@truerbluer If you expect Nixxes to be responsible for bigger workload because you want to port your games on PC day one, you can just staff it up accordingly. "Studio is too small" is just stupid excuse. Especially since releasing your game on PC will bring you way way way more sales. Just look at Helldivers 2.
Spider-Man 2 was buggy, because Sony forced it to release in october, because Insomniac exceeded budget and all marketing (and release of PS5 Slim) was tied to release of that game. If PC was supposed to be released day one, then they would obviously throw more people into mix during development to have both versions ready...duh?
Devs are setting hardware requirements. If they want to do stuff with their game that needs to use XYZ GB/s transfer speeds, they can just put "NVMe gen 4." in requirements. Pretty simple if you ask me. Loading times in PC version are usually slower, because not many devs are using DirectStore, which will be resolved as time passes.
Xbox gamers don't care in slightest that they have to pay to play online in Sea of Thieves while PC players don't need to. Because , they can burn through 1000$ to build a PC instead buying 450$ console if they want to. It's about choice. You know what consequences, advantages and disadvantages each choice has. Yeah, they bitched about it at first, but now they don't care.
We can talk about it more, but facts are that console market is stagnant, and currently PS5 is on pace to not even sell as many consoles as PS4 did. And development costs are ballooning. Sony knows that, Microsoft knows that. Nintendo doesn't care currently because they are not making graphically intensive games, so they don't cost that much to develop.
It's pretty clear that 115 million PS owners is absolute roof that Sony can count on. They need to have PC audience if they want to throw 300 million dollars into development of one game whether you like it or not.
@truerbluer Lol. Why would be a development time longer? Like I get that optimising game for PC takes a time, but sales will be way higher so you can put more people on the project. Sony even has Nixxes (PC port studio) that can be thrown from project to project to optimise PC versions before release.
Same for "games will be worse." Spider-Man 2 was pretty buggy (for standard of PS Studios games) and it was PS5 release only.
And that "build around PS5 SSD" argument is just laughable. You know that PC currently boasts way higher transfer speeds for SSD then PlayStation 5, right?
And I mean, yeah. PC version will probably be cheaper and won't require PS Plus for online play. But I don't understand why it is a problem. You have choice - spend less on hardware (console), but pay more for online play and games or spend way more on hardware and pay less for game with free online.
It's just obvious that sooner or later, first-party games will be transformed into "timed exclusives."
Dev budgets are ballooning like crazy and you can't just ignore 50 million Xbox owners and ***** of PC gamers that could buy your game and bring you higher ROI.
We are living in age when Insomniac had to sell 7,2 million copies of Spider-Man 2 at full price just to break even. And since new CEO of PlayStation is financial guy, I fully expect him to chase as high ROI as possible.
Just imagine world where Xbox will port their games on PlayStation 12 months after release and Sony will do the same with their games. Both companies would fight on merits of hardware and services. Wouldn't be world a better place?
@AdamNovice So what? Helldivers 2 was released on PC day one and it hit 200k concurent on Steam. There is no way that those players didn't pay for port and added into ROI.
@themightyant No, they are talking about slowdown in sales for next fiscal year ie. from april 2024 to march 2025. Which just isn't good no matter, how you slice it.
If PS6 is slated for 2028, we are still in first half of PS5 lifecycle and Sony is already expecting dropof in sales, which didn't happen in 4th year of PS4 on the market while PS5 is already lagging behind PS4.
And I mean. I don't even need to argue about "is situation fine?" Totoki already hinted during Q&A that they are looking at multiplatform releases for first-party games, that studios needs to reign in spending and they need to raise their margins. He is basically saying that business is not growing in console space and they need to cut costs while expanding towards new audience.
in my first post was to demonstrate, that Sony predicted that PS5 will surpass sales of PS4.
And I argued that slowing sales of PS5 are a problem specifically, because SIE management forecasted exact oposite. Worst thing in business is not hitting your expectations.
Yes, PS5 is currently "only" 2,4 million behind PS4. But since Sony is already hinting at slowdown of sales, while PS4 hit it's peak during 4th year on the market, it is the problem only exaggerated by ballooning investments. Also, slowdown is strange since they are supposed to be releasing PS5 Pro. And with Switch 2 launch their position may be even worse.
@themightyant It matters hugely. Because Sony management wants to see growth. Not selling same amount or even less consoles as in previous gen.
And it's pretty clear, that console market is just limited and it's not growing. So Sony needs to find new growth vector if PlayStation 5 is selling worse than PlayStation 4.
I mean. Just look at the numbers. They have 10 billion in revenue with 6% operating margins. That's just pitiful.
Or look at that in this way. Spider-Man was developed at 100 million budget, sold at 60$ to audience of 115 million PlayStation 4 users Spider-Man 2 was developed at 300 million budget, sold at 70$ to an audience of decreasing PlayStation owners.
Do you see the problem? Their investment into development of game tripled, they are only selling game with 10$ price increase to a decreasing audience.
@get2sammyb "It’s also lost a little pace on the PS4 launch aligned, which had an install base of 57.1 million units at this point in its lifecycle. Obviously, the PS5 had crippling stock shortages for its first few years on the market, though."
Sony predicted that once PS5 surpass sales of PS4 in Year 4, it will stay ahead. But Sony said that they are expecting dropoff in PS5 sales, so it doesn't look like it will surpass PS4 at all.
They are not even hitting that. They are currently at 16,4 million during fiscal year so they need to sell 4,6 million PlayStation 5 consoles during january-march to hit 21 million.
FY Q4 (january-march) is historically worst period for console sales (last year was an exception because it was first quarter when PS5 supply addressed demand) and even with slashed prices I really doubt will hit that number.
They also fell behind PS4. And without major first-party games until march 2025 I really doubt that PS5 will sell as good as PS4. Which is kinda big problem.
It makes sense, since that Taiwanese business web informed, that Sony had to cut production of PS5 because they have full warehouse of consoles, because they oversupplied during holiday.
I really doubt that they will hit 25 million during current fiscal year.
Lol. So we went from Indiana Jones and Starfield to Pentiment, Sea of Thieves and Hi-Fi Rush?
