Steam is only one PC option but not the ONLY one. PC gamers can buy from Microsoft or play on Game Pass for PC which is linked to Microsoft and Windows store, not Steam.
That's a bit like saying Xbox Sales and/or concurrent players are representative of the overall Console market when it has the smallest Sample size. Roughly 2/3rds of gamers play CoD on Console for example and Steam only accounts for about 6% so the 'majority' either use Game Pass/Windows or Battlenet. CoD has over 20m players monthly but if you only look at Steams data, it would indicate that barely anyone is playing.
Steam maybe on PC but that is NOT the only Option and with MS putting games on Game Pass for PC as well as selling it themselves so people don't necessarily need to buy and play on Steam. Therefore the numbers on Steam are not representative of the entire PC gaming community.
It can't be because of 'boycotting' over the Disc situation as PC is all-digital anyway so I doubt that affected their decision. I am willing to bet that Steam won't be the most popular option to play Doom on PC - Bethesda sell it on their site and are promoting Game Pass PC too and I'd expect both to be more Popular for Doom than Steam.
@NuclearProstate To be honest, I don't check the map that often and won't check it until I've 'explored' the area myself and cleared it anyway of enemies.
I am somewhat of a Completionist on my first Playthrough as I don't tend to want to 'replay' something that soon after playing it - especially not with a backlog to finish and new games I want to play releasing as well. I am enjoying the exploration and using the Map to see areas I've not explored and/or missed treasures as the Gold, Rubies etc are used for upgrading gear. The more I find, the more I can upgrade my gear and that benefits me as I play.
@PegasusActual93 By weak, I didn't mean in terms of Fire-power or enemies slain, I meant weak in terms of damage taken and the fact that it forces you to keep 'zooming' and platforming to avoid enemies and their hits.
In my opinion, Platforming doesn't belong in Doom - it was never a platformer. Doom: The Dark Ages is much more like the OG Dooms in that regard. - although you are a lot more agile.
Each to their own of course but you won't change my opinion about Doom: Eternal and judging by the comments here, it seems others have a similar opinion too. I much prefer Doom: The Dark Ages to Eternal
I wasn't the biggest fan of Doom: Eternal - Doom guy felt 'weak' but also the game had a bigger emphasis on Platforming which I found annoying/frustrating and not what I want/expect from 'Doom' - No double jumping platforming in the OG Dooms!
I've only played the first 4 chapters of Doom: The Dark Ages and whilst the movement is much more grounded, Doom guy is much more a Tank - but still 'agile'. Combat too is a lot more fun and seems more the focus than having to do some crazy platforming to get to a switch to open the next door or get to the next Combat section all whilst having little ammo and lose chunks of health quickly/easily...
I have played every Doom but Eternal is the only one I didn't 'finish' and will likely remain that way for the near future too. I'm really enjoying Doom:DA so far - the Atlan section is very linear but destroying everything you can in one is quite fun but the Combat in general is Superb, solid, brutal and satisfying - what I want from Doom!!
@Ultimapunch 'EVERY' game requires Downloading to get the Software on to your Internal Storage so that it runs 'properly' - whether that means downloading 100% from Disc, from internet or a combination of BOTH.
You do NOT put the disc in and p-play from the disc - the disc is just an access key. Once the game is installed on your internal storage, the 'software' on disc is obsolete, not required etc - at least until you choose to delete the software from your internal storage, then it may have some utility in the future.
The game is over 100MB so it doesn't matter if they put 100MB on Disc or just 10MB, its still going to require the 'rest' to be downloaded and installed (again - that could be 'internet' or a 2nd Disc). Regardless of that though, Discs are JUST a delivery method and the GAME has to be 'downloaded' and installed onto your Internal Storage.
Physical Media has been just a delivery method since the PS4 era as EVERY game since has NOT run from Physical Media. The Disc Drive itself is 'Obsolete' in terms of actual Gaming (hence Consoles with NO disc Drive) - you need SSD's and SSD Data transfer bandwidth nowadays. Doom the Dark Ages won't run from 'disc' and won't even run from a USB connected HDD because it needs to be installed to your SSD.
All Physical media allows you to do is 'sell' the game if you choose to. Unless you keep your Disc and your Hardware in working order, its no more 'preserved' than Digital. Digital purchased may well be 'preserved' better as the next gen may not use disc drives and everyone who bought Digital have their game on their account to download.
I don't hold Physical media in contempt, but I don't put it on a Pedestal either or think it is 'superior' to digital. The ONLY way it is superior is if you want to sell/trade. Otherwise, its basically the same or worse in othjer areas.
I've played the first 3 chapters so far and 100% completed those without any Guides or external sources. Like Previous Doom games, if you look at the map, all the secrets/collectibles etc positions are shown - you just have to work out how to reach them.
@Ultimapunch Most games don't come entirely on disc and/or require you to download patches, updates, additional content/features etc. Once installed on your internal storage, as all games must be, the only reason you need the 'disc' is to prove you still own it to access the software now installed on your System. It doesn't run from or require the disc for 'game' data,
I can't tell you that you should or shouldn't buy just because the Disc isn't big enough to hold all the data and as its 'downloaded' from Disc to your Internal storage, just the same as downloading from the internet. That is something that is going to be an individuals decision to make, but you also have to consider are you concerned about Playing on 'future' Hardware (which may not even have Disc Drives) or likely to keep your PS5 to play these - even if the internet/servers are closed?
Personally I'd prefer a NEW Fallout main game rather than a remake/remaster. I prefer the Fallout series to Elder Scrolls, but I think that comes down more to the different settings - one is Fantasy based with Swords and Sorcery based combat, the other Post apocalypse earth with Guns, explosives etc.
The old games are good but I also think that some issues will still be present unless they are building from scratch and make alterations. Some are design choices, others are perhaps software/engine and/or the way they worked around those for weak hardware etc.
Therefore I'd rather they took what they've learned, what other Devs have achieved and make a 'new' Game that sets a 'new' benchmark for RPG's. Fallout 4 to me felt 'dated' as does Starfield and even Oblivion Remastered does - even if it doesn't look quite as dated as their other games. The graphics may be improved - but the underlying Structure, the design (especially interactions with NPC's etc), the missions/writing etc haven't really evolved.
Its like they take Morrowind or F3 as the Core template for EVERYThing and only change the setting and/or add 'something' like Clunky base building. I'd rather they looked at 'every aspect' from the interactions to the Combat and Innovate/modernise...
I don't own one and have no interest in owning one. For some context, I've owned every Playstation and 'multiple' each generation. Last gen I had a PS4 and then bought the PS4 Pro, the Gen before that I had a the OG PS3 60GB Phat until that got YLOD and so bought a PS4 Slim. I also had a 360, 360 Elite, XB1 VCR, XB1S, XB1X and now a Series X.
So why not a PS5 Pro - well to me, it just isn't worth the extremely 'minor' improvements for the Cost, the lack of a built in Disc Drive and doesn't offer anything that my PS5 doesn't - a slightly sharper, slightly higher visual quality and/or slightly better performance isn't going to make me spend more than £500 on a 'Console' that still requires a Subscription to play ALL my games and all the content I bought.
Id rather spend the money of a PS5 Pro and the next 3-4 yrs of PS+ on a PC or PC upgrade that would offer more tangible gaming benefits...
No game plays from the disc - whether it has 100% of the Code or not. It still has to be downloaded from the disc and installed onto the internal storage to actually 'run'. So does it really matter if you are downloading from Disc, from the internet or a combination of both to get the game 'installed' and therefore playable.
Its no different to downloading a Day 1 Patch to fix many of the issues they didn't fix before they sent the code to be printed on disc. Its still just a delivery system though as whatever 'code' is on the Disc is not used at all when you are playing and the ONLY reason you need to put the disc in is to verify you still own a 'valid' Licence to play. Without the Disc, the game which is now fully installed on your internal storage is 'locked' and cannot be accessed until you put the Disc in.
The only advantage a disc may have in reality is that if you have a metered Internet connection, then downloading from Disc may actually be cheaper or at least not use it your entire Month's quota on downloading from the internet.
The argument about 'offline' does seem somewhat overblown. In the past 20yrs, since Consoles have been connected, I can't think of any extended time when I've had to play 'offline'. The last time any extended issues occurred was probably the PS3 Hack that took PSN down for an extended time.
It really doesn't matter if you download game code from the disc, internet or both before you can play. Everyone these days is connected to the internet and ALL games benefit from being connected (Patches, updates, free content/features/modes etc) so even if the disc had the entire 'game', it often has performance issues, bugs/glitches, missing features etc that were all fixed by downloading from the internet.
@neoxmahi of course MS overpaid for Activision, they had to offer a lot more 'per share' than they were worth and bought ALL shares. Even when their shares went up and stabilised for a while, they still never reached the 'value' that MS paid so overpaid.
As for getting their money back, That doesn't have to happen 'overnight', but as they immediately owned EVERY Legacy ABK IP inc Candy Crush, WoW and sales of Call of Duty and its bundles ALL started earning money for MS. Every game - even games released 'before' MS acquired them, if people bought them after, that's MS money as they own ABK - inc older CoD games that were associated with Playstation.
The difference is that MS is also willing to offer their games Day 1 free via a Subscription Service and so the 'revenue' from those gamers is likely lower than 'selling' it for Full Price in their Store to the 'few' that buy games when 'new' (as in day 1 at their max price vs Sale when its exhausted its own market and trying to get as many 'sales' as possible). And with rising costs, the ONLY market MS can sell to that they currently do not get revenue from, is Playstation (Switch as well but its not quite a direct competitor spec wise)
Microsoft already 'sell' their games Day 1 on PC which is likely a big reason why their console sales are not that high compared to Sony/Nintendo hardware. Xbox hardware is optional in a 'tiered' gaming structure - Cheapest/Cloud, Cheapest Hardware/Series S, 4k Premium Console/Series X, High End/Windows based PC. Therefore the Only market their games are 'not' available in, so can extract money from is Playstation. With Sony, they choose just to release on PC but also have the 'small' Xbox console market to target - should they wish.
In the long term, they'll make that money back and then some - Call of Duty continues to sell well and no doubt make 'billions' on the sale of Cod Points needed to buy Cosmetics and premium rewards in events, sale of Gobblegums to the Zombie players and the Battle Pass buyers too every season. WoW no doubt is still making money and don't forget games like Overwatch 2, Diablo 4 and Tony Hawkes etc that are continuing to make money for MS.
@AgentGuapo the difference is that with 4k Chequerboard you get a full 4k image but its essentially being delivered over two frames so it can look like a 'perfect' 4k image but is more noticeable in motion and/or scene transitions.
1440p on the other hand is less than half the pixel count of 4k so really fine detail - maybe only a pixel or 2 wide at 4k are lost because it's pixels are too 'big' so when its 'upscaled' to fit into a 4k window, it doesn't matter if they use a basic upscaling algorithm or some more complex method, you can't put detail after its been lost. AI may have trained on seeing that screenshot at 4k so maybe able to Artificially Create something very similar looking, close enough to be imperceptible, but if you start with 'fewer' pixels for information, it has to fill in the 'gaps' when its expanded.
With CB rendering - you are getting a '4k' image that's basically a composite of the last and the new frame in an alternating CB pattern and thus you get all the data - its just that the data is delivered over two frames where as 1440p is delivered 'every' frame and then expanded to fit a 2160p window which will soften the finer details due to them being 'lost'.
And this is why MS is basically not releasing games 'physically' on Xbox because only those with a Series X can buy Physical which is the 'smallest' group in terms of players as the Series S outsells the Series X, and with most using Game Pass for 'digital' delivery, some games probably won't sell more than 10k copies in a Physical format.
Physical is just a delivery method as Games haven't actually ran from Physical media on Playstation/Xbox since the PS3/360 gen. For over a decade now, you have to install games to your internal storage before you can play - no different to downloading and installing to SSD from the internet.
Apart from Legacy games and Backwards Compatibility, I wouldn't be surprised if Disc Drives aren't included as standard (like the PS5 Pro) and an 'optional' peripheral for those that have a collection of discs.
A game has to sell a LOT more copies on Disc to cover all the 'extra' costs involved in their manufacture and distribution and with import and global trade in a 'difficult' situation, I can see more publishers dropping Physical sooner - especially on Xbox as Physical sales account for an even lower percentage of sales than Playstation.
Considering that ONLY those who own a Series X, the lowest selling Console to get Gears of War: Reloaded, is the ONLY Xbox console with a Physical media player and so the ONLY gamers that will buy Physical in the 'Xbox/PC' market.
PC and Series S are ALL-Digital Platforms so Gamers won't buy Physical discs they can't use. Also, many of the Series X owners are also Game Pass Subscribers so won't be buying this Physically. Therefore you only have a 'handful' of people on Xbox/PC that are actually interested in buying Physical copies. Its not worth the Costs of Printing, Distributing etc for a small handful of sales when the Majority will buy Digitally or Play via Game Pass.
With Sony, the most popular Console is the Disc Drive version and statistically, a higher percentage buy Physical. It's often ~80% digital sales on Xbox versus ~60% digital sales on Playstation.
Not saying one is better than another, but why spend money on making Physical media if that specific market is buying/playing mostly Digital - after all, its still just a delivery method as Games must be installed to and run from the SSD.
@__Seraph I don't know what you are disagreeing with...
All I said is that it makes sense for MS to release 'old' games on Playstation for the 'Money' from outside their own user base, from people that 'could' have played it on Xbox or PC if they were that inclined to play.
That is money from Playstation gamers that otherwise wouldn't have been coming to Microsoft. The people buying on Playstation are most likely those that wouldn't buy an Xbox (or PC), wouldn't Subscribe to Game Pass on 'any' suitable device, so wouldn't be getting ANY money unless they do release on Playstation.
