BacklogBrad

Shouldn't really be surprising that this working. It's also not surprising that the day 1 model is very successful for xbox. Both models seem to work great and I don't really see either side changing tactics anytime soon.

Doesn't seem like the CMA decision will ultimately destroy the deal. They have multiple routes mapped out already to get around their ruling if they don't reverse it.

@Keyblade-Dan I'm trying to play it on PC/steam deck.

Seems like a manufactured problem to lock out players then panick about pre order numbers.

Hopefully they reconsider exclusivity going forward.

Maybe one day I will want one but so far it's looking like I dodged a $550 bullet.

Just diablo 4 for me. Not really interested in the other 2 but maybe someday I will try them.

Hopefully it's fully verified for the Deck and is a good port.

Finished the tutorial and first chapter. I'm digging it so far but I've always had a fascination with railroad sims like railroad tycoon 1-3 amd sid meiers railroads.

Playing on gamepass pc with keyboard mouse so I can't comment on console controls.

Cdpr doesn't make live service games so I don't see the interest from Sonys perspective.

Was never very excited for a live service Last of Us, even less so now.

They should have clarified that the main focus was 3rd party. I went into it thinking a lot of 1st party ps5 and psvr2 would be the focus with a few 3rd party. In that sense it was a huge flop.

I'm also not sure if Sony has a handle on how live service games are played. It's not really possible to dip your toe in them or shuffle between so many. People tend to play the crap out of it or don't play it at all. It seems like they are asking their audience to pick one of the dozen or so that are coming and none of them will end up working because there are too many.

I still plan on grabbing it on a steep sale price, $20 or less.

I like the PC strategy, dislike the live service strategy.

I wish they were using this time and resources for a single player game.

I was hoping they would change my mind and convince me I needed a psvr2.

@Tharsman I hope it makes 2023 too but it seems unlikely that they would take the L on their big showcase just to give the date shortly after. If they have other plans like a separate spiderman showcase why not say that? I can only guess that they do not have a date yet and if they can't nail down a firm date 4-5 months out I worry it might slip. The marketing window is closing fast for a fall date.

It could easily still make it but I'm much less confident than I was 2 days ago.

I'm not convinced it is a 2023 game anymore. Sony are not ones to get out of the way of other games, especially with such a major title like spiderman.

"We offer our users the most varied content, here are 30 muliplat games."

I imagine Sony has been hit with the same major delays to their games like Xbox and others, they just prefer to keep players in the dark rather than announce a game with an uncertain release window.

Wasn't what i was expecting it to be. It was just okay for me. I would give it a c+ or b-

Geoff Keighley will ensure that he gets more screen time than the games like usual.

They should have done it a long time ago. If they want to do like a trilogy or a continued story then numbering them would be fine. 16 numbered games over nearly 40 years is too many especially with little to no continuation between them.

Final fantasy 14 being an MMO definitely should not have been a numbered entry.

@Beerheadgamer82 yes their strategy of relying on other studios to develop games for them was not the best use of resources. Buying studios and their IP is much better especially with their emphasis on subscriptions services where 1st party legacy content is very valuable.

@Beerheadgamer82 you can't just create a studio and have it spit out iconic IP immediately. You're talking close to a decade or more to get up and running and make their first big AAA game. Then they need to build a following through marketing, word of mouth, etc. There is no guarantee that even 20 years from now they will ever have created a meaningful IP that becomes popular. So yes spending billions on already established studios/publishers is the best way for xbox to be more competitive.

@Beerheadgamer82 it makes the least competitive platform more competitive with Sony and Nintendo. Xbox will still be in 3rd place but it will put pressure on sony to maintain their status as market leader.

Having 3 console platforms somewhat close to even is much better for the industry than having one or two.

I'd still give it to gamepass by a decent margin. Native downloads to PC, streaming to my phone or anything with a browser is pretty handy. Steam deck with xcloud is great. Plus the shear number of day 1 games that I don't have to pay for is nice.

It's kind of shocking how quickly you can load the same save you were playing natively on series x to pc, cloud/mobile, series s, xb1, etc.

This seems like Sonys version of the tech layoffs and restructuring that have been all over the Industry lately. I wonder if there is more bad news coming.

Doesn't build much confidence in the future of psvr.

It depends on what you are considering "the future."

These services will continue to grow and be a part of the equation but won't be how all games are released.