Like, don't get me wrong, both Hi-Fi Rush and Pentiment are great. But it will hardly hurt Microsoft's position on console market when they will port those games. They were not a system sellers and they were not supposed to be one. Not to mention Sea of Thieves which is 6 years old.
It's literally like if Sony decided to port Concrete Genie to Xbox.
I wonder what will be Sony's response in future in terms of releasing their games on PC day one.
Because Helldivers 2 has way more players on PC then on PlayStation 5, so game clearly benefited from linked marketing push.
@naruball Because as I already told you, Microsoft already IS third party publisher, so even if his bio was left intact it doesn't necessarily mean what you think it means.
He had his profile like that for month and nobody cared, until one Twitter user pointed it out and people connected it to recent events.
@naruball This article is exact reason why.
Because especially since this week's events, people are literally grasping for any straw to fit their narrative.
And I'm not saying that rumors about Microsoft porting their games on PlayStation are not true.
I'm just saying that Microsoft is already third-party publisher in some cases (Minecraft, TESO, F76, Call of Duty, Diablo, Overwatch etc.), so it's obvious that they need to take care about all platforms in Asia. But people will read it and immediately put it alongside other rumors from last several days.
@naruball Hogwarts Legacy is cross-gen game. And it also took almost one year to develop functioning port that is so constrained that I'm baffled somebody bought it.
Switch sold 140 million consoles and is largely ignored by big third parties. Ports are either late or non-existent. So let's not pretend that every big multiplatform game is on Switch.
People rejected PS3 with high price, because they had alternative. Xbox 360 that was cheaper and ran majority of games better. It took Sony to make cheaper and better Slim model to put up fight. So you exactly proved my point that competition is needed.
@naruball Switch 2 is rumored to be even less powerful then Series S. So I bet AAA game devs will have just a great time porting their games on system when they are already complaining about Series S power...
You are literally proving my point. Yes, Sony currently can take a risk with games, because they are competing to create ecosystem that people will prefer over competition. With competition (in hardware space) gone, there is no incentive to bet on projects that doesn't have 100% chance of being successful and bringing huge ROI.
Same thing with consoles. When there is competition (Series X), Sony have incentive to price their console in line with competition and therefore taking loss on hardware. In market where isn't any competing hardware, there is no reason for Sony to take a loss on hardware. So I hope, people are prepared for 700$ PS6
@naruball People will buy console, because they want consoles. They don't want PC. And if their only option for playing AAA multiplatform games would be PlayStation (Switch can't run 99% of AAA multiplatform games), they will buy PlayStation even without exclusives.
And I'm not talking about Spider-Man, because that's somehow safe bet. I'm talking about risky projects like new IP's, studios like Sony Bend that isn't making 100% hits etc.
It's about ROI. If you can spend your investment $ in thing that will bring you more money, you will do that. Instead of giving 300 million dollars to a studio that will bring you back 400 millions.
And let's stop dreaming about "another company entering space." Only two companies have money that are required to enter gaming industry as a platform holder. Apple and Google. And Google already tried.
Competition is crucial. If there wasn't an Xbox 360, Sony wouldn't be in position of need to nurture first-party studios. If there wasn't a PS4, Microsoft would get away with Xbox One DRM policies. If it wasn't for Game Pass, Sony wouldn't make PS Plus Extra/Premium which are 100x better then old PS Now offerings.
Just remember what happened last time when Sony felt that their position on the market is untouchable.
Every month of delay is 200+ devs (in big AA projects) on payroll without any ROI. And game budgets for big AAA SP games are already on verge of being unsustainable.
Xbox is in no way, shape of form pressuring Sony to release their games in shape that they are not ready. Financial reality of game development is doing that. Spider-Man 2 was released in buggy state (for standards of PlayStation Studios) not because of Xbox, but because game already exceeded it's budget, it was tied with release of PS5 Slim (through bundles), and millions of dollars on marketing was already invested and slated for October release.
Ehh. Nobody is questioning "complacency" of devs to create great games. But if Xbox really leaves console making, what reason would Sony have to invest in 300+ million big budget SP games? Currently it's huge risk which we saw with Spider-Man 2 that has to sold 7,5 million copies to at least break even.
Answer is none. Currently, Sony is using exclusives to draw people into their ecosystem where people then spend money on third-party stuff where Sony is getting 30% from every transaction. That's basically how consoles are working in past 4 generations. But with Xbox consoles gone, investing 300+ million into SP game is just pitiful investment with low ROI, because your console will be "console of choice" even without those games.
@GamingFan4Lyf Well, audience decides what system seller is. Sony found out that their audience likes third-person action adventure games so they steered in that direction. Microsoft has Game Pass so they are betting on variety of content.
Nintendo is showing that "system seller" can be game from almost any genre. Animal Crossing, Zelda, Mario, Pikmin, Xenoblade etc.
I would dare to say that Starfield was system seller, because it pushed Xbox consoles and also Game Pass, which is it's job and despite not really stellar reviews. And I expect Indiana Jones to move good number of consoles despite fact that game is first-person. And then you have Forza Horizon which is staple of racing genre and is always moving consoles. And I expect Fable (third person RPG), Perfect Dark (FPS) and Quake (FPS) to do the same if they will be quality titles.
I see no drawback for Microsoft.
It's small niche game. It wasn't system seller and it was never supposed to be one. It's an equivalent of Sony porting Concrete Genie to Xbox and Switch.
Microsoft will get additional money from Sony/Nintendo players (like in case of Ori on Switch) and players will get to experience one of the best games from 2023.
Yeah. There is no way that this new game will be done before 2030.
Even if Death Stranding 2 won't suffer from any delays (which is always a possibility) and will release in 2025, you are looking at 5-6 years AAA development (which is standard currently). Not to mention fact that Kojima is also working on OD for Xbox.
@Ken_Kaniff It would be strange if it wasn't like that. They spent 80 billion on two publishers and have 32+ internal studios. If they can't release first-party games at a pace of at least 4-5 per year, something is seriously rotten there. This year they have Towerborne, Call of Duty Gulf War, Avowed, Indiana Jones, ARA: History Untold, Hellblade 2 and Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024 which is pretty nice start.