Forza Motorsport was the MAIN Forza Title that rivalled Gran Turismo. Playground wanted to make an Arcade Racer and used the 'Forza' engine and Licence to give it a 'higher' profile but it was still a spin off from the 'main' event - like they Did with Halo & Halo Wars and Gears of War and Gears Tactics - its a great way to expand the genres of games as these 3 IP's span multiple different genres each - Forza Motorsport is a Sim style racer, Horizon is the Arcade 'spin-off', Halo is an FPS game, Halo Wars an RTS and Halo: Spartan Assault is a top down twin stick shooter - completely different genres.
If MS release Halo Spartan Assault on PS5, that's not the same as releasing Halo: CE for example as Halo: CE is part of the main line series.
I couldn't care less if everything eventually releases on PS too - even if they only have a 6month delay akin to Indiana Jones rather than the 'years' that games like Gears of War, FH5, Sea of Thieves etc. Its no different from Sony selling games like Spider-Man, R&C, Last of Us, God of War etc on PC to extract extra income from PC gamers that won't buy a Playstation just to play the 'few' exclusives they may have some interest in when EVERYTHING else is on their preferred Platform.
I do expect Hellblade 2, South of Midnight and Starfield to be ported 'eventually' - its the ONLY way to maximise profits on those 'IPs'. By the time they do release on Playstation, those games aren't selling Xbox hardware, Game Pass Subs or games anymore - they've been on sale multiple times and if people really wanted to play, they'd have bought years ago.
Therefore its getting money from Playstation users that otherwise would NOT be giving any money to Microsoft. MS themselves are using their own games - like Indiana Jones, South of Midnight, Avowed etc to sell Hardware, Subs etc. The OLD games aren't selling on PC/Xbox anymore so not generating revenue from their own users, so why not sell to those 'outside' to extract money from those they otherwise wouldn't have.
It makes sense to release OLD games on other platforms because they have 'exhausted' their own user base - everyone that has an Xbox/PC would have bought, played and moved on from these so no longer generating revenue. These 'assets' can either continue to make NO money for you or you can release outside your user base to extract as much revenue you can from your 'assets'.
Sony and Nintendo can both release games outside their Platform too if they really wanted but choose not to. They could release Spider-Man on Xbox to extract extra income from that user base - but would rather lose that 'sale' than let MS make a bit of money off their IP...
The Big 3 - Forza Motorsport, Halo: CE and Gears of War have ALL had 'spin-offs' - like Forza Horizon, Halo Wars, Gears Tactics etc and whilst they are bringing Gears of War to PS5 - it is a 20yr old game (nearly) and the first of any 'main' IP.
I can't see MS releasing Forza Motorsport on Playstation - it doesn't make sense to spend money porting to PS when it also has its own first party racer - Gran Turismo (a direct competitor). Let alone all the other 3rd Party offerings - like Project Cars, Grid etc. FH5 is the 'best' Arcade Open World Racer and has no direct Sony made Competitor and very few 3rd Party alternatives to compete with.
Gears of War too is 'unique' but its also a 20yr old game that has already had a 'remaster' a decade ago that has now being updated and ported to Every Platform they can. No one would buy an Xbox just to play this and most will either play the 10yr old 'Ultimate' via BC or if they already Sub to Game Pass, play there.
If you have an Xbox already, its not as if you can't play these games and a lot cheaper options available on Xbox too - even if you choose to buy rather than rent games via Game Pass, these are 'old' games and often on sale...
Since MS have 'expanded' their Portfolio of Studio's and of course IP's, the only 'day 1' releases have been basically 'legacy' IP's - Minecraft, Call of Duty, Doom and Outer Worlds 2. Everything else has been 'exclusive' on Xbox for a period of time, Gears of War will have been 'exclusive' for 19yrs whilst FH5 was 3yrs,.
Its not as if Xbox too hasn't got exclusives - games like South of Midnight, Avowed, Flight Sim 2024, Starfield, Hellblade 2, Forza Motorsport, Halo Infinite etc as well as upcoming releases like Fable, State of Decay 3, Clockwork Revolution, Perfect Dark etc
As someone with both Consoles and Gaming PC's too, I don't really see any issue with Publishers like MS, Sony or Nintendo perhaps reusing their 'Old' IP's to make money on other Platforms - Sony does it with PC by releasing games that are no longer selling Playstation Hardware and game sales have dried up to a trickle to make money from outside their user base.
In essence, its releasing 'older' games that anyone who really wanted to play would already have bought their hardware and the game - so its purely extra money from those people who would never have bought these games anyway. If Playstation gamers really wanted to play Gears, Forza, Halo, Fable etc, they'd have bought an Xbox or maybe Sub to Game Pass on whatever devices they have to play 'cheaply'...
Not to be negative, but 3m, considering the potential market of all those that could have bought, isn't that high after 3m. As a percentage of that potential, 3m would be very small.
No doubt though it sold enough to be profitable. Which to me tells me that games are generally over-priced to be profitable with 'relatively' Low sales. How many PS5 players 'could' buy (over 100m) but maybe only 1-2% bought it which to me isn't 'popular'. 3m may sound a lot, but 99% of PC & PS5/Xbox Console gamers haven't bought or engaged with this game in any capacity.
Congrats on the milestone though! It maybe selling better than they anticipated or expected and with cost of living increases and financial insecurity on a global scale, that is an achievement...
Have played and can still play anytime I want on 'other' platforms so have no interest in buying it just to play it from scratch again on PS5.
It doesn't seem weird to me that FH5 is now on Playstation - its not a 'new' game for a start and with games like Minecraft, Call of Duty, Sea of Thieves, Grounded and numerous others - inc Doom, Outer Worlds 2, ESO/F76 etc all on PS5 (or coming soon), It's no different to seeing games like God of War, Horizon, Spider-Man, Last of Us, R&C etc on Steam (Steamdeck is a Console too btw).
Sonic on a Nintendo was a big thing but the majority of games these days are released 'everywhere'. Its often just a 'few' games a year that are exclusives on Sony/MS so they've had the majority of the SAME games (eventually) on both.
I still don't think MS will port Forza Motorsport as I don't think they'll believe it would be worth it as Sony already has its own competitor (Gran Turismo) so won't sell enough to be worth it. It costs to do all the porting, optimising, licensing, manufacturing, distribution, advertising etc etc before its released. let alone post-release support/upkeep so I don't think 'everything' will be ported, and even if the majority do, I still think they'll be 'exclusive' for some time on Xbox before releasing - even if just a 6month short Delay (like Indy).
MS (I Believe) will end up releasing more games on Playstation this year than Sony will and may even end up with more Games released on PS5 (thanks to owning ABK/Bethesda) than Sony too. After Sonic went to Nintendo, nothing really 'surprises'. MLB has been on Xbox quite a few years now too - even released in Game Pass for the first 3yrs to help establish it....
I don't think so - It's very misleading more than anything.
Playstation gamers are more likely to buy their games in a Physical format compared to Xbox/PC - in fact the the Series X, the ONLY hardware with a Disc Drive, is also the lowest selling hardware meaning that the 'vast' majority on Xbox and ALL those on PC don't even have the option to buy a Physical copy.
Whilst I do appreciate that Sony has 'two' models now that are 'all-digital', both the PS5 Digital and PS5 Pro combined haven't sold more than the PS5 with a Disc drive and the PS5 Pro can add a disc drive so more than 50% can buy Physical whilst on Xbox, that percentage is much, much lower.
Xbox/PC too offer Game Pass. Say what you will about Game Pass, but that gives those Gamers another 'choice' - Pay £70+ for their Games or play them on Game Pass. So not only do they have the Choice to play without Buying, the majority who choose to buy rather than subscribe have 'no' choice but to buy their games Digitally - thus the 'balance' is skewed.
Couple that with the fact Xbox Consoles are 'optional' as ALL MS games are released on PC mening PC gamers don't 'need' to buy an Xbox or risk missing out on exclusives or forced to wait until they are finally released on PC. PC gamers will buy a PS5 - even if its just to play the 1-2 Exclusives a year they really enjoy and/or as a alternative to the 'PC/Xbox' ecosystem they already have access too.
Therefore the Xbox doesn't sell as many Units and as stated, the ONLY Xbox with a Physical Media Player has the lowest numbers of all so the ONLY people that will buy Physical copies of ANY game, will be the 'handful' of Xbox Series X owners that don't subscribe to Game Pass which is a 'very' small subset of the entire Xbox/PC market.
That's why it isn't crazy - but expected. If MS ditch Disc Drives entirely next gen and Sony doesn't, it will have 100% of the 'Physical' sales regardless.
If the majority of Playstation owners had the option to play via PS+ and couldn't buy it Physically if they wanted to play because they own a Digital only Playstation, then I'm sure the split would be more 65/35 (in Sony's favour as the bigger seller console).
@ChrisDeku £300m is different from $300m and actually £300m is what I consider a very conservative estimate based on 30m paying £10 a month - yet over 35m are subscribed with most paying more for 'Ultimate' - the most expensive option but the one that gets you 'Day 1' games on Console, its likely to be closer to £400m a month - that's £'s not $'s.
With £300m coming in every month, they can pay their Studios and all their development costs. Most games are built over years so the 'cost' to develop is spread out over that time. If a game costs £180m to make over 5 years, that's £36m a year or £3m a month - so £300m income a month can keep up to 100 studios making games for Game Pass - but that doesn't count for 3rd Party published games which they also need to 'pay' for.
So technically they don't 'need' to sell because Game Pass revenue can offset the 'cost' to make those games in the first place. Of course they do 'sell' to maximise their IP's profit margins and grow their business. Sales may be pure 'profit'.
Sony probably could have put Concord and Marathon on PS+ too - but Sony are very much a 'Sales' based company and have a different 'belief' over their own products. They believe their product, whether its Hardware (Consoles, TV's etc) or their Games, they consider them 'Premium' and 'better' than ANY other and as such, customers should expect a 'Premium' price tag - PS5 £10 tax because it 'looks' better than the PS4 version despite it being exactly the same Game, story etc. Tv's that cost more than Samsung/LG with 'worse' specs overall - Sony 'think' their Premium so will charge for their games even if they should be F2P - It goes against Sony's own Status and business model.
That's why they will charge a 'premium' for what should be F2P as they believe their games are 'premium' compared to all the F2P options. Sony have always been 'Sales' based - MS have been more Service based in general and that is perhaps the biggest difference in why MS will forego maximum Profit margins (Day 1 sales when the game is most expensive) in favour of Sub fees...
Of course its selling 'faster' on Playstation because on Playstation, Gamers have NO choice but to 'buy' it to play. However, on both Xbox and PC, Gamers also have the option of Game Pass which will affect 'Sales'. Those who Subscribe are less likely to buy - especially at/around launch when its at its most expensive.
They don't 'need' to sell when they have £300m+ coming in 'every' month from Subscribers but of course with 100m+ on Sony's platform, that's a sizeable market to try and get extra revenue from and maximise profits...
Forza Horizon quickly became my Favourite Car Racing game as it blended the Sim style 'Forza/GT' type cars, customisation etc and blended it with more Arcade and 'fun' activities. Since games like Burnout have disappeared, Forza Horizon games have been the only racing games I play nowadays.
FH5 is the latest in a great line of Forza Horizon games and I'm glad that others are now able to experience it. I don't think MS will bother with bringing Forza Motorsport to Playstation - I don't think it will sell well enough to justify the costs of porting and supporting the game as Gran Turismo is more direct Competition and established on Playstation.
Anyway, Great to see more people able to play what I consider to be the best Racing game of its type instead of settling for 3rd rate 'clones' trying to emulate this...
@Athrum You are still missing the point - regardless of whether or not the ALL the content is on the disc, you still have to 'download' it and install to your SSD before you can play - its still just a Delivery system.
You CANNOT play the game from the disc - it must be downloaded and installed to your SSD which makes the disc just a delivery system to get the 'software' on your SSD - the exact same purpose as the internet.
The only thing that 'differs' is the way the licence to access the software is handled - the actual thing you 'puchase'. You Purchase a License to play the software - not the software itself. That is why you need to keep your disc or sign into your account to play to 'verify' you still own a Valid License. The game is 'installed' on your SSD, its played from the SSD, and disc/internet is just a 'delivery' system to install the Software to your SSD!! It doesn't matter if all the game, some or none of the game is on disc, its purpose is to enable you to 'install' the game to your SDD!
@Athrum doesn't change the fact that the disc itself is nothing more than a delivery system as far as the 'software' is concerned. You still don't play the game from the disc and the ONLY reason you need the disc is because it contains the 'licence' to access the Software that has to be installed on your internal storage.
That's also a very small number of games and I bet the majority are not 'new' games at all. I bet most are ports or collections of 'old' games. Games that have already been patched, updated and/or received ALL the post release content/DLC that can all 'fit' on the Bluray disc.
However, the games still need to be 'installed' onto the internal storage, as they have done since the start of the PS4/XB1 era so therefore, the disc is nothing more than a 'delivery' system to 'deliver' the software to the customer's Console - exactly the same as the internet - both require you to download and install the Software to your Console.
The ONLY difference in reality between Physical & Digital is that if you prefer to 'buy' Physical, the licence you purchase is on the disc which you have to put in the disc drive to 'verify' you still own the Licence to play where as Digital, your licence is locked to your account.
Physical doesn't 'preserve' games any better than Digital. They go out of Print, stop being manufactured and the hardware they require does too. You can't go and buy Goldeneye Cartridge for N64 and an N64 to play it on so its NOT preserved and just because I bought Goldeneye on N64, that doesn't let me play it today on current hardware its been ported to. If the Hardware/Cartridge/Disc breaks, you cannot buy a replacement - its not 'preserved'.
I am not a 'Digital Only' defender but that MANY here don't seem to understand that the ONLY reason you have to put the Disc in your console is to 'verify' you still own a Licence to access the Game installed on your internal storage. Its just a 'delivery' system so whether it contains the complete game code or 'not' is 'irrelevant' as you don't play the game on the disc. - the only 'important' thing on the disc is the Licence to play - it could just have a launcher to 'install' from the internet and licence.
The games are installed to your SSD which require a Licence to access - that licence is either on a disc if you buy Physical or locked to your account. Disc Licences are 'general', where as Digital licences are locked to your account and your account only. You must install the software to your SSD so it then comes down to a choice of 'delivery' method - that maybe Disc, disc & internet or just internet but you NEVER play the software on the disc and haven't on PS4 or PS5.