If it shortens development time and cost then I'm all for it.

Really puts that ABK complaint that Microsoft maybe might possibly someday raise their prices into perspective.....

Needing a premium subscription to get a demo of a 1st party game (or any game) is kind of a joke.

Ones a single player rpg the other is an online multiplayer. Not really sure how it would make sense to include it with hogwarts legacy.

I think they made the right call to have a fully developed quiddich game instead of shoe-horning it into legacy.

"The world's most iconic magical sport"

I thought that was WWE.

Been burned by Square Enix a lot lately. Waiting for a sale on this one.

@Total_Weirdo could be a licensing issue. Their access to gaming rights with the spider man ip is complicated, they might have to make a deal with marvel/Disney to have that in their subscription service.

Important to note there will be a 5gb storage cap on the creation side starting next month.

Jim Ryan went back to his absurd argument that one company having marketing rights and exclusive content for call of duty would cause irreparable harm to competition while currently having both of those things for call of duty. He continues to insult the intelligence of regulators with flat out lies.

There was a right way to argue against this merger, this just isn't it.

I usually just have the game I'm currently playing and the game I plan to play next downloaded at a time.

I use cloud gaming with gamepass more than I expected to and i am surprised by the quality of the streaming. But the remote access doesn't do it for me. I can't imagine a scenario where I would use this.

Current gen - last gen - retro

Ps3/360 is my favorite gen of all time.

A delay would have gone over better.
Probably an executive decision to stick to the date. Hopefully they learn from this.

I don't plan on buying one unless things change drastically.

For as much as I loved astro bot rescue mission, a sequel would not motivate me to spend $620 to play it. I would rather the sequel just be a normal ps5 game. Maybe I am just not that into vr but most games feel shovelwareish where they are just quick 3-4 hour gimmicks. Horizon call of the mountain and the popular kayak game seem to fit that bill perfectly from what ive seen. My favorite psvr1 experience might have been skyrim and even then it didnt seem to enhance the experience but just provided a gimmicky excuse to replay one of my favorite games.

I also feel burned that all those games I bought for psvr1 are not available in any capacity. The thought of building a new library seems like a foolish thing to do especially now that it seems like Sony might jump ship on this thing at any time.

It's hard to imagine sony offering proper support to such a small audience. I would be surprised if we see another psvr headset.

It's a niche market and asking those people to buy a ps5 and psvr2 for a small library of games was a tall order.

It is one of the most addictively fun games I have ever played. I don't have a problem with it winning over the "technically advanced" games.

I imagine real artists will iterate on the ai creations.

I can picture a tinder like app where a team of creative humans will be swiping right on or saving the ai creations they like. Then they will tweak them to their liking later if needed or make their own design based on something that inspired them.

@EhronLocke From the perspective of a company well behind sony and nintendo in marketspace and exclusive content, buying a publisher seems like a solid strategy. If the deal put them way out in front of the competition than yes it would be scummy and regulators should do something but that is clearly not the case here.

@thefourfoldroot1 I don't agree that COD would have been exclusive without concessions or that one company now owns everything. But again I was only pointing out the lunacy of sonys complaint that was literally their current practice with the title.

@EhronLocke it was one of their official complaints to CMA and FTC. They would be harmed by exclusive in game content for COD on Xbox. Something they currently have over xbox.

@thefourfoldroot1 I'm only relaying sonys complaint that this deal might lead to exclusive in game content for Xbox. Something that they currently have over Xbox. Their argument made no sense.

When Sony made call of duty exclusivity the sole complaint it would only make sense that governments would research the topic and find exclusivity is a common tactic and one that sony relies on heavily.

@EhronLocke but it is Sony complaining about it and saying it is an unfair practice while doing it.

It's bizarre that they would expect government to step in and "prevent" actions they are currently using.

I admire Sonys courage to tell regulators "as market leader, only we should be able to do this" but I'm not surprised they are facing clapback.

It was Sony who defined this "high end" console market with their FTC/CMA arguments. Maybe it wasn't a good idea to fight so hard over the abk deal that was never getting blocked.

Nothing will come of this thing with congress but Sony shouldn't be surprised the microscope is back on them after they flew so close to the sun with their ridiculous abk arguments. They literally complained that MS might have exclusive in game content someday for COD while paying for exclusive in game content for COD.