I think writing is on the wall for PSVR2. 0 first-party PSVR2 games announced. Sales dropped from a cliff. And now even third-party devs are saying that there is no point in porting their games for platform.
@Lavishturtle Rocksteady never worked on Superman game. It was rumor originated from a guy who mixed up studios. Warner Bros. Montreal worked on Superman game (makers of Gotham Knights). But not Rocksteady.
I see that PlayStation community on the internet is dealing with same stuff as Xbox community when Sea of Thieves launched on PC - "Why we have to pay to access multiplayer in this game, but PC gamers don't need to?"
@EquiinoxGII People who are cheering for this development are in for a rude awakening. Without Xbox hardware, Sony can do basically whatever they want with prices on PlayStation. I'm sure people would be fine with PlayStation 6 for 700$, right?
@UltimateOtaku91 No it isn't
Unless it's also coming to mobile and Arcade machines
I'm not trying to say that Hi-Fi Rush is not coming to other platforms, but I'm just pointing out that this rating is just there to "cover their asses" and not because announcement is incoming. Also, rating is from december 2022 so other platforms are included for more then year. And PS5 is missing
I like haptics, but Adaptive Triggers is most annoying ***** ever and I disabled it on console settings. But it kinda screwed me because Adaptive Trigger mechanic is huge part of Returnal for example...
Yeah. I'm still not expecting any news about this game this year.
5 years in development is common in current AAA game industry (even more with new IP) and considering they only started development on that new IP in 2021, I'm expecting this game at the end of current gen. So there is no point in revealing that game this year.
@Impossibilium Okay. You clearly can't separate disgusting personality of Kotick from his ability to run successful business. So there is literally no point to talk to you about it.
@dv_xedge Well. We will see how leaks will be handled by those same sites in future. If it is more about "it's Insomniac" or more about "it's morally wrong."
But I digress. I'm interested in those information and there will be always someone who is willing to cover it, so I will read it there. It's not even that hard to access those files for yourself.
@Gunnerzaurus PushSquare covered Capcom leaks but is refusing to cover Insomniac leaks (so I expect this comment to be deleted). Gamespot editor also said that they will not cover Insomniac leaks why they covered Capcom leaks. And don't get me started on youtubers.
And while I understand difference between "Xbox leak" and Insomniac leak (Xbox basically doxxed themselves by uploading underacted files), there is no difference between Capcom and Insomniac leaks because they both originated from ransmoware hackers who published data.
And okay. Every web can choose where is their line in the sand. But don't use excuses when you covered information from same situation to try to get into moral highground.
@Gunnerzaurus But then don't argue with "we won't cover it because it's stolen information" when exactly same thing happened with Capcom and they covered it. Because it's just hypocrisy at that point.
It's really strange how differently are devs voicing their opinions about this leak.
Capcom had massive breach that revealed private info about employees and also revealed slate of their games for next 6 years and almost nobody cared and every website covered that leak.
But Insomniac suffered same breach and now everybody is concerned including some websites and people from gaming media?
I don't want to spread conspiracies but it really looks like they are afraid that Sony will take away their access to review codes/preview events etc. and that's why they won't cover it. And while I understand Insomniac devs being pissed at this situation, this really smells like double standard.
Jesus. Those royalties for Marvel are absolutely insane. It cost 315 million dollars for Sony to make Spider-Man 2 From every 70$ on Digital copies they need to send 6,3 - 12,6$ to Marvel. From every 70$ on Physical copies they need to send 13,3 - 18,2$ to Marvel. Not to mention cut for retailers, distribution companies etc. From every DLC they need to send 19-26% to Marvel From every hardware bundle they need to send 24,5 - 35$ to Marvel
Which means that if you bought PlayStation 5 Slim Spider-Man 2 bundle for 449$, not only Sony probably lost money on actual hardware unit sold, they also lost additional 24,5 - 35$ because of Marvel cut.
Which also means that if similar provision exist for Modern Warfare 3 PS5 bundles, with every PlayStation 5 Slim sold, Microsoft got huge chunk of money.
@themightyant Yeah. I tend to agree. I'm taking it as an official "excuse" and if it is true, that it's absolutely on Naugty Dog's management.
But my theory is just that they tried to do TLOU Online in "Naughty Dog way" and Bungie just told them that nobody will play it long term and live service without longevity is useless. So they have the option to adapt mechanics which would keep engagement or ditch the project entirely and they chose latter.
In my opinion, Naughty Dog strengths as developer are just incompatible with live service games. They care about carefully constructed narratives, animation and technical perfection, but they are not strong in gameplay mechanics and being able to churn new content fast enough. No live service players cares about lengthy cutscenes, obsessive animation quality and technical perfection. They care about engaging gameplay and new content
@thefourfoldroot1 It's bad management from Naughty Dog. How on earth are you developing a game for 4 years and only after all that time you realised how many devs would be needed to sustain this live service? Jesus. There are plenty of successful live service games like Apex, Fortnite etc. that should give you a clear picture what resources are needed for managing that type of game.
They now basically wasted 4 years of dev time on huge part of studio that could be used to make 2 AAA games during PS5 generation instead of one. Because there is just no way ND will be able to make more then one AAA game until end of generation.
I'm sorry, but this is just pathetic.
How many dev time was wasted on this project and how it is possible that studio like Naughty Dog had no clue how many people would be needed to sustain live service game?
@mrbone Fact that you have account in services doesn't make you MAU (Monthly active user). You should know that before you want to use phrases like liar.
Since you are arguing about bad numbers, isn't selling 20 million copies of a game that sold 120 million consoles also bad number?
I don't think Indiana Jones would sell more then PlayStation exclusives even if it was multiplatform (including PlayStation release). Mainly because I don't think Indiana Jones has brand recognition as Spider-Man (for example). Even if it will be excellent game.
I don't even need to "convince you" about anything. Numbers speak for itself. PC gaming market is similar size as market of all 3 console manufacturers combined.