Games don't run from the Disc and haven't since the PS3/360 era. Since the PS4/XB1 era, EVERY game has to be 'installed' to the Internal Storage to run - even more so with this Generation as the SSD has much faster data transfer speeds than a 'bluray' drive.
The disc is 'almost' useless - its just a 'delivery' method, like the internet, so you can 'install' the software (which ALWAYS requires at least an internet connection to update during 'installation' to the SSD) - You cannot 'buy' a Game on Disc these days, put the disc in and be playing within seconds. The ONLY reason you need the Disc post installation, the reason you need to put it in the Disc Drive is to verify you still own the 'licence'' to play the game. With Digital, that Licence is linked to your account.
Even with the entitre game installed on your SSD, you cannot 'play' that game without a valid Licence. The entire game, even if its the most up to date version, will not be playable unless you put the disc in (or sign into your account) - the disc is just a key to unlock 'access' post installation and prior to installation, is nothing more than a distribution method - whether it includes the whole game, part of the game or even just a launcher to install from the internet - you NEVER play the game on the disc anyway!!
Does it matter how much of the content is actually on the disc - the game NEVER runs from the disc anyway so you still have to 'download' and install from the disc regardless. To me, it doesn't make any real difference whether you are downloading from disc or the internet, you can't play until its installed on your SSD.
Games never release 'complete' and/or bug free so there is always a need to be connected.
Hard pass from me - even if free to play! Don't like the artstyle at all - its weird 'cartoony' style with generic hero/characters that no doubt will have seasonal content and season passes and cosmetics and new characters/heros/classes to expand the 'range' of cosmetics - if it survives long enough!
I'm sure the gunplay feels good - it's Bungie, but this isn't Marathon, not the 'Marathon' I want from Bungie, and certainly not the Artstyle I want either and wouldn't want to spend my time in that environment.
It sounds like MW2's 'DMZ' mode but with 'hero's' and a more generic, bland, sci-fi setting and child-friendly colour scheme/aesthetic to try and appeal to the young masses who have the time to invest and money to spend
@JonnyAces Regardless of the terminology that differentiates between Online Multiplayer modes and 'Live Service', Factions was cancelled.
Multiplayer modes these days are more 'live service' than an 'add-on' to a Single Player game too extend its playability/life cycle. They all offer DLC or Seasonal content with countless 'cosmetic' bundles they want to 'sell'. The only difference is that 'live service' tends to add more content 'free' and sell Seasonal Passes/Cosmetic bundles where as traditional MP modes tended to sell DLC Map/Weapon packs and Cosmetics/loot boxes etc but the traditional method split the community between those who bought DLC and those who didn't own the Maps/Weapons.
Therefore I meant that Factions - whether as a Live Service MP or more traditional - has been cancelled. Multi-player games these days are more 'live' service than the traditional MP modes as the whole community don't miss out on new Maps, modes, events, weapons etc and sell Customisation bundles to fund the new content instead of selling the Content and splitting the Community. Therefore any 'Multi-player' only game is likely to be 'live service' so when I say 'live service', I mean a Multi-player only release which Factions was (until it was cancelled).
Have to release it again now the PS5 Pro is out and then release it again once the PS6 releases so you have a version specific to that hardware...
@JonnyAces I doubt you'll get Factions as that was cancelled years ago and no longer planned for release. It, along with a few other Live Service games were cancelled.
You still have Fairgame$ and Marathon to look forward to if Live Services are what you want to play...
I do wonder how long Hardware can survive. I don't know how sustainable it is with all the plastics and other raw materials needed to manufacture and distribute Hardware Globally. Its not just the costs of manufacturing and the Raw materials, but distributing them globally - often with Fossil Fuels too. Not only that, you need 'millions' of each component - millions of Terabytes of SSD storage for example - more than enough to store EVERY game if built into a server instead...
With the infrastructure for streaming improving and the increasing cost of hardware/games, I do wonder whether the 'majority' of gamers will abandon hardware - much like few own VHS/DVD/Bluray Players/media or Record/CD players/media because Digital is far cheaper and/or more accessible (you can watch anywhere, not just the one Screen your Hardware is connected to or listen anywhere too).
Hardware will exist for gaming in the near future at least - but I can see it being very expensive (for those that want the 'best' experience and budget to achieve it - like Movie fanatics and Audiophiles have) and/or 'cheap' (more 'novelty', Retro or child friendly) but maybe won't get all the latest releases.
I can see more and more games relying on streaming - inc Single Player games - for Asset streaming, events, maybe even AI/Physics calculations or even to create more dynamic environments that change/evolve over time.
I can see MS quitting the 'Console' hardware space before Sony/Nintendo but only because Sony/Nintendo need their Hardware to sell their Games and get people into their 'ecosystem'. MS already have their own store and ecosystem on PC and Cloud - all running on their OS, their API etc...
Sony will benefit from this and get 30% from sales in their Digital store - the only place to buy games Digitally on their platform. That's what they get as Platform holder, retailer etc.
All it means is that MS is no different to EA, Ubisoft or other 3rd Party Publishers on Sony's platform, just like Bethesda/ABK Published games were too before MS acquired them.
Sony 'could' release their games on Xbox and sell well too - but Microsoft would expect their '30%' too for games sold through their store etc too - which Sony 'refuse' to do - but will with Steam as they are a '3rd Party Publisher' on that platform - its not their's!
Where is the ONLY market that Microsoft Games (until recently) were not available on? That would be Sony/Nintendo Consoles - the ONLY place they can 'target' for revenue Growth, to get money from gamers they otherwise would not get money from - 70% is still better than nothing they were getting before. Console sales maybe down, but Game 'engagement and sales' are high because they are 'not' just limited to their 'small' (compared to Sony/Nintendo Console sales numbers) Console users to play - Steam sales numbers are Good and 'high' player numbers (yes most maybe because of Game Pass, not 'buying' the game) would indicate they are 'successful' and reviewed well too.
Therefore it makes sense to bring some of their Catalogue to Playstation as a 3rd Party Publisher - in the same way Sony does with Steam/PC. Its got comparable hardware to their Series X, already port and make games for Playstation (Minecraft, Call of Duty, Doom etc) and inherited/Acquired a LOT of Playstation titles - like Fallout 76, ESO, Overwatch, Deathloop etc) so opened the door. Its also the only platform 'currently' they can target for revenue growth as they already compete/offer something on EVERY other Gaming Platform currently.
Whilst the next few months may have quite a few Releases from Microsoft on Playstation, Microsoft are also releasing (or have released) a few 'big' games for their own platform too.
Doom of course is common to both Consoles in terms of release date, but whilst Sony maybe getting FH5, Indy, AoE2 etc, Xbox have Avowed, South of Midnight, Towerborne etc to play.
No doubt Indiana will sell well on PS. It has more than 2x the Console sales so 'should' sell at least twice as many copies, but whether it has the same 'reach', same player numbers as Xbox (and PC) gamers didn't need to buy to play. They may have paid for Game Pass (even just 1 month worth) but that is Consumer choice.
Sales 'revenue' is just one option - but Game Pass is another 'revenue' stream too - 30m paying at least £10 'every' month is £300m a month - before any 'sales' revenue starts coming back in. Theses games may sell 1-2m in the first few months - that's not even close to the revenue coming in from Game Pass. You could also argue, that '£300m+' per month is what paid for those games to be made in the first place - that revenue is paying Devs, paying studios etc to make the game so ANY sales on top is 'pure' profit. They haven't spent £100m developing a product that needs to sell to get that £100m investment back. Game Pass subs have paid that £100m it cost to develop and now get to play 'free' and ANY sale is pure profit.
It's just a different business model but because you have an alternative option on Xbox, Sales alone is meaningless. I'd expect Indiana Jones to sell a LOT more on Playstation, but I expect a higher percentage of Xbox gamers will have played at least the opening section. Would you rather have '2%' of gamers playing your game, but sell enough over time to be 'profitable' or Reach 50% of the gamers and maybe not get as 'much' per gamer for the 'initial' point of access, get more in revenue from DLC/MTX's and not worry about whether or not your game will eventually sell enough to cover the costs and bring in enough revenue to continue making games...
@BecauseBecause Not one game plays directly from the disc and hasn't done since the PS3/360 era. Since the PS4 Gen, ALL games have to be 'installed' to your Hard-drive.
The game code on disc is 'pre-release' game Code and whilst that may well include the entire game, the vast majority rely on Day 1 updates and/or patches. Often numerous features are added 'post' launch too - like Performance modes, additional content etc. Some games aren't 'complete' on the disc too with some requiring a download to install the rest.
So many games these days are quite different from the 'Day 1' version on Disc - inc older Games now playable via BC. Cyberpunk 2077 is a great example of a 'PS4' Single Player game that the disc code is completely obsolete. It needs your hardware to be 'online' to update the Software installed on your Hardware to play.
Once the game is 'installed' to your Hard-drive, the Discs sole purpose is to prove you still own the License Key to access the Game. Sell the disc, you can't access the game despite the Game being installed on your Harddrive. The Disc performs the same function as the internet - its just a 'delivery' system (either the 'early' full game, early partial game (with some download required for the rest) or just a 'launcher' to install the Software from the internet anyway. You are NOT playing the game from the Disc, but from your hard drive, its just a 'key' to unlock access to it.
It doesn't matter if the Disc has ALL the game and its 'perfect' at launch as you'll still have to install it from the Disc to your internal Storage to 'run' from there, not from the Disc itself. The disc may not 'work' on newer Hardware (especially with no disc drive) but you can download games 'delisted' if you had purchased them before they were delisted. Your 'licence' key is attached to your digital profile so don't need a Disc at all.
Discs don't 'preserve' games any better than digital - maybe even worse as discs are only manufactured for a limited time, require specific Hardware (you can't play SM64 Cartridge without a working N64 and Controller - and can't buy any of those 'new' if one breaks, if you can even find a working version now), and of course often only contain pre-release code at best - Virtually every game these days is updated with patches that not only 'fix' bugs, but add features and QoL improvements too.
Games don't PLAY from a Disc - the disc's SOLE purpose is to deliver the Code (or download launcher) and contain your License Key to access the software once installed on your Hard drive.
Until that software is 'installed' on the hardware locally, the game is NOT playable. So you either have to 'download' and install the software via the internet or disc. With Disc also requiring manufacturing, that also means that the code is the 'oldest' if not incomplete and most buggy/broken that requires online to install huge patches and/or additional content.
The Games, regardless of whether or not they are Single player, require 'Online' at the 'installation' stage and at least periodically throughout its life as new patches/fixes, additional content/features etc are provided online and the game may not actually run or be playable without online. Owning a disc is nothing more than a Physical Licence Key to access Software installed on your Consoles Hard drive and does NOT preserve the game as you can't 'play' from the disc and even if it did have the game on it, would not be the same game you played Day 1 with the Day 1 patch and bug fixes.
I can see them bringing Hellblade 2 over at some point - after all the first released on Playstation so there is 'history'.
I can't see them bringing Forza Motorsport despite them bringing Forza Horizon 5 - I think its too 'similar' to Gran Turismo and probably not worth the investment in porting to PS5 for the amount of sales it would likely get.
I'm sure they could release numerous 'old' games that are no longer selling on Xbox, no longer selling Hardware or Subscriptions either so not really making MS money anymore. Halo Master Chief released over a decade ago and as far as I recall, is no longer being 'actively' supported by the Devs. If they bring any 'Gears' game to PS5, maybe the first 'ultimate' edition that was also on PC - but I think a Gears Collection makes more sense as that would bring at least Gears 2 & 3 to PC as well.
Obviously with their Zenimax and ABK acquisition, they have numerous IP's that have been popular on Playstation. Whether they release Day 1 (like Doom) or will release after 'months' of (timed) exclusivity on Xbox (liker Indiana) time will tell.
I still think the majority will be 'older' games - and by older, I only mean that they have released elsewhere (Xbox/PC) and been out at least a week (so not up to 7 days Earlier Access) on that platform. With Game Pass on a 'monthly' plan and MS themselves wanting at least 1 big game a quarter, I can see them delaying releases for at least 3 months on PS so they can use them to sell their own Hardware/Subs.
Indiana Jones isn't selling Xbox Consoles or Game Pass Subscriptions by the time it releases on Playstation - MS are hoping that Avowed, South of Midnight and Doom will sell those and/or keep people subscribed too. Those that wanted to play Indy (or sub to Game Pass) would likely have done so and now its coming to Playstation to sell to those that wouldn't buy an Xbox or Sub to Game Pass anyway so wouldn't get any revenue from them.
I don't think it makes sense for MS to release everything Day 1 on PS but a few months of exclusivity (not a year or more like some Exclusives) makes the most sense. That way, the game is still relatively fresh, it still offers 'some' exclusivity as incentives for MS's ecosystem and can decide which games they think will find success and which maybe won't due to similarities to Sony's own Exclusives.
As we know, MS has quite a few releases coming to Playstation - but most are already playable on Xbox and Xbox has NEW games like Avowed and South of Midnight releasing Exclusively on Xbox as well as games like Fable, Perfect Dark, State of Decay 3, Clockwork Revolution, Gears: E-Day etc in the works too.
I'd like to see Sunset Overdrive on PS but I don't know that is a Microsoft decision. They may have owned the Publishing Rights at one time, but I believe they don't own the IP...
I don't see why Voice Actors should be 'protected' from advancements in technology. I don't see why they can't use AI - especially if the Conversation capability of NPC's become more ad hoc, unscripted so a voice actor isn't reading from a script.
I'm not saying that AI should replace human voices in all situations, but I do believe that AI can and should be used if the Devs/Publisher choose to use it. I don''t see it as any different from other 'industries' from Agriculture and textiles during the industrial revolution to Computers, CNC, Robots etc involved in Manufacturing and/or distribution.
