Realistic:
Housemarque
Bluepoint
Kojima
Konamis ips (silent hill, mgs and castlevania)
Tap here to load 116 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...