Games are selling on PC, but PC has way more games and also different preferences. For example, Baldur's Gate 3 sold way more copies on PC because console gamers are not that hot on CRPG games while PC gamers are. Cyberpunk and Witcher 3 also sold best on PC. So trying to pretend that PC is small market is just pure lunacy. Riot literally never released game on consoles and they are one of the biggest gaming company on the market.
"Oh GP always count everyone who downloads and plays even 10 sec." Yes. And copy sold is copy sold even if person never played the game or played 10 minutes. And also when game is bundled with console (ehm. God of War Ragnarok, Spider-Man 2). But if you want to claim that 35 million Forza Horizon 5 players only played the game for 10 minutes and never turned it again then be my guest.
@mrbone I literally provided you hard number of MAU on two PC stores that vastly exceeds number of PlayStation users.
Rockstar is not releasing GTA VI on PC day one because they know they can double dip on people who are impatient and will buy GTA VI on PlayStation/Xbox and then on PC. Which is smart on their part.
Also. I never claimed that Indiana Jones will outsell PlayStation exclusives. I just said that it's not as big deal to skip PlayStation as some of the PlayStation users claim it is thanks to Xbox+PC combined audience.
And regarding "small size" of Xbox+PC audience. Forza Horizon 5 exceeded 35 million players. Not bad for "just" racing game
@Kevw2006 Mate. Steam alone has 126 million MAU which is more then PlayStation (107 million). Add EGS (estimates talk about 62 million MAU), GoG, Battle.net, Riot Launcher, Xbox Store on PC, EA Store, Ubisoft Connect etc. and you will maybe get a grip about how huge PC market actually is.
@Titntin Do you understand why exclusives are called exclusives right? Because they exclude a group of people.
MachineGames (and Arkane Lyon) are owned by Microsoft. Microsoft is funding development of Indiana Jones and Blade. They are first party games in same vein as Wolverine and Spider-Man. Also they didn't "bought" IP, they just licensed it.
Also. PC is not "Microsoft's platform." PC is open platform with competing stores and Microsoft sees no money from copy of other games sold through GoG/EGS/Steam. So arguing with that is pretty stupid.
And don't claim it's only about "removing games already being made for different competitor" because people bitch about Blade and that game started development in 2022 - when it was pretty clear that no PlayStation version is or ever will be developed.
As I said. This whole spiel is about PlayStation fans being angry, because they are used to have everything. So now they are trying to invent theories why it doesn't make financial sense for Indiana Jones and Blade to be exclusive for Disney. When in reality, those game are exclusive to bring people into Xbox ecosystem.
I want to play Indiana Jones/Fable/Gears 6 etc. so I bought Xbox. I recently purchased PlayStation 5 because there are plenty of games I don't want to miss. It's business so stop arguing with morality and ethics.
Comments 775
Re: Sony Plans to Improve Profit Margins with 'Aggressive' PC Release Strategy
@truerbluer
If you expect Nixxes to be responsible for bigger workload because you want to port your games on PC day one, you can just staff it up accordingly. "Studio is too small" is just stupid excuse. Especially since releasing your game on PC will bring you way way way more sales. Just look at Helldivers 2.
Spider-Man 2 was buggy, because Sony forced it to release in october, because Insomniac exceeded budget and all marketing (and release of PS5 Slim) was tied to release of that game. If PC was supposed to be released day one, then they would obviously throw more people into mix during development to have both versions ready...duh?
Devs are setting hardware requirements. If they want to do stuff with their game that needs to use XYZ GB/s transfer speeds, they can just put "NVMe gen 4." in requirements. Pretty simple if you ask me. Loading times in PC version are usually slower, because not many devs are using DirectStore, which will be resolved as time passes.
Xbox gamers don't care in slightest that they have to pay to play online in Sea of Thieves while PC players don't need to. Because , they can burn through 1000$ to build a PC instead buying 450$ console if they want to. It's about choice. You know what consequences, advantages and disadvantages each choice has. Yeah, they bitched about it at first, but now they don't care.
We can talk about it more, but facts are that console market is stagnant, and currently PS5 is on pace to not even sell as many consoles as PS4 did. And development costs are ballooning. Sony knows that, Microsoft knows that. Nintendo doesn't care currently because they are not making graphically intensive games, so they don't cost that much to develop.
It's pretty clear that 115 million PS owners is absolute roof that Sony can count on. They need to have PC audience if they want to throw 300 million dollars into development of one game whether you like it or not.
Re: Sony Plans to Improve Profit Margins with 'Aggressive' PC Release Strategy
@truerbluer Lol. Why would be a development time longer? Like I get that optimising game for PC takes a time, but sales will be way higher so you can put more people on the project. Sony even has Nixxes (PC port studio) that can be thrown from project to project to optimise PC versions before release.
Same for "games will be worse." Spider-Man 2 was pretty buggy (for standard of PS Studios games) and it was PS5 release only.
And that "build around PS5 SSD" argument is just laughable. You know that PC currently boasts way higher transfer speeds for SSD then PlayStation 5, right?
And I mean, yeah. PC version will probably be cheaper and won't require PS Plus for online play. But I don't understand why it is a problem. You have choice - spend less on hardware (console), but pay more for online play and games or spend way more on hardware and pay less for game with free online.
Re: Sony Plans to Improve Profit Margins with 'Aggressive' PC Release Strategy
It's just obvious that sooner or later, first-party games will be transformed into "timed exclusives."
Dev budgets are ballooning like crazy and you can't just ignore 50 million Xbox owners and ***** of PC gamers that could buy your game and bring you higher ROI.
We are living in age when Insomniac had to sell 7,2 million copies of Spider-Man 2 at full price just to break even. And since new CEO of PlayStation is financial guy, I fully expect him to chase as high ROI as possible.
Just imagine world where Xbox will port their games on PlayStation 12 months after release and Sony will do the same with their games. Both companies would fight on merits of hardware and services. Wouldn't be world a better place?
Re: Sony Plans to Improve Profit Margins with 'Aggressive' PC Release Strategy
@AdamNovice So what?