Paid Actors will increase the costs significantly - therefore either take budget away from other aspects or risk becoming 'unprofitable' or over-priced. Same as replacing hundreds of Farm Labourers instead of 'technology' - that led to cheaper Farm produce, same as cheaper clothing/fabrics from the Textile industry...
I doubt games will be 'cheaper' to the Consumer, but they maybe will take more risks, keep more 'jobs' (look at the last year or two) and/or sustain the industry better...
It's not just Ubisoft that are 'sniffing' around as EA and 'others' (maybe Embracer, Sony, TenCent etc) are also interested IF Ubisoft are considering selling some of their IP's - especially those that they don't feel can make and/or make profitably.
Assassin's Creed and probably Far Cry too are not on the table as these are likely two Ubisoft IP's that they can 'rely' on. Maybe Beyond: Good and Evil, Prince of Persia, Watchdogs and even Rayman though maybe Assets they no longer want/need and could sell to save them selling 'Ubisoft'
They've had some 'flops' like Xdefiant, Skull & Bones etc too so they may need to 'sell' some IP's to invest in their Stronger IP's.
Whilst it is 'manipulation', its still going to be in the records as releasing on the 'Official' date, not 2-5 days early.
It's a bit like shops getting their physical media in days before the official launch to ensure they have stock for 'Day 1' or mail order to dispatch in time to arrive on Day 1. If you were 'lucky', you may have got to buy or receive it early - now its just a 'free' bonus that Publishers can offer to encourage gamers to 'pre-order' as the 'bonus' is pointless on Release day. Its 'free' to giveaway - the Game code is often in the hands of Reviewers etc so nothing has had to be developed specifically for this.
If you don't want to play Day 1, let alone 'early', then don't spend money. I don't think it really matters if a 'few' decide to pay for 'Premium' Editions when the game is at its most expensive, often $/£100+, they get to play a few days 'early' like all those reviewers etc. For those that buy the regular 'Standard' $70 to play on Release day, they are still playing on 'Day 1' as that day is the OFFICIAL release day for EVERYONE on that platform!
As more and more games are 'online' - inc 'Single Player' these days as they have some 'online' aspect synced to it - whether it's streaming of some assets/content, Friends times/Drivatars, Shared Map or whatever reason it 'requires' online connection, then there is ALWAYS a risk of 'preserving' access.
Physical too doesn't guarantee its 'preserved' as the hardware its made for is no longer in production and what's left in the world won't last forever. You can't buy a 'new' replacement disc, cartridge as they're no longer made, can't buy a new official Controller or hardware - its up to you to 'keep' your hardware, Software, controllers etc and hope that they keep working when you want to play years or more from now....
I had boxes and boxes and boxes of physical games - mostly on Cassette and old Floppy discs that I had 'preserved' from my BBC/Vic 20 days, through the 64 and 128bit, then 512bit computers, to PC but ALL had to go to the Tip because none of the Hardware was working and couldn't guarantee the Games were still 'fine'. My Son had my N64 and Cartridges as well as my PS1/2 games, but I still have my PS3/PS4/PS5, OGXB/360/XB1/XSX games and Hardware - although I don't think any PS3 controller now holds a charge....
Maybe its because Sony make money from eslop sold in their store - maybe 'more' than the 30% standard charge for digital sales through Sony's storefront.
They can say that these are NOT their games, not harmful to their Hardware, OS or Ecosystem and its more 'choice' for consumers - and of course if people do buy, they'll make money too.
@Max_the_German Streaming is obviously not the 'best' way to play a Game - but it maybe the only option to play certain games in certain situations - like on the go in Public places. Mobiles are not really designed for gaming and their control schemes, but virtually everyone has one, its better than 'nothing' and is the most 'used' device for 'Gaming'
Without being 'snobby' about Games/Gaming, Mobile has the most Gamers - more than Playstation, Xbox and Switch combined. It maybe the 'weakest' in terms of Graphics/performance etc, but its also something virtually everyone has and the 'entry' point.
The entry point for Sony's gaming is the PS5 with the 'Pro' offering slightly better Graphics/Performance at a Cost. Portal too will cost money. MS's 'streaming' service has little/no Hardware cost (if you already have devices like a Mobile or PC/Laptop/tablet...). If you want better quality 'gaming', the more you spend on hardware etc, the better the experience can be.
Whilst it is 'streaming', its not like Microsofts more 'Netflix' style approach where streaming to ANY device from Servers (rather than your OWN console) is more Consumer friendly/accessible.
Sony's require you to buy Sony Hardware to stream from a Sony Platform to another Sony Platform. It maybe 'higher' quality, but maybe that is down to the fact its built solely for Sony Hardware - not suitable for ALL inc Mobile 4G/5G Networks.
Its a 'brand new' release on Playstation hardware - the alternative is to buy an Xbox Series X or PC to play this game at least at the same 'quality' settings which will cost you a lot more.
The fact it's a few years old is irrelevant! Games that are 'delayed' on ANY Platform through whatever marketing/exclusivity deals don't release 'cheaper' when they finally come out and if we look at numerous 'remasters' and ports of older generation games to 'current' hardware, these are often releasing at the same price as the new games. The Last of Us Pt 1 cost more for PS5 than it did when it released on PS3 a decade before...
I'd be more annoyed if the game was launching at a more 'expensive' price than it launched on Xbox but it is the SAME price - yes it may now be available on 'sale' - but its regular price not on sale is the SAME as the PS5 launch. Its still the cheapest way to play FH5 if you only have a Playstation.
@Decimateh-xblz And that is is the 'unique selling point' that Microsoft will have with their Consoles - rather than rely on keeping games away from others to force you to buy their hardware.
The game is still brand new and there has never been a 'Playstation' version that is optimised and working with the PS5 hardware and OS 'correctly'.
You'd expect Sony to charge the same as any other 'new' release when they bring their games to PC for the first time and IF they ever decide to release some games on Xbox to 'maximise' their reach and revenue for some games too, you'd expect them to charge the going rate for 'new' releases - not the price of a '2-5yr old game' on another platform. It's still a 'new' to PS platform - I have Game Pass and Xbox too so I know it's benefits to MS owned IP's/Games - but if I 'prefer' to play on a 'Playstation' because of Controller, hardware design, or whatever, that's the 'price' to play on that hardware and/or 'wait' until you can play it...
It's still the first time its released on Playstation hardware. It's no different from Deathloop or Ghostwire which released on Xbox at the RRP - nott a 'discounted' or lower price just because its an 'old' game. Its still a 'next' gen game that should still look and run well on PS5 and at least 60fps.
It's still a LOT cheaper than buying an Xbox or PC to 'buy' the game for less - yes it maybe available on Game Pass too, but unless you have a Series X or PC, you won't get the equivalent visual quality and performance.
It's a current gen AAA game and soon going to be available on PS5 for the first time. I think its actually priced at the 'same' launch price on Xbox - not the 'current' Price point that Sony and then others have now adopted - $70! No $10 'upgrade' charge for PS5+ versions!!
I won't be buying it - but I don't think it's 'unreasonable' or 'unfair' compared to all other NEW releases (even 'old' games remastered or 'upgraded' to current gen are more expensive than they were when they released). The current price for NEW games is above what Forza Horizon will cost and its still the ONLY way to Play Forza on your PS5. Unless you have other options, it's whether you want to play it 'enough' to pay the asking price - inc waiting for Sales to reach the price point at which you think its worth buying to you.
Go back to 2017 and the landscape was very different - MS only had about 5 Studio's and Sony had more than double. Sony too have added to their Studio's (as well as closed some) - inc Bungie which was a 'Publisher' too - hence cost much more, Insomniac, Housemarque etc. Whilst that may not be the same as 'buying' Zenimax and certainly not ABK, its not as if Sony has been 'idle'
The narrative has still been Xbox has 'NO' games and that was still being said a year or two ago. All that 'money' spent on Studio's, Publishers, IP's etc and NOTHING to show for it. Now it seems Xbox has so many games coming to Sony, let alone the 'exclusives' it has for Xbox (even if just timed) that they can release more games than Sony will for its own Platform.
Its not just the 'numbers' of Studios though, its more the situation we find ourselves in today. It 'seems' like Sony haven't really got a 'lot' coming in the next few years - with numerous projects being cancelled losing 'years' of work.
A decade ago, MS E3 shows would show off many more games than Sony - however, the majority would be 3rd Party or 'indies' so Xbox had 'no' games of their own - now it seems that Sony is in that position. Its not as if Sony themselves don't have 'older' games in their Catalogue they too could 'port' to Xbox as well as PC to make extra Revenue and get more Gamers into their IP's.
From my perspective though, it has never mattered to me that 'others' who prefer to play on a different manufacturers 'box' get to play some of the Games I enjoy on my prefered 'box'.
I could say there is NO point buying a PS5 because EVERYTHING is released on PC - even if you have to wait months/years for Sony to decide its now worth selling to those who wouldn't/didn't buy a PS5 to play it so would get NO revenue at all.
If you really want to play Avowed, Forza Horizon 5, AoE2, Age of Mythology, Hifi Rush, Indiana Jones, Sea of Thieves etc, they have ALL been on Xbox and PC as well as Game Pass. Starfield, South of Midnight, Forza Motorsport, Halo, Gears, MSFS, Fable, Redfall (granted not the best game) etc are all 'Exclusive' on Xbox. Game Pass too isn't on Playstation - that could make Xbox the 'best' value option for Xbox games.
It doesn't bother me that 'other' gamers also get the option to play on their 'preferred' Platform choice rather than 'miss out' or feel forced to buy something they don't want/need (hardware) just to play a Game. I'd prefer a world where you pick Hardware based on your own 'preference', not based on the 'exclusive' content which also means you'll miss out on others 'exclusives'.
Just like Sony is 'boosting' their revenue by releasing games on another platform to get money coming in from 'outside' their Ecosystem, MS is doing the same - but MS own Windows and Windows PC owners are also MS 'customers' and have their own storefront, sell a service on PC and of course don't need to port/optimise etc for other 'PC' sellers like Steam. With PS5, they have to port and optimise for Sony's 'system' and OS/API.
Anyway, as a Playstation 5 owner too, I'm happy to see many Playstation gamers getting to play some of the Xbox games I also enjoy. As a Playstation gamer, I should be more annoyed at Sony for their 'lack' of new Games - MS is likely to be the biggest Publisher, release more games on Playstation than Sony will and have 'more' gamers spending time in 'their' games, the biggest 'player bases', leading to more revenue from DLC/MTX's etc
I guess the narrative about Xbox having 'no' games has now become 'no' exclusives but I'd rather have more games releasing every year than just 1 or 2 'exclusives' I may want to play...
Also might have something to do with the fact that Playstation gamers have no choice but to 'buy' but Xbox/PC gamers have a 'choice' - buy or play on Game Pass and so a high fraction of the players on these 2 platforms are not going to be adding to that 'Sales' data.
Playstation too has a larger player base and with '2:1' numbers of Consoles sold, you'd expect that PS would have 2/3rds vs 1/3rd of the total revenue - assuming that the game is equally as popular on both. If Sony has 100m Consoles and Xbox 50m, both sell to 50% of their Playerbase, Sony sell 50m to Xbox 25m and would be 2/3rds of the revenue generated.
Regardless, only a few games have or appear to release 'Day 1' on PS5 and I don't see it as being that different from Sony releasing their games on PC when they are not selling Hardware/Software anymore. When Indiana Jones comes to PS5, Avowed, South of Midnight or whatever other Xbox 'Exclusive' is selling Hardware/Subs/Software. By the time Spider-Man 2 released on PC, its not selling PS5 hardware or Software anymore so why not sell it to those who won't 'buy' a PS5 to play it??
Comments 5,913
Re: Inquiry Already Underway Over Lacklustre DOOM: The Dark Ages Opening
Steam is only one PC option but not the ONLY one. PC gamers can buy from Microsoft or play on Game Pass for PC which is linked to Microsoft and Windows store, not Steam.
That's a bit like saying Xbox Sales and/or concurrent players are representative of the overall Console market when it has the smallest Sample size. Roughly 2/3rds of gamers play CoD on Console for example and Steam only accounts for about 6% so the 'majority' either use Game Pass/Windows or Battlenet. CoD has over 20m players monthly but if you only look at Steams data, it would indicate that barely anyone is playing.
Steam maybe on PC but that is NOT the only Option and with MS putting games on Game Pass for PC as well as selling it themselves so people don't necessarily need to buy and play on Steam. Therefore the numbers on Steam are not representative of the entire PC gaming community.
It can't be because of 'boycotting' over the Disc situation as PC is all-digital anyway so I doubt that affected their decision. I am willing to bet that Steam won't be the most popular option to play Doom on PC - Bethesda sell it on their site and are promoting Game Pass PC too and I'd expect both to be more Popular for Doom than Steam.
Re: DOOM: The Dark Ages Guide: 100% Collectibles Walkthrough
@NuclearProstate To be honest, I don't check the map that often and won't check it until I've 'explored' the area myself and cleared it anyway of enemies.
I am somewhat of a Completionist on my first Playthrough as I don't tend to want to 'replay' something that soon after playing it - especially not with a backlog to finish and new games I want to play releasing as well. I am enjoying the exploration and using the Map to see areas I've not explored and/or missed treasures as the Gold, Rubies etc are used for upgrading gear. The more I find, the more I can upgrade my gear and that benefits me as I play.
Re: Poll: Are You Playing DOOM: The Dark Ages?
Loving Doom the Dark Ages and have completed the first 8 chapters to 100% so far...
Re: Video: DOOM Gameplay Comparison Shows Decades of Evolution
@PegasusActual93 By weak, I didn't mean in terms of Fire-power or enemies slain, I meant weak in terms of damage taken and the fact that it forces you to keep 'zooming' and platforming to avoid enemies and their hits.
In my opinion, Platforming doesn't belong in Doom - it was never a platformer. Doom: The Dark Ages is much more like the OG Dooms in that regard. - although you are a lot more agile.
Each to their own of course but you won't change my opinion about Doom: Eternal and judging by the comments here, it seems others have a similar opinion too. I much prefer Doom: The Dark Ages to Eternal
Re: Video: DOOM Gameplay Comparison Shows Decades of Evolution
I wasn't the biggest fan of Doom: Eternal - Doom guy felt 'weak' but also the game had a bigger emphasis on Platforming which I found annoying/frustrating and not what I want/expect from 'Doom' - No double jumping platforming in the OG Dooms!
I've only played the first 4 chapters of Doom: The Dark Ages and whilst the movement is much more grounded, Doom guy is much more a Tank - but still 'agile'. Combat too is a lot more fun and seems more the focus than having to do some crazy platforming to get to a switch to open the next door or get to the next Combat section all whilst having little ammo and lose chunks of health quickly/easily...
I have played every Doom but Eternal is the only one I didn't 'finish' and will likely remain that way for the near future too. I'm really enjoying Doom:DA so far - the Atlan section is very linear but destroying everything you can in one is quite fun but the Combat in general is Superb, solid, brutal and satisfying - what I want from Doom!!
Re: DOOM: The Dark Ages Guide: 100% Collectibles Walkthrough
@Ultimapunch 'EVERY' game requires Downloading to get the Software on to your Internal Storage so that it runs 'properly' - whether that means downloading 100% from Disc, from internet or a combination of BOTH.
You do NOT put the disc in and p-play from the disc - the disc is just an access key. Once the game is installed on your internal storage, the 'software' on disc is obsolete, not required etc - at least until you choose to delete the software from your internal storage, then it may have some utility in the future.
The game is over 100MB so it doesn't matter if they put 100MB on Disc or just 10MB, its still going to require the 'rest' to be downloaded and installed (again - that could be 'internet' or a 2nd Disc). Regardless of that though, Discs are JUST a delivery method and the GAME has to be 'downloaded' and installed onto your Internal Storage.
Physical Media has been just a delivery method since the PS4 era as EVERY game since has NOT run from Physical Media. The Disc Drive itself is 'Obsolete' in terms of actual Gaming (hence Consoles with NO disc Drive) - you need SSD's and SSD Data transfer bandwidth nowadays. Doom the Dark Ages won't run from 'disc' and won't even run from a USB connected HDD because it needs to be installed to your SSD.
All Physical media allows you to do is 'sell' the game if you choose to. Unless you keep your Disc and your Hardware in working order, its no more 'preserved' than Digital. Digital purchased may well be 'preserved' better as the next gen may not use disc drives and everyone who bought Digital have their game on their account to download.
I don't hold Physical media in contempt, but I don't put it on a Pedestal either or think it is 'superior' to digital. The ONLY way it is superior is if you want to sell/trade. Otherwise, its basically the same or worse in othjer areas.
Re: DOOM: The Dark Ages Guide: 100% Collectibles Walkthrough
I've played the first 3 chapters so far and 100% completed those without any Guides or external sources. Like Previous Doom games, if you look at the map, all the secrets/collectibles etc positions are shown - you just have to work out how to reach them.
@Ultimapunch Most games don't come entirely on disc and/or require you to download patches, updates, additional content/features etc. Once installed on your internal storage, as all games must be, the only reason you need the 'disc' is to prove you still own it to access the software now installed on your System. It doesn't run from or require the disc for 'game' data,
I can't tell you that you should or shouldn't buy just because the Disc isn't big enough to hold all the data and as its 'downloaded' from Disc to your Internal storage, just the same as downloading from the internet. That is something that is going to be an individuals decision to make, but you also have to consider are you concerned about Playing on 'future' Hardware (which may not even have Disc Drives) or likely to keep your PS5 to play these - even if the internet/servers are closed?
Re: Poll: Which Bethesda RPG Needs an Oblivion-Style Remaster Next?
Personally I'd prefer a NEW Fallout main game rather than a remake/remaster. I prefer the Fallout series to Elder Scrolls, but I think that comes down more to the different settings - one is Fantasy based with Swords and Sorcery based combat, the other Post apocalypse earth with Guns, explosives etc.
The old games are good but I also think that some issues will still be present unless they are building from scratch and make alterations. Some are design choices, others are perhaps software/engine and/or the way they worked around those for weak hardware etc.
Therefore I'd rather they took what they've learned, what other Devs have achieved and make a 'new' Game that sets a 'new' benchmark for RPG's. Fallout 4 to me felt 'dated' as does Starfield and even Oblivion Remastered does - even if it doesn't look quite as dated as their other games. The graphics may be improved - but the underlying Structure, the design (especially interactions with NPC's etc), the missions/writing etc haven't really evolved.
Its like they take Morrowind or F3 as the Core template for EVERYThing and only change the setting and/or add 'something' like Clunky base building. I'd rather they looked at 'every aspect' from the interactions to the Combat and Innovate/modernise...
Re: Talking Point: What Do You Think of the PS5 Pro, Six Months Later?
I don't own one and have no interest in owning one. For some context, I've owned every Playstation and 'multiple' each generation. Last gen I had a PS4 and then bought the PS4 Pro, the Gen before that I had a the OG PS3 60GB Phat until that got YLOD and so bought a PS4 Slim. I also had a 360, 360 Elite, XB1 VCR, XB1S, XB1X and now a Series X.
So why not a PS5 Pro - well to me, it just isn't worth the extremely 'minor' improvements for the Cost, the lack of a built in Disc Drive and doesn't offer anything that my PS5 doesn't - a slightly sharper, slightly higher visual quality and/or slightly better performance isn't going to make me spend more than £500 on a 'Console' that still requires a Subscription to play ALL my games and all the content I bought.
Id rather spend the money of a PS5 Pro and the next 3-4 yrs of PS+ on a PC or PC upgrade that would offer more tangible gaming benefits...
Re: PS5 Fans Furious As Microsoft Ships DOOM: The Dark Ages with Just 85MB on the Disc
No game plays from the disc - whether it has 100% of the Code or not. It still has to be downloaded from the disc and installed onto the internal storage to actually 'run'. So does it really matter if you are downloading from Disc, from the internet or a combination of both to get the game 'installed' and therefore playable.
Its no different to downloading a Day 1 Patch to fix many of the issues they didn't fix before they sent the code to be printed on disc. Its still just a delivery system though as whatever 'code' is on the Disc is not used at all when you are playing and the ONLY reason you need to put the disc in is to verify you still own a 'valid' Licence to play. Without the Disc, the game which is now fully installed on your internal storage is 'locked' and cannot be accessed until you put the Disc in.
The only advantage a disc may have in reality is that if you have a metered Internet connection, then downloading from Disc may actually be cheaper or at least not use it your entire Month's quota on downloading from the internet.
The argument about 'offline' does seem somewhat overblown. In the past 20yrs, since Consoles have been connected, I can't think of any extended time when I've had to play 'offline'. The last time any extended issues occurred was probably the PS3 Hack that took PSN down for an extended time.
It really doesn't matter if you download game code from the disc, internet or both before you can play. Everyone these days is connected to the internet and ALL games benefit from being connected (Patches, updates, free content/features/modes etc) so even if the disc had the entire 'game', it often has performance issues, bugs/glitches, missing features etc that were all fixed by downloading from the internet.
Re: Halo the Final PS5 Holdout of Xbox's Historic Big Three
@neoxmahi of course MS overpaid for Activision, they had to offer a lot more 'per share' than they were worth and bought ALL shares. Even when their shares went up and stabilised for a while, they still never reached the 'value' that MS paid so overpaid.
As for getting their money back, That doesn't have to happen 'overnight', but as they immediately owned EVERY Legacy ABK IP inc Candy Crush, WoW and sales of Call of Duty and its bundles ALL started earning money for MS. Every game - even games released 'before' MS acquired them, if people bought them after, that's MS money as they own ABK - inc older CoD games that were associated with Playstation.
The difference is that MS is also willing to offer their games Day 1 free via a Subscription Service and so the 'revenue' from those gamers is likely lower than 'selling' it for Full Price in their Store to the 'few' that buy games when 'new' (as in day 1 at their max price vs Sale when its exhausted its own market and trying to get as many 'sales' as possible). And with rising costs, the ONLY market MS can sell to that they currently do not get revenue from, is Playstation (Switch as well but its not quite a direct competitor spec wise)
Microsoft already 'sell' their games Day 1 on PC which is likely a big reason why their console sales are not that high compared to Sony/Nintendo hardware. Xbox hardware is optional in a 'tiered' gaming structure - Cheapest/Cloud, Cheapest Hardware/Series S, 4k Premium Console/Series X, High End/Windows based PC. Therefore the Only market their games are 'not' available in, so can extract money from is Playstation. With Sony, they choose just to release on PC but also have the 'small' Xbox console market to target - should they wish.
In the long term, they'll make that money back and then some - Call of Duty continues to sell well and no doubt make 'billions' on the sale of Cod Points needed to buy Cosmetics and premium rewards in events, sale of Gobblegums to the Zombie players and the Battle Pass buyers too every season. WoW no doubt is still making money and don't forget games like Overwatch 2, Diablo 4 and Tony Hawkes etc that are continuing to make money for MS.
Re: Days Gone Remastered PS5 Amplifies the Horror Compared to Its PS4 Predecessor
@AgentGuapo the difference is that with 4k Chequerboard you get a full 4k image but its essentially being delivered over two frames so it can look like a 'perfect' 4k image but is more noticeable in motion and/or scene transitions.
1440p on the other hand is less than half the pixel count of 4k so really fine detail - maybe only a pixel or 2 wide at 4k are lost because it's pixels are too 'big' so when its 'upscaled' to fit into a 4k window, it doesn't matter if they use a basic upscaling algorithm or some more complex method, you can't put detail after its been lost. AI may have trained on seeing that screenshot at 4k so maybe able to Artificially Create something very similar looking, close enough to be imperceptible, but if you start with 'fewer' pixels for information, it has to fill in the 'gaps' when its expanded.
With CB rendering - you are getting a '4k' image that's basically a composite of the last and the new frame in an alternating CB pattern and thus you get all the data - its just that the data is delivered over two frames where as 1440p is delivered 'every' frame and then expanded to fit a 2160p window which will soften the finer details due to them being 'lost'.
Re: Physical Game Sales See Dramatic Drop-Off in UK as Console Market Struggles
And this is why MS is basically not releasing games 'physically' on Xbox because only those with a Series X can buy Physical which is the 'smallest' group in terms of players as the Series S outsells the Series X, and with most using Game Pass for 'digital' delivery, some games probably won't sell more than 10k copies in a Physical format.
Physical is just a delivery method as Games haven't actually ran from Physical media on Playstation/Xbox since the PS3/360 gen. For over a decade now, you have to install games to your internal storage before you can play - no different to downloading and installing to SSD from the internet.
Apart from Legacy games and Backwards Compatibility, I wouldn't be surprised if Disc Drives aren't included as standard (like the PS5 Pro) and an 'optional' peripheral for those that have a collection of discs.
A game has to sell a LOT more copies on Disc to cover all the 'extra' costs involved in their manufacture and distribution and with import and global trade in a 'difficult' situation, I can see more publishers dropping Physical sooner - especially on Xbox as Physical sales account for an even lower percentage of sales than Playstation.
Re: Rumour: Gears of War: Reloaded May Be Getting a Physical PS5 Release, No Word on Xbox
Considering that ONLY those who own a Series X, the lowest selling Console to get Gears of War: Reloaded, is the ONLY Xbox console with a Physical media player and so the ONLY gamers that will buy Physical in the 'Xbox/PC' market.
PC and Series S are ALL-Digital Platforms so Gamers won't buy Physical discs they can't use. Also, many of the Series X owners are also Game Pass Subscribers so won't be buying this Physically. Therefore you only have a 'handful' of people on Xbox/PC that are actually interested in buying Physical copies. Its not worth the Costs of Printing, Distributing etc for a small handful of sales when the Majority will buy Digitally or Play via Game Pass.
With Sony, the most popular Console is the Disc Drive version and statistically, a higher percentage buy Physical. It's often ~80% digital sales on Xbox versus ~60% digital sales on Playstation.
Not saying one is better than another, but why spend money on making Physical media if that specific market is buying/playing mostly Digital - after all, its still just a delivery method as Games must be installed to and run from the SSD.
Re: Halo the Final PS5 Holdout of Xbox's Historic Big Three
@__Seraph I don't know what you are disagreeing with...
All I said is that it makes sense for MS to release 'old' games on Playstation for the 'Money' from outside their own user base, from people that 'could' have played it on Xbox or PC if they were that inclined to play.
That is money from Playstation gamers that otherwise wouldn't have been coming to Microsoft. The people buying on Playstation are most likely those that wouldn't buy an Xbox (or PC), wouldn't Subscribe to Game Pass on 'any' suitable device, so wouldn't be getting ANY money unless they do release on Playstation.
Forza Motorsport was the MAIN Forza Title that rivalled Gran Turismo. Playground wanted to make an Arcade Racer and used the 'Forza' engine and Licence to give it a 'higher' profile but it was still a spin off from the 'main' event - like they Did with Halo & Halo Wars and Gears of War and Gears Tactics - its a great way to expand the genres of games as these 3 IP's span multiple different genres each - Forza Motorsport is a Sim style racer, Horizon is the Arcade 'spin-off', Halo is an FPS game, Halo Wars an RTS and Halo: Spartan Assault is a top down twin stick shooter - completely different genres.
If MS release Halo Spartan Assault on PS5, that's not the same as releasing Halo: CE for example as Halo: CE is part of the main line series.
I couldn't care less if everything eventually releases on PS too - even if they only have a 6month delay akin to Indiana Jones rather than the 'years' that games like Gears of War, FH5, Sea of Thieves etc. Its no different from Sony selling games like Spider-Man, R&C, Last of Us, God of War etc on PC to extract extra income from PC gamers that won't buy a Playstation just to play the 'few' exclusives they may have some interest in when EVERYTHING else is on their preferred Platform.
I do expect Hellblade 2, South of Midnight and Starfield to be ported 'eventually' - its the ONLY way to maximise profits on those 'IPs'. By the time they do release on Playstation, those games aren't selling Xbox hardware, Game Pass Subs or games anymore - they've been on sale multiple times and if people really wanted to play, they'd have bought years ago.