Helldivers 2 was released on PC day one and it hit 200k concurent on Steam. There is no way that those players didn't pay for port and added into ROI.
Re: PS5 Sales Touch 55 Million As Sony Breaks Revenue Records
@themightyant No, they are talking about slowdown in sales for next fiscal year ie. from april 2024 to march 2025. Which just isn't good no matter, how you slice it.
If PS6 is slated for 2028, we are still in first half of PS5 lifecycle and Sony is already expecting dropof in sales, which didn't happen in 4th year of PS4 on the market while PS5 is already lagging behind PS4.
And I mean. I don't even need to argue about "is situation fine?" Totoki already hinted during Q&A that they are looking at multiplatform releases for first-party games, that studios needs to reign in spending and they need to raise their margins. He is basically saying that business is not growing in console space and they need to cut costs while expanding towards new audience.
Re: PS5 Sales Touch 55 Million As Sony Breaks Revenue Records
@themightyant The reason why I sent this link
https://www.gameinformer.com/sites/default/files/styles/body_default/public/2022/05/26/90660446/sony_page.jpg
in my first post was to demonstrate, that Sony predicted that PS5 will surpass sales of PS4.
And I argued that slowing sales of PS5 are a problem specifically, because SIE management forecasted exact oposite. Worst thing in business is not hitting your expectations.
Yes, PS5 is currently "only" 2,4 million behind PS4. But since Sony is already hinting at slowdown of sales, while PS4 hit it's peak during 4th year on the market, it is the problem only exaggerated by ballooning investments. Also, slowdown is strange since they are supposed to be releasing PS5 Pro. And with Switch 2 launch their position may be even worse.
Re: PS5 Sales Touch 55 Million As Sony Breaks Revenue Records
@themightyant It matters hugely. Because Sony management wants to see growth. Not selling same amount or even less consoles as in previous gen.
And it's pretty clear, that console market is just limited and it's not growing. So Sony needs to find new growth vector if PlayStation 5 is selling worse than PlayStation 4.
I mean. Just look at the numbers. They have 10 billion in revenue with 6% operating margins. That's just pitiful.
Or look at that in this way.
Spider-Man was developed at 100 million budget, sold at 60$ to audience of 115 million PlayStation 4 users
Spider-Man 2 was developed at 300 million budget, sold at 70$ to an audience of decreasing PlayStation owners.
Do you see the problem? Their investment into development of game tripled, they are only selling game with 10$ price increase to a decreasing audience.
Re: PS5 Sales Touch 55 Million As Sony Breaks Revenue Records
@get2sammyb "It’s also lost a little pace on the PS4 launch aligned, which had an install base of 57.1 million units at this point in its lifecycle. Obviously, the PS5 had crippling stock shortages for its first few years on the market, though."
Sony predicted that once PS5 surpass sales of PS4 in Year 4, it will stay ahead. But Sony said that they are expecting dropoff in PS5 sales, so it doesn't look like it will surpass PS4 at all.
https://www.gameinformer.com/sites/default/files/styles/body_default/public/2022/05/26/90660446/sony_page.jpg
Re: Sony Slashes PS5 Forecast to 21 Million for Fiscal Year
They are not even hitting that. They are currently at 16,4 million during fiscal year so they need to sell 4,6 million PlayStation 5 consoles during january-march to hit 21 million.
FY Q4 (january-march) is historically worst period for console sales (last year was an exception because it was first quarter when PS5 supply addressed demand) and even with slashed prices I really doubt will hit that number.
They also fell behind PS4. And without major first-party games until march 2025 I really doubt that PS5 will sell as good as PS4. Which is kinda big problem.
Re: PS5 Goes for the Kill with New Discounts in Europe
It makes sense, since that Taiwanese business web informed, that Sony had to cut production of PS5 because they have full warehouse of consoles, because they oversupplied during holiday.
I really doubt that they will hit 25 million during current fiscal year.
Re: Pentiment Pegged for PS5 Amid Ongoing Xbox Strategy Shift Rumours
Lol. So we went from Indiana Jones and Starfield to Pentiment, Sea of Thieves and Hi-Fi Rush?
Like, don't get me wrong, both Hi-Fi Rush and Pentiment are great. But it will hardly hurt Microsoft's position on console market when they will port those games. They were not a system sellers and they were not supposed to be one. Not to mention Sea of Thieves which is 6 years old.
It's literally like if Sony decided to port Concrete Genie to Xbox.
Re: Helldivers 2 Is 'Blowing Through Estimates', Around 1 Million Sales In Less Than a Week
@Voltan CEO of Arrowhead said that game hit 220k CCU at the time when Steam was peaking at 156k. So I'm going from his info...
Edit: okay. my bad. I didn't read most recent tweet.
Re: Helldivers 2 Is 'Blowing Through Estimates', Around 1 Million Sales In Less Than a Week
I wonder what will be Sony's response in future in terms of releasing their games on PC day one.
Because Helldivers 2 has way more players on PC then on PlayStation 5, so game clearly benefited from linked marketing push.
Re: Microsoft Employee Inadvertently Adds More Fuel to the Xbox Multiplatform Fire
@naruball Because as I already told you, Microsoft already IS third party publisher, so even if his bio was left intact it doesn't necessarily mean what you think it means.
He had his profile like that for month and nobody cared, until one Twitter user pointed it out and people connected it to recent events.
Re: Microsoft Employee Inadvertently Adds More Fuel to the Xbox Multiplatform Fire
@naruball This article is exact reason why.
Because especially since this week's events, people are literally grasping for any straw to fit their narrative.
And I'm not saying that rumors about Microsoft porting their games on PlayStation are not true.
I'm just saying that Microsoft is already third-party publisher in some cases (Minecraft, TESO, F76, Call of Duty, Diablo, Overwatch etc.), so it's obvious that they need to take care about all platforms in Asia. But people will read it and immediately put it alongside other rumors from last several days.
Re: Microsoft Employee Inadvertently Adds More Fuel to the Xbox Multiplatform Fire
Last time I checked, Minecraft is on all platforms and COD will be too. So this is probably weakest "proof" or "hint" in existence of universe.