Therefore its getting money from Playstation users that otherwise would NOT be giving any money to Microsoft. MS themselves are using their own games - like Indiana Jones, South of Midnight, Avowed etc to sell Hardware, Subs etc. The OLD games aren't selling on PC/Xbox anymore so not generating revenue from their own users, so why not sell to those 'outside' to extract money from those they otherwise wouldn't have.
It makes sense to release OLD games on other platforms because they have 'exhausted' their own user base - everyone that has an Xbox/PC would have bought, played and moved on from these so no longer generating revenue. These 'assets' can either continue to make NO money for you or you can release outside your user base to extract as much revenue you can from your 'assets'.
Sony and Nintendo can both release games outside their Platform too if they really wanted but choose not to. They could release Spider-Man on Xbox to extract extra income from that user base - but would rather lose that 'sale' than let MS make a bit of money off their IP...
Re: Halo the Final PS5 Holdout of Xbox's Historic Big Three
The Big 3 - Forza Motorsport, Halo: CE and Gears of War have ALL had 'spin-offs' - like Forza Horizon, Halo Wars, Gears Tactics etc and whilst they are bringing Gears of War to PS5 - it is a 20yr old game (nearly) and the first of any 'main' IP.
I can't see MS releasing Forza Motorsport on Playstation - it doesn't make sense to spend money porting to PS when it also has its own first party racer - Gran Turismo (a direct competitor). Let alone all the other 3rd Party offerings - like Project Cars, Grid etc. FH5 is the 'best' Arcade Open World Racer and has no direct Sony made Competitor and very few 3rd Party alternatives to compete with.
Gears of War too is 'unique' but its also a 20yr old game that has already had a 'remaster' a decade ago that has now being updated and ported to Every Platform they can. No one would buy an Xbox just to play this and most will either play the 10yr old 'Ultimate' via BC or if they already Sub to Game Pass, play there.
If you have an Xbox already, its not as if you can't play these games and a lot cheaper options available on Xbox too - even if you choose to buy rather than rent games via Game Pass, these are 'old' games and often on sale...
Since MS have 'expanded' their Portfolio of Studio's and of course IP's, the only 'day 1' releases have been basically 'legacy' IP's - Minecraft, Call of Duty, Doom and Outer Worlds 2. Everything else has been 'exclusive' on Xbox for a period of time, Gears of War will have been 'exclusive' for 19yrs whilst FH5 was 3yrs,.
Its not as if Xbox too hasn't got exclusives - games like South of Midnight, Avowed, Flight Sim 2024, Starfield, Hellblade 2, Forza Motorsport, Halo Infinite etc as well as upcoming releases like Fable, State of Decay 3, Clockwork Revolution, Perfect Dark etc
As someone with both Consoles and Gaming PC's too, I don't really see any issue with Publishers like MS, Sony or Nintendo perhaps reusing their 'Old' IP's to make money on other Platforms - Sony does it with PC by releasing games that are no longer selling Playstation Hardware and game sales have dried up to a trickle to make money from outside their user base.
In essence, its releasing 'older' games that anyone who really wanted to play would already have bought their hardware and the game - so its purely extra money from those people who would never have bought these games anyway. If Playstation gamers really wanted to play Gears, Forza, Halo, Fable etc, they'd have bought an Xbox or maybe Sub to Game Pass on whatever devices they have to play 'cheaply'...
Re: Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2 Tops 3 Million Sales in Three Months
Not to be negative, but 3m, considering the potential market of all those that could have bought, isn't that high after 3m. As a percentage of that potential, 3m would be very small.
No doubt though it sold enough to be profitable. Which to me tells me that games are generally over-priced to be profitable with 'relatively' Low sales. How many PS5 players 'could' buy (over 100m) but maybe only 1-2% bought it which to me isn't 'popular'. 3m may sound a lot, but 99% of PC & PS5/Xbox Console gamers haven't bought or engaged with this game in any capacity.
Congrats on the milestone though! It maybe selling better than they anticipated or expected and with cost of living increases and financial insecurity on a global scale, that is an achievement...
Re: Poll: Are You Playing Forza Horizon 5 on PS5?
Have played and can still play anytime I want on 'other' platforms so have no interest in buying it just to play it from scratch again on PS5.
It doesn't seem weird to me that FH5 is now on Playstation - its not a 'new' game for a start and with games like Minecraft, Call of Duty, Sea of Thieves, Grounded and numerous others - inc Doom, Outer Worlds 2, ESO/F76 etc all on PS5 (or coming soon), It's no different to seeing games like God of War, Horizon, Spider-Man, Last of Us, R&C etc on Steam (Steamdeck is a Console too btw).
Sonic on a Nintendo was a big thing but the majority of games these days are released 'everywhere'. Its often just a 'few' games a year that are exclusives on Sony/MS so they've had the majority of the SAME games (eventually) on both.
I still don't think MS will port Forza Motorsport as I don't think they'll believe it would be worth it as Sony already has its own competitor (Gran Turismo) so won't sell enough to be worth it. It costs to do all the porting, optimising, licensing, manufacturing, distribution, advertising etc etc before its released. let alone post-release support/upkeep so I don't think 'everything' will be ported, and even if the majority do, I still think they'll be 'exclusive' for some time on Xbox before releasing - even if just a 6month short Delay (like Indy).
MS (I Believe) will end up releasing more games on Playstation this year than Sony will and may even end up with more Games released on PS5 (thanks to owning ABK/Bethesda) than Sony too. After Sonic went to Nintendo, nothing really 'surprises'. MLB has been on Xbox quite a few years now too - even released in Game Pass for the first 3yrs to help establish it....
Re: UK Sales Charts: Expedition 33 Debuts in Second Place, Almost All Sales for PS5 Version
I don't think so - It's very misleading more than anything.
Playstation gamers are more likely to buy their games in a Physical format compared to Xbox/PC - in fact the the Series X, the ONLY hardware with a Disc Drive, is also the lowest selling hardware meaning that the 'vast' majority on Xbox and ALL those on PC don't even have the option to buy a Physical copy.
Whilst I do appreciate that Sony has 'two' models now that are 'all-digital', both the PS5 Digital and PS5 Pro combined haven't sold more than the PS5 with a Disc drive and the PS5 Pro can add a disc drive so more than 50% can buy Physical whilst on Xbox, that percentage is much, much lower.
Xbox/PC too offer Game Pass. Say what you will about Game Pass, but that gives those Gamers another 'choice' - Pay £70+ for their Games or play them on Game Pass. So not only do they have the Choice to play without Buying, the majority who choose to buy rather than subscribe have 'no' choice but to buy their games Digitally - thus the 'balance' is skewed.
Couple that with the fact Xbox Consoles are 'optional' as ALL MS games are released on PC mening PC gamers don't 'need' to buy an Xbox or risk missing out on exclusives or forced to wait until they are finally released on PC. PC gamers will buy a PS5 - even if its just to play the 1-2 Exclusives a year they really enjoy and/or as a alternative to the 'PC/Xbox' ecosystem they already have access too.
Therefore the Xbox doesn't sell as many Units and as stated, the ONLY Xbox with a Physical Media Player has the lowest numbers of all so the ONLY people that will buy Physical copies of ANY game, will be the 'handful' of Xbox Series X owners that don't subscribe to Game Pass which is a 'very' small subset of the entire Xbox/PC market.
That's why it isn't crazy - but expected. If MS ditch Disc Drives entirely next gen and Sony doesn't, it will have 100% of the 'Physical' sales regardless.
If the majority of Playstation owners had the option to play via PS+ and couldn't buy it Physically if they wanted to play because they own a Digital only Playstation, then I'm sure the split would be more 65/35 (in Sony's favour as the bigger seller console).
Re: Indiana Jones PS5 Is Selling Faster Than on Xbox and PC, Claims Analysts
@ChrisDeku £300m is different from $300m and actually £300m is what I consider a very conservative estimate based on 30m paying £10 a month - yet over 35m are subscribed with most paying more for 'Ultimate' - the most expensive option but the one that gets you 'Day 1' games on Console, its likely to be closer to £400m a month - that's £'s not $'s.
With £300m coming in every month, they can pay their Studios and all their development costs. Most games are built over years so the 'cost' to develop is spread out over that time. If a game costs £180m to make over 5 years, that's £36m a year or £3m a month - so £300m income a month can keep up to 100 studios making games for Game Pass - but that doesn't count for 3rd Party published games which they also need to 'pay' for.
So technically they don't 'need' to sell because Game Pass revenue can offset the 'cost' to make those games in the first place. Of course they do 'sell' to maximise their IP's profit margins and grow their business. Sales may be pure 'profit'.
Sony probably could have put Concord and Marathon on PS+ too - but Sony are very much a 'Sales' based company and have a different 'belief' over their own products. They believe their product, whether its Hardware (Consoles, TV's etc) or their Games, they consider them 'Premium' and 'better' than ANY other and as such, customers should expect a 'Premium' price tag - PS5 £10 tax because it 'looks' better than the PS4 version despite it being exactly the same Game, story etc. Tv's that cost more than Samsung/LG with 'worse' specs overall - Sony 'think' their Premium so will charge for their games even if they should be F2P - It goes against Sony's own Status and business model.
That's why they will charge a 'premium' for what should be F2P as they believe their games are 'premium' compared to all the F2P options. Sony have always been 'Sales' based - MS have been more Service based in general and that is perhaps the biggest difference in why MS will forego maximum Profit margins (Day 1 sales when the game is most expensive) in favour of Sub fees...
Re: Indiana Jones PS5 Is Selling Faster Than on Xbox and PC, Claims Analysts
Of course its selling 'faster' on Playstation because on Playstation, Gamers have NO choice but to 'buy' it to play. However, on both Xbox and PC, Gamers also have the option of Game Pass which will affect 'Sales'. Those who Subscribe are less likely to buy - especially at/around launch when its at its most expensive.
They don't 'need' to sell when they have £300m+ coming in 'every' month from Subscribers but of course with 100m+ on Sony's platform, that's a sizeable market to try and get extra revenue from and maximise profits...
Re: Forza Horizon 5 (PS5) - Xbox Had the Best Open World Racer All This Time
Forza Horizon quickly became my Favourite Car Racing game as it blended the Sim style 'Forza/GT' type cars, customisation etc and blended it with more Arcade and 'fun' activities. Since games like Burnout have disappeared, Forza Horizon games have been the only racing games I play nowadays.
FH5 is the latest in a great line of Forza Horizon games and I'm glad that others are now able to experience it. I don't think MS will bother with bringing Forza Motorsport to Playstation - I don't think it will sell well enough to justify the costs of porting and supporting the game as Gran Turismo is more direct Competition and established on Playstation.
Anyway, Great to see more people able to play what I consider to be the best Racing game of its type instead of settling for 3rd rate 'clones' trying to emulate this...
Re: Microsoft Short Changes Indiana Jones PS5 by Only Putting 20GB on the Blu-ray
@Athrum You are still missing the point - regardless of whether or not the ALL the content is on the disc, you still have to 'download' it and install to your SSD before you can play - its still just a Delivery system.
You CANNOT play the game from the disc - it must be downloaded and installed to your SSD which makes the disc just a delivery system to get the 'software' on your SSD - the exact same purpose as the internet.
The only thing that 'differs' is the way the licence to access the software is handled - the actual thing you 'puchase'. You Purchase a License to play the software - not the software itself. That is why you need to keep your disc or sign into your account to play to 'verify' you still own a Valid License. The game is 'installed' on your SSD, its played from the SSD, and disc/internet is just a 'delivery' system to install the Software to your SSD!! It doesn't matter if all the game, some or none of the game is on disc, its purpose is to enable you to 'install' the game to your SDD!
Re: Microsoft Short Changes Indiana Jones PS5 by Only Putting 20GB on the Blu-ray
@Athrum doesn't change the fact that the disc itself is nothing more than a delivery system as far as the 'software' is concerned. You still don't play the game from the disc and the ONLY reason you need the disc is because it contains the 'licence' to access the Software that has to be installed on your internal storage.
That's also a very small number of games and I bet the majority are not 'new' games at all. I bet most are ports or collections of 'old' games. Games that have already been patched, updated and/or received ALL the post release content/DLC that can all 'fit' on the Bluray disc.
However, the games still need to be 'installed' onto the internal storage, as they have done since the start of the PS4/XB1 era so therefore, the disc is nothing more than a 'delivery' system to 'deliver' the software to the customer's Console - exactly the same as the internet - both require you to download and install the Software to your Console.
The ONLY difference in reality between Physical & Digital is that if you prefer to 'buy' Physical, the licence you purchase is on the disc which you have to put in the disc drive to 'verify' you still own the Licence to play where as Digital, your licence is locked to your account.
Physical doesn't 'preserve' games any better than Digital. They go out of Print, stop being manufactured and the hardware they require does too. You can't go and buy Goldeneye Cartridge for N64 and an N64 to play it on so its NOT preserved and just because I bought Goldeneye on N64, that doesn't let me play it today on current hardware its been ported to. If the Hardware/Cartridge/Disc breaks, you cannot buy a replacement - its not 'preserved'.
I am not a 'Digital Only' defender but that MANY here don't seem to understand that the ONLY reason you have to put the Disc in your console is to 'verify' you still own a Licence to access the Game installed on your internal storage. Its just a 'delivery' system so whether it contains the complete game code or 'not' is 'irrelevant' as you don't play the game on the disc. - the only 'important' thing on the disc is the Licence to play - it could just have a launcher to 'install' from the internet and licence.
The games are installed to your SSD which require a Licence to access - that licence is either on a disc if you buy Physical or locked to your account. Disc Licences are 'general', where as Digital licences are locked to your account and your account only. You must install the software to your SSD so it then comes down to a choice of 'delivery' method - that maybe Disc, disc & internet or just internet but you NEVER play the software on the disc and haven't on PS4 or PS5.