Re: PS5, PS4 First-Party Devs Won't Get Complacent Even if Competition Degrades
@naruball Hogwarts Legacy is cross-gen game. And it also took almost one year to develop functioning port that is so constrained that I'm baffled somebody bought it.
Switch sold 140 million consoles and is largely ignored by big third parties. Ports are either late or non-existent. So let's not pretend that every big multiplatform game is on Switch.
People rejected PS3 with high price, because they had alternative. Xbox 360 that was cheaper and ran majority of games better. It took Sony to make cheaper and better Slim model to put up fight. So you exactly proved my point that competition is needed.
Re: PS5, PS4 First-Party Devs Won't Get Complacent Even if Competition Degrades
@naruball Switch 2 is rumored to be even less powerful then Series S. So I bet AAA game devs will have just a great time porting their games on system when they are already complaining about Series S power...
You are literally proving my point. Yes, Sony currently can take a risk with games, because they are competing to create ecosystem that people will prefer over competition. With competition (in hardware space) gone, there is no incentive to bet on projects that doesn't have 100% chance of being successful and bringing huge ROI.
Same thing with consoles. When there is competition (Series X), Sony have incentive to price their console in line with competition and therefore taking loss on hardware. In market where isn't any competing hardware, there is no reason for Sony to take a loss on hardware. So I hope, people are prepared for 700$ PS6
Re: PS5, PS4 First-Party Devs Won't Get Complacent Even if Competition Degrades
@naruball People will buy console, because they want consoles. They don't want PC. And if their only option for playing AAA multiplatform games would be PlayStation (Switch can't run 99% of AAA multiplatform games), they will buy PlayStation even without exclusives.
And I'm not talking about Spider-Man, because that's somehow safe bet. I'm talking about risky projects like new IP's, studios like Sony Bend that isn't making 100% hits etc.
It's about ROI. If you can spend your investment $ in thing that will bring you more money, you will do that. Instead of giving 300 million dollars to a studio that will bring you back 400 millions.
And let's stop dreaming about "another company entering space." Only two companies have money that are required to enter gaming industry as a platform holder. Apple and Google. And Google already tried.
Competition is crucial. If there wasn't an Xbox 360, Sony wouldn't be in position of need to nurture first-party studios. If there wasn't a PS4, Microsoft would get away with Xbox One DRM policies. If it wasn't for Game Pass, Sony wouldn't make PS Plus Extra/Premium which are 100x better then old PS Now offerings.
Just remember what happened last time when Sony felt that their position on the market is untouchable.
Re: PS5, PS4 First-Party Devs Won't Get Complacent Even if Competition Degrades
@UltimateOtaku91 I really doubt that.
Every month of delay is 200+ devs (in big AA projects) on payroll without any ROI. And game budgets for big AAA SP games are already on verge of being unsustainable.
Xbox is in no way, shape of form pressuring Sony to release their games in shape that they are not ready. Financial reality of game development is doing that. Spider-Man 2 was released in buggy state (for standards of PlayStation Studios) not because of Xbox, but because game already exceeded it's budget, it was tied with release of PS5 Slim (through bundles), and millions of dollars on marketing was already invested and slated for October release.
Re: PS5, PS4 First-Party Devs Won't Get Complacent Even if Competition Degrades
Ehh. Nobody is questioning "complacency" of devs to create great games.
But if Xbox really leaves console making, what reason would Sony have to invest in 300+ million big budget SP games? Currently it's huge risk which we saw with Spider-Man 2 that has to sold 7,5 million copies to at least break even.
Answer is none. Currently, Sony is using exclusives to draw people into their ecosystem where people then spend money on third-party stuff where Sony is getting 30% from every transaction. That's basically how consoles are working in past 4 generations. But with Xbox consoles gone, investing 300+ million into SP game is just pitiful investment with low ROI, because your console will be "console of choice" even without those games.
Re: Evidence of Rockin' Xbox Exclusive Hi-Fi Rush Coming to PS5 Continues to Mount
@GamingFan4Lyf Well, audience decides what system seller is. Sony found out that their audience likes third-person action adventure games so they steered in that direction.
Microsoft has Game Pass so they are betting on variety of content.
Nintendo is showing that "system seller" can be game from almost any genre. Animal Crossing, Zelda, Mario, Pikmin, Xenoblade etc.
I would dare to say that Starfield was system seller, because it pushed Xbox consoles and also Game Pass, which is it's job and despite not really stellar reviews. And I expect Indiana Jones to move good number of consoles despite fact that game is first-person. And then you have Forza Horizon which is staple of racing genre and is always moving consoles. And I expect Fable (third person RPG), Perfect Dark (FPS) and Quake (FPS) to do the same if they will be quality titles.
Re: Evidence of Rockin' Xbox Exclusive Hi-Fi Rush Coming to PS5 Continues to Mount
I see no drawback for Microsoft.
It's small niche game. It wasn't system seller and it was never supposed to be one. It's an equivalent of Sony porting Concrete Genie to Xbox and Switch.
Microsoft will get additional money from Sony/Nintendo players (like in case of Ori on Switch) and players will get to experience one of the best games from 2023.
Re: Could Sony, Hideo Kojima's Physint Be the First Announced PS6 Game?
Yeah. There is no way that this new game will be done before 2030.
Even if Death Stranding 2 won't suffer from any delays (which is always a possibility) and will release in 2025, you are looking at 5-6 years AAA development (which is standard currently). Not to mention fact that Kojima is also working on OD for Xbox.
Re: Following Embracer Shutdown, Volition Veterans Form New Outfit Shapeshifter Games
@Ken_Kaniff It would be strange if it wasn't like that.
They spent 80 billion on two publishers and have 32+ internal studios. If they can't release first-party games at a pace of at least 4-5 per year, something is seriously rotten there.
This year they have Towerborne, Call of Duty Gulf War, Avowed, Indiana Jones, ARA: History Untold, Hellblade 2 and Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024 which is pretty nice start.
Re: Rec Room Dev 'Can't Justify' a PSVR2 Port
@MattBoothDev It doesn't matter.