Re: Microsoft Short Changes Indiana Jones PS5 by Only Putting 20GB on the Blu-ray
Games don't run from the Disc and haven't since the PS3/360 era. Since the PS4/XB1 era, EVERY game has to be 'installed' to the Internal Storage to run - even more so with this Generation as the SSD has much faster data transfer speeds than a 'bluray' drive.
The disc is 'almost' useless - its just a 'delivery' method, like the internet, so you can 'install' the software (which ALWAYS requires at least an internet connection to update during 'installation' to the SSD) - You cannot 'buy' a Game on Disc these days, put the disc in and be playing within seconds. The ONLY reason you need the Disc post installation, the reason you need to put it in the Disc Drive is to verify you still own the 'licence'' to play the game. With Digital, that Licence is linked to your account.
Even with the entitre game installed on your SSD, you cannot 'play' that game without a valid Licence. The entire game, even if its the most up to date version, will not be playable unless you put the disc in (or sign into your account) - the disc is just a key to unlock 'access' post installation and prior to installation, is nothing more than a distribution method - whether it includes the whole game, part of the game or even just a launcher to install from the internet - you NEVER play the game on the disc anyway!!
Re: Microsoft Short Changes Indiana Jones PS5 by Only Putting 20GB on the Blu-ray
Does it matter how much of the content is actually on the disc - the game NEVER runs from the disc anyway so you still have to 'download' and install from the disc regardless. To me, it doesn't make any real difference whether you are downloading from disc or the internet, you can't play until its installed on your SSD.
Games never release 'complete' and/or bug free so there is always a need to be connected.
Re: Marathon a 'Premium', Paid for Game on PS5, But It's Not $70
Hard pass from me - even if free to play! Don't like the artstyle at all - its weird 'cartoony' style with generic hero/characters that no doubt will have seasonal content and season passes and cosmetics and new characters/heros/classes to expand the 'range' of cosmetics - if it survives long enough!
I'm sure the gunplay feels good - it's Bungie, but this isn't Marathon, not the 'Marathon' I want from Bungie, and certainly not the Artstyle I want either and wouldn't want to spend my time in that environment.
It sounds like MW2's 'DMZ' mode but with 'hero's' and a more generic, bland, sci-fi setting and child-friendly colour scheme/aesthetic to try and appeal to the young masses who have the time to invest and money to spend
Re: Sony Reportedly Gearing Up to Sell You The Last of Us on PS5 One More Time
@JonnyAces Regardless of the terminology that differentiates between Online Multiplayer modes and 'Live Service', Factions was cancelled.
Multiplayer modes these days are more 'live service' than an 'add-on' to a Single Player game too extend its playability/life cycle. They all offer DLC or Seasonal content with countless 'cosmetic' bundles they want to 'sell'. The only difference is that 'live service' tends to add more content 'free' and sell Seasonal Passes/Cosmetic bundles where as traditional MP modes tended to sell DLC Map/Weapon packs and Cosmetics/loot boxes etc but the traditional method split the community between those who bought DLC and those who didn't own the Maps/Weapons.
Therefore I meant that Factions - whether as a Live Service MP or more traditional - has been cancelled. Multi-player games these days are more 'live' service than the traditional MP modes as the whole community don't miss out on new Maps, modes, events, weapons etc and sell Customisation bundles to fund the new content instead of selling the Content and splitting the Community. Therefore any 'Multi-player' only game is likely to be 'live service' so when I say 'live service', I mean a Multi-player only release which Factions was (until it was cancelled).
Re: Sony Reportedly Gearing Up to Sell You The Last of Us on PS5 One More Time
Have to release it again now the PS5 Pro is out and then release it again once the PS6 releases so you have a version specific to that hardware...
@JonnyAces I doubt you'll get Factions as that was cancelled years ago and no longer planned for release. It, along with a few other Live Service games were cancelled.
You still have Fairgame$ and Marathon to look forward to if Live Services are what you want to play...
Re: Kids Aren't Dreaming of Owning a PS6, Says Netflix Games Boss
I do wonder how long Hardware can survive. I don't know how sustainable it is with all the plastics and other raw materials needed to manufacture and distribute Hardware Globally. Its not just the costs of manufacturing and the Raw materials, but distributing them globally - often with Fossil Fuels too. Not only that, you need 'millions' of each component - millions of Terabytes of SSD storage for example - more than enough to store EVERY game if built into a server instead...
With the infrastructure for streaming improving and the increasing cost of hardware/games, I do wonder whether the 'majority' of gamers will abandon hardware - much like few own VHS/DVD/Bluray Players/media or Record/CD players/media because Digital is far cheaper and/or more accessible (you can watch anywhere, not just the one Screen your Hardware is connected to or listen anywhere too).
Hardware will exist for gaming in the near future at least - but I can see it being very expensive (for those that want the 'best' experience and budget to achieve it - like Movie fanatics and Audiophiles have) and/or 'cheap' (more 'novelty', Retro or child friendly) but maybe won't get all the latest releases.
I can see more and more games relying on streaming - inc Single Player games - for Asset streaming, events, maybe even AI/Physics calculations or even to create more dynamic environments that change/evolve over time.
I can see MS quitting the 'Console' hardware space before Sony/Nintendo but only because Sony/Nintendo need their Hardware to sell their Games and get people into their 'ecosystem'. MS already have their own store and ecosystem on PC and Cloud - all running on their OS, their API etc...
Re: Preview: Being the Good Guy Is Fun for Once in Classic GTA Police Sim The Precinct on PS5
I thought GTA started out being a 'bad guy' version of the Cop game APB so this seems to be more like a modern take of APB...
Re: Xbox Is Absolutely Dominating PS5's Pre-Order Charts
Sony will benefit from this and get 30% from sales in their Digital store - the only place to buy games Digitally on their platform. That's what they get as Platform holder, retailer etc.
All it means is that MS is no different to EA, Ubisoft or other 3rd Party Publishers on Sony's platform, just like Bethesda/ABK Published games were too before MS acquired them.
Sony 'could' release their games on Xbox and sell well too - but Microsoft would expect their '30%' too for games sold through their store etc too - which Sony 'refuse' to do - but will with Steam as they are a '3rd Party Publisher' on that platform - its not their's!
Where is the ONLY market that Microsoft Games (until recently) were not available on? That would be Sony/Nintendo Consoles - the ONLY place they can 'target' for revenue Growth, to get money from gamers they otherwise would not get money from - 70% is still better than nothing they were getting before. Console sales maybe down, but Game 'engagement and sales' are high because they are 'not' just limited to their 'small' (compared to Sony/Nintendo Console sales numbers) Console users to play - Steam sales numbers are Good and 'high' player numbers (yes most maybe because of Game Pass, not 'buying' the game) would indicate they are 'successful' and reviewed well too.
Therefore it makes sense to bring some of their Catalogue to Playstation as a 3rd Party Publisher - in the same way Sony does with Steam/PC. Its got comparable hardware to their Series X, already port and make games for Playstation (Minecraft, Call of Duty, Doom etc) and inherited/Acquired a LOT of Playstation titles - like Fallout 76, ESO, Overwatch, Deathloop etc) so opened the door. Its also the only platform 'currently' they can target for revenue growth as they already compete/offer something on EVERY other Gaming Platform currently.
Re: Xbox Is Absolutely Dominating PS5's Pre-Order Charts
Whilst the next few months may have quite a few Releases from Microsoft on Playstation, Microsoft are also releasing (or have released) a few 'big' games for their own platform too.
Doom of course is common to both Consoles in terms of release date, but whilst Sony maybe getting FH5, Indy, AoE2 etc, Xbox have Avowed, South of Midnight, Towerborne etc to play.
No doubt Indiana will sell well on PS. It has more than 2x the Console sales so 'should' sell at least twice as many copies, but whether it has the same 'reach', same player numbers as Xbox (and PC) gamers didn't need to buy to play. They may have paid for Game Pass (even just 1 month worth) but that is Consumer choice.
Sales 'revenue' is just one option - but Game Pass is another 'revenue' stream too - 30m paying at least £10 'every' month is £300m a month - before any 'sales' revenue starts coming back in. Theses games may sell 1-2m in the first few months - that's not even close to the revenue coming in from Game Pass. You could also argue, that '£300m+' per month is what paid for those games to be made in the first place - that revenue is paying Devs, paying studios etc to make the game so ANY sales on top is 'pure' profit. They haven't spent £100m developing a product that needs to sell to get that £100m investment back. Game Pass subs have paid that £100m it cost to develop and now get to play 'free' and ANY sale is pure profit.
It's just a different business model but because you have an alternative option on Xbox, Sales alone is meaningless. I'd expect Indiana Jones to sell a LOT more on Playstation, but I expect a higher percentage of Xbox gamers will have played at least the opening section. Would you rather have '2%' of gamers playing your game, but sell enough over time to be 'profitable' or Reach 50% of the gamers and maybe not get as 'much' per gamer for the 'initial' point of access, get more in revenue from DLC/MTX's and not worry about whether or not your game will eventually sell enough to cover the costs and bring in enough revenue to continue making games...
Re: Indiana Jones PS5's Physical Release Requires You to Download the Game
@BecauseBecause Not one game plays directly from the disc and hasn't done since the PS3/360 era. Since the PS4 Gen, ALL games have to be 'installed' to your Hard-drive.
The game code on disc is 'pre-release' game Code and whilst that may well include the entire game, the vast majority rely on Day 1 updates and/or patches. Often numerous features are added 'post' launch too - like Performance modes, additional content etc. Some games aren't 'complete' on the disc too with some requiring a download to install the rest.
So many games these days are quite different from the 'Day 1' version on Disc - inc older Games now playable via BC. Cyberpunk 2077 is a great example of a 'PS4' Single Player game that the disc code is completely obsolete. It needs your hardware to be 'online' to update the Software installed on your Hardware to play.
Once the game is 'installed' to your Hard-drive, the Discs sole purpose is to prove you still own the License Key to access the Game. Sell the disc, you can't access the game despite the Game being installed on your Harddrive. The Disc performs the same function as the internet - its just a 'delivery' system (either the 'early' full game, early partial game (with some download required for the rest) or just a 'launcher' to install the Software from the internet anyway. You are NOT playing the game from the Disc, but from your hard drive, its just a 'key' to unlock access to it.
It doesn't matter if the Disc has ALL the game and its 'perfect' at launch as you'll still have to install it from the Disc to your internal Storage to 'run' from there, not from the Disc itself. The disc may not 'work' on newer Hardware (especially with no disc drive) but you can download games 'delisted' if you had purchased them before they were delisted. Your 'licence' key is attached to your digital profile so don't need a Disc at all.
Discs don't 'preserve' games any better than digital - maybe even worse as discs are only manufactured for a limited time, require specific Hardware (you can't play SM64 Cartridge without a working N64 and Controller - and can't buy any of those 'new' if one breaks, if you can even find a working version now), and of course often only contain pre-release code at best - Virtually every game these days is updated with patches that not only 'fix' bugs, but add features and QoL improvements too.
Re: Indiana Jones PS5's Physical Release Requires You to Download the Game
Games don't PLAY from a Disc - the disc's SOLE purpose is to deliver the Code (or download launcher) and contain your License Key to access the software once installed on your Hard drive.
Until that software is 'installed' on the hardware locally, the game is NOT playable. So you either have to 'download' and install the software via the internet or disc. With Disc also requiring manufacturing, that also means that the code is the 'oldest' if not incomplete and most buggy/broken that requires online to install huge patches and/or additional content.
The Games, regardless of whether or not they are Single player, require 'Online' at the 'installation' stage and at least periodically throughout its life as new patches/fixes, additional content/features etc are provided online and the game may not actually run or be playable without online. Owning a disc is nothing more than a Physical Licence Key to access Software installed on your Consoles Hard drive and does NOT preserve the game as you can't 'play' from the disc and even if it did have the game on it, would not be the same game you played Day 1 with the Day 1 patch and bug fixes.
Re: Xbox Has 'a Lot More' PS5 Ports to Come in 2025
I can see them bringing Hellblade 2 over at some point - after all the first released on Playstation so there is 'history'.
I can't see them bringing Forza Motorsport despite them bringing Forza Horizon 5 - I think its too 'similar' to Gran Turismo and probably not worth the investment in porting to PS5 for the amount of sales it would likely get.
I'm sure they could release numerous 'old' games that are no longer selling on Xbox, no longer selling Hardware or Subscriptions either so not really making MS money anymore. Halo Master Chief released over a decade ago and as far as I recall, is no longer being 'actively' supported by the Devs. If they bring any 'Gears' game to PS5, maybe the first 'ultimate' edition that was also on PC - but I think a Gears Collection makes more sense as that would bring at least Gears 2 & 3 to PC as well.
Obviously with their Zenimax and ABK acquisition, they have numerous IP's that have been popular on Playstation. Whether they release Day 1 (like Doom) or will release after 'months' of (timed) exclusivity on Xbox (liker Indiana) time will tell.
I still think the majority will be 'older' games - and by older, I only mean that they have released elsewhere (Xbox/PC) and been out at least a week (so not up to 7 days Earlier Access) on that platform. With Game Pass on a 'monthly' plan and MS themselves wanting at least 1 big game a quarter, I can see them delaying releases for at least 3 months on PS so they can use them to sell their own Hardware/Subs.
Indiana Jones isn't selling Xbox Consoles or Game Pass Subscriptions by the time it releases on Playstation - MS are hoping that Avowed, South of Midnight and Doom will sell those and/or keep people subscribed too. Those that wanted to play Indy (or sub to Game Pass) would likely have done so and now its coming to Playstation to sell to those that wouldn't buy an Xbox or Sub to Game Pass anyway so wouldn't get any revenue from them.
I don't think it makes sense for MS to release everything Day 1 on PS but a few months of exclusivity (not a year or more like some Exclusives) makes the most sense. That way, the game is still relatively fresh, it still offers 'some' exclusivity as incentives for MS's ecosystem and can decide which games they think will find success and which maybe won't due to similarities to Sony's own Exclusives.
As we know, MS has quite a few releases coming to Playstation - but most are already playable on Xbox and Xbox has NEW games like Avowed and South of Midnight releasing Exclusively on Xbox as well as games like Fable, Perfect Dark, State of Decay 3, Clockwork Revolution, Gears: E-Day etc in the works too.
I'd like to see Sunset Overdrive on PS but I don't know that is a Microsoft decision. They may have owned the Publishing Rights at one time, but I believe they don't own the IP...
Re: Ex-Xbox Console Exclusive Indiana Jones Will Be Available Physically on PS5, But May Require an Internet Connection
April 17th - not too much longer to wait...
Re: SAG-AFTRA Still 'Frustratingly Far Apart' from Big Game Studios, Publishers on AI Protections
I don't see why Voice Actors should be 'protected' from advancements in technology. I don't see why they can't use AI - especially if the Conversation capability of NPC's become more ad hoc, unscripted so a voice actor isn't reading from a script.
I'm not saying that AI should replace human voices in all situations, but I do believe that AI can and should be used if the Devs/Publisher choose to use it. I don''t see it as any different from other 'industries' from Agriculture and textiles during the industrial revolution to Computers, CNC, Robots etc involved in Manufacturing and/or distribution.
Paid Actors will increase the costs significantly - therefore either take budget away from other aspects or risk becoming 'unprofitable' or over-priced. Same as replacing hundreds of Farm Labourers instead of 'technology' - that led to cheaper Farm produce, same as cheaper clothing/fabrics from the Textile industry...
I doubt games will be 'cheaper' to the Consumer, but they maybe will take more risks, keep more 'jobs' (look at the last year or two) and/or sustain the industry better...
Re: After Gobbling Two Publishers, Now Xbox Has Been Sniffing Around Ubisoft's IP
It's not just Ubisoft that are 'sniffing' around as EA and 'others' (maybe Embracer, Sony, TenCent etc) are also interested IF Ubisoft are considering selling some of their IP's - especially those that they don't feel can make and/or make profitably.
Assassin's Creed and probably Far Cry too are not on the table as these are likely two Ubisoft IP's that they can 'rely' on. Maybe Beyond: Good and Evil, Prince of Persia, Watchdogs and even Rayman though maybe Assets they no longer want/need and could sell to save them selling 'Ubisoft'
They've had some 'flops' like Xdefiant, Skull & Bones etc too so they may need to 'sell' some IP's to invest in their Stronger IP's.
Re: Death Stranding 2 Puts Early Access Incentives Under the Microscope All Over Again
Whilst it is 'manipulation', its still going to be in the records as releasing on the 'Official' date, not 2-5 days early.
It's a bit like shops getting their physical media in days before the official launch to ensure they have stock for 'Day 1' or mail order to dispatch in time to arrive on Day 1. If you were 'lucky', you may have got to buy or receive it early - now its just a 'free' bonus that Publishers can offer to encourage gamers to 'pre-order' as the 'bonus' is pointless on Release day. Its 'free' to giveaway - the Game code is often in the hands of Reviewers etc so nothing has had to be developed specifically for this.
If you don't want to play Day 1, let alone 'early', then don't spend money. I don't think it really matters if a 'few' decide to pay for 'Premium' Editions when the game is at its most expensive, often $/£100+, they get to play a few days 'early' like all those reviewers etc. For those that buy the regular 'Standard' $70 to play on Release day, they are still playing on 'Day 1' as that day is the OFFICIAL release day for EVERYONE on that platform!
Re: Forza Horizon 5 Will Require a Microsoft Account to Play on PS5, Raising Preservation Problems
As more and more games are 'online' - inc 'Single Player' these days as they have some 'online' aspect synced to it - whether it's streaming of some assets/content, Friends times/Drivatars, Shared Map or whatever reason it 'requires' online connection, then there is ALWAYS a risk of 'preserving' access.
Physical too doesn't guarantee its 'preserved' as the hardware its made for is no longer in production and what's left in the world won't last forever. You can't buy a 'new' replacement disc, cartridge as they're no longer made, can't buy a new official Controller or hardware - its up to you to 'keep' your hardware, Software, controllers etc and hope that they keep working when you want to play years or more from now....
I had boxes and boxes and boxes of physical games - mostly on Cassette and old Floppy discs that I had 'preserved' from my BBC/Vic 20 days, through the 64 and 128bit, then 512bit computers, to PC but ALL had to go to the Tip because none of the Hardware was working and couldn't guarantee the Games were still 'fine'. My Son had my N64 and Cartridges as well as my PS1/2 games, but I still have my PS3/PS4/PS5, OGXB/360/XB1/XSX games and Hardware - although I don't think any PS3 controller now holds a charge....
Re: PS5, PS4 Fans Baffled by Sony's Decision to Promote Shovelware
Maybe its because Sony make money from eslop sold in their store - maybe 'more' than the 30% standard charge for digital sales through Sony's storefront.
They can say that these are NOT their games, not harmful to their Hardware, OS or Ecosystem and its more 'choice' for consumers - and of course if people do buy, they'll make money too.
Re: Sony Makes Push for Cloud Gaming Crown with Almost 400 More Games Whitelisted for PS Plus Premium
@Max_the_German Streaming is obviously not the 'best' way to play a Game - but it maybe the only option to play certain games in certain situations - like on the go in Public places. Mobiles are not really designed for gaming and their control schemes, but virtually everyone has one, its better than 'nothing' and is the most 'used' device for 'Gaming'
Without being 'snobby' about Games/Gaming, Mobile has the most Gamers - more than Playstation, Xbox and Switch combined. It maybe the 'weakest' in terms of Graphics/performance etc, but its also something virtually everyone has and the 'entry' point.
The entry point for Sony's gaming is the PS5 with the 'Pro' offering slightly better Graphics/Performance at a Cost. Portal too will cost money. MS's 'streaming' service has little/no Hardware cost (if you already have devices like a Mobile or PC/Laptop/tablet...). If you want better quality 'gaming', the more you spend on hardware etc, the better the experience can be.
Re: Sony Makes Push for Cloud Gaming Crown with Almost 400 More Games Whitelisted for PS Plus Premium
Whilst it is 'streaming', its not like Microsofts more 'Netflix' style approach where streaming to ANY device from Servers (rather than your OWN console) is more Consumer friendly/accessible.
Sony's require you to buy Sony Hardware to stream from a Sony Platform to another Sony Platform. It maybe 'higher' quality, but maybe that is down to the fact its built solely for Sony Hardware - not suitable for ALL inc Mobile 4G/5G Networks.
Re: Talking Point: Is Forza Horizon 5's PS5 Price Point Too High?
Its a 'brand new' release on Playstation hardware - the alternative is to buy an Xbox Series X or PC to play this game at least at the same 'quality' settings which will cost you a lot more.
The fact it's a few years old is irrelevant! Games that are 'delayed' on ANY Platform through whatever marketing/exclusivity deals don't release 'cheaper' when they finally come out and if we look at numerous 'remasters' and ports of older generation games to 'current' hardware, these are often releasing at the same price as the new games. The Last of Us Pt 1 cost more for PS5 than it did when it released on PS3 a decade before...
I'd be more annoyed if the game was launching at a more 'expensive' price than it launched on Xbox but it is the SAME price - yes it may now be available on 'sale' - but its regular price not on sale is the SAME as the PS5 launch. Its still the cheapest way to play FH5 if you only have a Playstation.
Re: Xbox's Forza Horizon 5 Snatches April Release Date on PS5, Priced at $60
@Decimateh-xblz And that is is the 'unique selling point' that Microsoft will have with their Consoles - rather than rely on keeping games away from others to force you to buy their hardware.
The game is still brand new and there has never been a 'Playstation' version that is optimised and working with the PS5 hardware and OS 'correctly'.
You'd expect Sony to charge the same as any other 'new' release when they bring their games to PC for the first time and IF they ever decide to release some games on Xbox to 'maximise' their reach and revenue for some games too, you'd expect them to charge the going rate for 'new' releases - not the price of a '2-5yr old game' on another platform. It's still a 'new' to PS platform - I have Game Pass and Xbox too so I know it's benefits to MS owned IP's/Games - but if I 'prefer' to play on a 'Playstation' because of Controller, hardware design, or whatever, that's the 'price' to play on that hardware and/or 'wait' until you can play it...
Re: Xbox's Forza Horizon 5 Snatches April Release Date on PS5, Priced at $60
It's still the first time its released on Playstation hardware. It's no different from Deathloop or Ghostwire which released on Xbox at the RRP - nott a 'discounted' or lower price just because its an 'old' game. Its still a 'next' gen game that should still look and run well on PS5 and at least 60fps.
It's still a LOT cheaper than buying an Xbox or PC to 'buy' the game for less - yes it maybe available on Game Pass too, but unless you have a Series X or PC, you won't get the equivalent visual quality and performance.
It's a current gen AAA game and soon going to be available on PS5 for the first time. I think its actually priced at the 'same' launch price on Xbox - not the 'current' Price point that Sony and then others have now adopted - $70! No $10 'upgrade' charge for PS5+ versions!!
I won't be buying it - but I don't think it's 'unreasonable' or 'unfair' compared to all other NEW releases (even 'old' games remastered or 'upgraded' to current gen are more expensive than they were when they released). The current price for NEW games is above what Forza Horizon will cost and its still the ONLY way to Play Forza on your PS5. Unless you have other options, it's whether you want to play it 'enough' to pay the asking price - inc waiting for Sales to reach the price point at which you think its worth buying to you.
Re: Reaction: Xbox Publishing More Games on PS5 Than Sony Is Not a Gotcha, It's Just a Sign of the Times
Go back to 2017 and the landscape was very different - MS only had about 5 Studio's and Sony had more than double. Sony too have added to their Studio's (as well as closed some) - inc Bungie which was a 'Publisher' too - hence cost much more, Insomniac, Housemarque etc. Whilst that may not be the same as 'buying' Zenimax and certainly not ABK, its not as if Sony has been 'idle'
The narrative has still been Xbox has 'NO' games and that was still being said a year or two ago. All that 'money' spent on Studio's, Publishers, IP's etc and NOTHING to show for it. Now it seems Xbox has so many games coming to Sony, let alone the 'exclusives' it has for Xbox (even if just timed) that they can release more games than Sony will for its own Platform.
Its not just the 'numbers' of Studios though, its more the situation we find ourselves in today. It 'seems' like Sony haven't really got a 'lot' coming in the next few years - with numerous projects being cancelled losing 'years' of work.
A decade ago, MS E3 shows would show off many more games than Sony - however, the majority would be 3rd Party or 'indies' so Xbox had 'no' games of their own - now it seems that Sony is in that position. Its not as if Sony themselves don't have 'older' games in their Catalogue they too could 'port' to Xbox as well as PC to make extra Revenue and get more Gamers into their IP's.
From my perspective though, it has never mattered to me that 'others' who prefer to play on a different manufacturers 'box' get to play some of the Games I enjoy on my prefered 'box'.
Re: Some Fans Think This Smile Is Proof Avowed Is Coming to PS5
Again, does it matter?
I could say there is NO point buying a PS5 because EVERYTHING is released on PC - even if you have to wait months/years for Sony to decide its now worth selling to those who wouldn't/didn't buy a PS5 to play it so would get NO revenue at all.
If you really want to play Avowed, Forza Horizon 5, AoE2, Age of Mythology, Hifi Rush, Indiana Jones, Sea of Thieves etc, they have ALL been on Xbox and PC as well as Game Pass. Starfield, South of Midnight, Forza Motorsport, Halo, Gears, MSFS, Fable, Redfall (granted not the best game) etc are all 'Exclusive' on Xbox. Game Pass too isn't on Playstation - that could make Xbox the 'best' value option for Xbox games.
It doesn't bother me that 'other' gamers also get the option to play on their 'preferred' Platform choice rather than 'miss out' or feel forced to buy something they don't want/need (hardware) just to play a Game. I'd prefer a world where you pick Hardware based on your own 'preference', not based on the 'exclusive' content which also means you'll miss out on others 'exclusives'.
Just like Sony is 'boosting' their revenue by releasing games on another platform to get money coming in from 'outside' their Ecosystem, MS is doing the same - but MS own Windows and Windows PC owners are also MS 'customers' and have their own storefront, sell a service on PC and of course don't need to port/optimise etc for other 'PC' sellers like Steam. With PS5, they have to port and optimise for Sony's 'system' and OS/API.
Anyway, as a Playstation 5 owner too, I'm happy to see many Playstation gamers getting to play some of the Xbox games I also enjoy. As a Playstation gamer, I should be more annoyed at Sony for their 'lack' of new Games - MS is likely to be the biggest Publisher, release more games on Playstation than Sony will and have 'more' gamers spending time in 'their' games, the biggest 'player bases', leading to more revenue from DLC/MTX's etc
I guess the narrative about Xbox having 'no' games has now become 'no' exclusives but I'd rather have more games releasing every year than just 1 or 2 'exclusives' I may want to play...
Re: Xbox Was December's Biggest Publisher, and 64% of Its Sales Were on PS5, PS4
Also might have something to do with the fact that Playstation gamers have no choice but to 'buy' but Xbox/PC gamers have a 'choice' - buy or play on Game Pass and so a high fraction of the players on these 2 platforms are not going to be adding to that 'Sales' data.
Playstation too has a larger player base and with '2:1' numbers of Consoles sold, you'd expect that PS would have 2/3rds vs 1/3rd of the total revenue - assuming that the game is equally as popular on both. If Sony has 100m Consoles and Xbox 50m, both sell to 50% of their Playerbase, Sony sell 50m to Xbox 25m and would be 2/3rds of the revenue generated.
Regardless, only a few games have or appear to release 'Day 1' on PS5 and I don't see it as being that different from Sony releasing their games on PC when they are not selling Hardware/Software anymore. When Indiana Jones comes to PS5, Avowed, South of Midnight or whatever other Xbox 'Exclusive' is selling Hardware/Subs/Software. By the time Spider-Man 2 released on PC, its not selling PS5 hardware or Software anymore so why not sell it to those who won't 'buy' a PS5 to play it??