Meta Quest outsold PSVR2 30:1 during holidays on Amazon and that is translating into willingness of devs to port their games onto platform.
Unless Sony pays for that port of course.
Re: Rec Room Dev 'Can't Justify' a PSVR2 Port
I think writing is on the wall for PSVR2.
0 first-party PSVR2 games announced. Sales dropped from a cliff. And now even third-party devs are saying that there is no point in porting their games for platform.
Re: Suicide Squad Teases Major Post-Launch Support, 'Hundreds' of Build Combinations
@Lavishturtle Rocksteady never worked on Superman game. It was rumor originated from a guy who mixed up studios. Warner Bros. Montreal worked on Superman game (makers of Gotham Knights). But not Rocksteady.
Re: PS Store Sales Charts: Few Surprises for PS5, PS4 Over Crucial Christmas Period
I'm kinda surprised Spider-Man 2 wasn't even close to beat Modern Warfare 3 considering MW3 reviews...
Re: Helldivers 2 Confirms PS5, PC Crossplay with Inspirational Gameplay Trailer
I see that PlayStation community on the internet is dealing with same stuff as Xbox community when Sea of Thieves launched on PC - "Why we have to pay to access multiplayer in this game, but PC gamers don't need to?"
Re: Rumour: Sea of Thieves Might Be One More Xbox Game Coming to PS5
@EquiinoxGII People who are cheering for this development are in for a rude awakening.
Without Xbox hardware, Sony can do basically whatever they want with prices on PlayStation. I'm sure people would be fine with PlayStation 6 for 700$, right?
Re: Rumour: Sea of Thieves Might Be One More Xbox Game Coming to PS5
@UltimateOtaku91 No it isn't
Unless it's also coming to mobile and Arcade machines
I'm not trying to say that Hi-Fi Rush is not coming to other platforms, but I'm just pointing out that this rating is just there to "cover their asses" and not because announcement is incoming. Also, rating is from december 2022 so other platforms are included for more then year. And PS5 is missing
Re: Sony's Third-Party Chief Explains How PlayStation Makes PS5 the Best Place to Play
I like haptics, but Adaptive Triggers is most annoying ***** ever and I disabled it on console settings. But it kinda screwed me because Adaptive Trigger mechanic is huge part of Returnal for example...
Re: Days Gone Dev on New PS5 Exclusive: We're Cooking
Yeah. I'm still not expecting any news about this game this year.
5 years in development is common in current AAA game industry (even more with new IP) and considering they only started development on that new IP in 2021, I'm expecting this game at the end of current gen. So there is no point in revealing that game this year.
Re: Activision Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick Is Stepping Down on 29th December, 2023
@Impossibilium Okay. You clearly can't separate disgusting personality of Kotick from his ability to run successful business. So there is literally no point to talk to you about it.
Re: Activision Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick Is Stepping Down on 29th December, 2023
@Impossibilium Well. I don't want to ruin a dream for you, but making money for investors/shareholders is purpose of publicly traded company
Re: Activision Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick Is Stepping Down on 29th December, 2023
@Impossibilium He owned huge amount of shares so his compensation is not surprising in the slightest.
And whatever you might think of him, he saved Activision from bankruptcy and he made it one of the most successful gaming companies in history.
Re: Devs Weigh in on 'Disgraceful' Insomniac Games Data Breach
@dv_xedge Well. We will see how leaks will be handled by those same sites in future. If it is more about "it's Insomniac" or more about "it's morally wrong."
But I digress. I'm interested in those information and there will be always someone who is willing to cover it, so I will read it there. It's not even that hard to access those files for yourself.
Re: Devs Weigh in on 'Disgraceful' Insomniac Games Data Breach
@Gunnerzaurus PushSquare covered Capcom leaks but is refusing to cover Insomniac leaks (so I expect this comment to be deleted). Gamespot editor also said that they will not cover Insomniac leaks why they covered Capcom leaks. And don't get me started on youtubers.
And while I understand difference between "Xbox leak" and Insomniac leak (Xbox basically doxxed themselves by uploading underacted files), there is no difference between Capcom and Insomniac leaks because they both originated from ransmoware hackers who published data.
And okay. Every web can choose where is their line in the sand. But don't use excuses when you covered information from same situation to try to get into moral highground.
Re: Devs Weigh in on 'Disgraceful' Insomniac Games Data Breach
@Gunnerzaurus But then don't argue with "we won't cover it because it's stolen information" when exactly same thing happened with Capcom and they covered it. Because it's just hypocrisy at that point.
Re: Devs Weigh in on 'Disgraceful' Insomniac Games Data Breach
It's really strange how differently are devs voicing their opinions about this leak.
Capcom had massive breach that revealed private info about employees and also revealed slate of their games for next 6 years and almost nobody cared and every website covered that leak.
But Insomniac suffered same breach and now everybody is concerned including some websites and people from gaming media?
I don't want to spread conspiracies but it really looks like they are afraid that Sony will take away their access to review codes/preview events etc. and that's why they won't cover it. And while I understand Insomniac devs being pissed at this situation, this really smells like double standard.
Re: Insomniac Hackers Allegedly Leak Terabytes of Internal Information
Jesus. Those royalties for Marvel are absolutely insane.
It cost 315 million dollars for Sony to make Spider-Man 2
From every 70$ on Digital copies they need to send 6,3 - 12,6$ to Marvel.
From every 70$ on Physical copies they need to send 13,3 - 18,2$ to Marvel. Not to mention cut for retailers, distribution companies etc.
From every DLC they need to send 19-26% to Marvel
From every hardware bundle they need to send 24,5 - 35$ to Marvel
Which means that if you bought PlayStation 5 Slim Spider-Man 2 bundle for 449$, not only Sony probably lost money on actual hardware unit sold, they also lost additional 24,5 - 35$ because of Marvel cut.
Which also means that if similar provision exist for Modern Warfare 3 PS5 bundles, with every PlayStation 5 Slim sold, Microsoft got huge chunk of money.
Re: The Last of Us' Cancelled PS5 Multiplayer Was 'More Fun' Than Any Other Online Game
@themightyant Yeah. I tend to agree. I'm taking it as an official "excuse" and if it is true, that it's absolutely on Naugty Dog's management.
But my theory is just that they tried to do TLOU Online in "Naughty Dog way" and Bungie just told them that nobody will play it long term and live service without longevity is useless. So they have the option to adapt mechanics which would keep engagement or ditch the project entirely and they chose latter.
In my opinion, Naughty Dog strengths as developer are just incompatible with live service games. They care about carefully constructed narratives, animation and technical perfection, but they are not strong in gameplay mechanics and being able to churn new content fast enough. No live service players cares about lengthy cutscenes, obsessive animation quality and technical perfection. They care about engaging gameplay and new content
Re: The Last of Us' Cancelled PS5 Multiplayer Was 'More Fun' Than Any Other Online Game
@thefourfoldroot1 It's bad management from Naughty Dog.
How on earth are you developing a game for 4 years and only after all that time you realised how many devs would be needed to sustain this live service?
Jesus. There are plenty of successful live service games like Apex, Fortnite etc. that should give you a clear picture what resources are needed for managing that type of game.
They now basically wasted 4 years of dev time on huge part of studio that could be used to make 2 AAA games during PS5 generation instead of one. Because there is just no way ND will be able to make more then one AAA game until end of generation.
Re: The Last of Us Multiplayer Project Is Officially Cancelled
I'm sorry, but this is just pathetic.
How many dev time was wasted on this project and how it is possible that studio like Naughty Dog had no clue how many people would be needed to sustain live service game?
Re: Disney Doesn't Think It Was 'Overly Exclusionary' to Cut Planned PS5 Version of Indiana Jones
@mrbone Fact that you have account in services doesn't make you MAU (Monthly active user). You should know that before you want to use phrases like liar.
Since you are arguing about bad numbers, isn't selling 20 million copies of a game that sold 120 million consoles also bad number?
I don't think Indiana Jones would sell more then PlayStation exclusives even if it was multiplatform (including PlayStation release). Mainly because I don't think Indiana Jones has brand recognition as Spider-Man (for example). Even if it will be excellent game.
I don't even need to "convince you" about anything. Numbers speak for itself. PC gaming market is similar size as market of all 3 console manufacturers combined.
https://fatihyazici7.medium.com/game-industry-overview-and-trends-f697fc13d702
And about my allegiances. I have PlayStation 5 and Series X. So you can imply whatever you want...
Re: Disney Doesn't Think It Was 'Overly Exclusionary' to Cut Planned PS5 Version of Indiana Jones
@mrbone https://www.tweaktown.com/news/89084/pc-market-rapidly-expands-as-steam-hits-record-30-million-concurrent-users/index.html
Epic also publishes their MAU at EGS every year, so you can easily check it out. Steam is also growing so that 120 million is currently probably higher. And as I said, I didn't count huge crowd of Battle.net users and Riot Launcher users, and smaller crowds of Xbox App users, EA Play users, Ubisoft Connect users and GOG users.
Games are selling on PC, but PC has way more games and also different preferences. For example, Baldur's Gate 3 sold way more copies on PC because console gamers are not that hot on CRPG games while PC gamers are. Cyberpunk and Witcher 3 also sold best on PC. So trying to pretend that PC is small market is just pure lunacy. Riot literally never released game on consoles and they are one of the biggest gaming company on the market.
"Oh GP always count everyone who downloads and plays even 10 sec." Yes. And copy sold is copy sold even if person never played the game or played 10 minutes. And also when game is bundled with console (ehm. God of War Ragnarok, Spider-Man 2). But if you want to claim that 35 million Forza Horizon 5 players only played the game for 10 minutes and never turned it again then be my guest.
Re: Disney Doesn't Think It Was 'Overly Exclusionary' to Cut Planned PS5 Version of Indiana Jones
@mrbone I literally provided you hard number of MAU on two PC stores that vastly exceeds number of PlayStation users.
Rockstar is not releasing GTA VI on PC day one because they know they can double dip on people who are impatient and will buy GTA VI on PlayStation/Xbox and then on PC. Which is smart on their part.
Also. I never claimed that Indiana Jones will outsell PlayStation exclusives. I just said that it's not as big deal to skip PlayStation as some of the PlayStation users claim it is thanks to Xbox+PC combined audience.
And regarding "small size" of Xbox+PC audience. Forza Horizon 5 exceeded 35 million players. Not bad for "just" racing game
Re: Disney Doesn't Think It Was 'Overly Exclusionary' to Cut Planned PS5 Version of Indiana Jones
@Kevw2006 Mate. Steam alone has 126 million MAU which is more then PlayStation (107 million). Add EGS (estimates talk about 62 million MAU), GoG, Battle.net, Riot Launcher, Xbox Store on PC, EA Store, Ubisoft Connect etc. and you will maybe get a grip about how huge PC market actually is.
Re: Disney Doesn't Think It Was 'Overly Exclusionary' to Cut Planned PS5 Version of Indiana Jones
@Titntin Do you understand why exclusives are called exclusives right? Because they exclude a group of people.
MachineGames (and Arkane Lyon) are owned by Microsoft. Microsoft is funding development of Indiana Jones and Blade. They are first party games in same vein as Wolverine and Spider-Man. Also they didn't "bought" IP, they just licensed it.
Also. PC is not "Microsoft's platform." PC is open platform with competing stores and Microsoft sees no money from copy of other games sold through GoG/EGS/Steam. So arguing with that is pretty stupid.
And don't claim it's only about "removing games already being made for different competitor" because people bitch about Blade and that game started development in 2022 - when it was pretty clear that no PlayStation version is or ever will be developed.
As I said. This whole spiel is about PlayStation fans being angry, because they are used to have everything. So now they are trying to invent theories why it doesn't make financial sense for Indiana Jones and Blade to be exclusive for Disney. When in reality, those game are exclusive to bring people into Xbox ecosystem.
I want to play Indiana Jones/Fable/Gears 6 etc. so I bought Xbox. I recently purchased PlayStation 5 because there are plenty of games I don't want to miss. It's business so stop arguing with morality and ethics.