KippDynamite

"Also we'll probably get 'round to releasing video games at some point."

@themightyant
Thanks!

Yes, at times I try to engage and make a difference. But my actual life of full of helping people all day and most of the time I can't be bothered to do it on a gaming website as well.

Props to people who have the patience to do it here, though!

@themightyant
Makes me want to be less engaged in the community, to be honest. If half the discussion on this post is about whether or not diversity is good then perhaps many people in this community are too immature for my time.

If you have watched much Jeopardy you'll notice that there are always categories that were paid for. All sorts of random stuff. Often a category as innocent as state historical sites is sponsored by that state's tourism board.

A price drop! Breaking news!

This page is always so vague and useless. It's annoying it's constantly put on the news feed. Save it for when they are actually available, maybe?

I'm glad you discovered these aspects of video games! Games can be so much more than quest markers and holding X so that your horse stays on the path.

I'm getting tired of this discussion.

So . . . it's like the original Rogue?

Mine still crashes when using rest mode during a native PS5 game. It's so weird to me that they haven't fixed this yet.

There is such a thing as too much information. You would be happier about playing this game of you weren't caught up with information about industry gossip, business deals, etc. Enthusiastic gamers sometimes ruin things for themselves by being too active in online communities.

It's Very Difficult To Tell The Name Of The Game When The Words In The Headlines Are All Capitalized.

@uptownsoul
Agree. Usually the loudest are the most insecure. Especially if they have nothing meaningful to say.

To be honest, as a person who doesn't run a gaming news website I haven't really noticed any difference over the past 10 years.

If they are being more tight lipped it might be because they don't want the competition to pivot their plans.

They totally should have announced Ghost of Tsushima: Director's Cut on a sunny Monday morning.

@SoulsBourne128
You could pause/resume the PSP by moving the power slider briefly to off. Sliding it back on resumed.

I believe I read an article that the official position of Sony with regard to why the Vita failed is . . . they don't know why it failed.

As someone who has played it regularly for over 9 years my theory is:
-Fairly expensive.
-Insanely priced proprietary memory cards.
-Complete lack of support from Sony after 18 months.

Everything else about it is amazing, including that screen!

I have been trying to buy games via the Vita's storefront for months. It simply won't let me buy games. It's a frustrating mess.

I recall that in the early days of the Vita and PS4 that PlayStation was pushing Indies pretty hard. They had a guy that, by all accounts, was great to work with, seemed passionate about games, and went the extra mile to get good Indies published on PlayStation.

His name is Shahid Ahmad, and I can't help but notice his departure from PlayStation a few years ago lines up almost exactly with the time that PlayStation seemed to be a bit less focused on smaller devs.

I don't know his reasons for leaving but I assume it was to focus more on passion projects. If PlayStation could get him back I think it would actually make a big difference.

I can actually see why Sony doesn't allow devs to set and change prices, though perhaps they are currently too rigid about this.

We note that other stores have a problem with this, but in the past even the PS Store was riddled with content that was obviously priced highly so that it could appear to have a deep sale. Stuff like an avatar being priced at $5 and then being featured heavily (by default) with a 90% off sale - which put it at the price of the other avatars. These "sales" would last for years.

When people see that kind of stuff they don't take the store seriously. It looks like a scam or something.

And honestly it makes sense for a store to set their own prices - most physical stores are the exact same way. But this report seems to reveal that simply having better communication and action (instead of being ignored) would probably be a good enough middle ground.

Part of me thinks "as a customer, I WANT a curated experience. Because honestly most games - including indies - aren't very good."

On the other hand the PS Store doesn't feel curated at all. It seems to feature obviously big titles like Call of Duty and Apex Legends, with other titles being hard to find even if you explicitly search for them. I don't know the perfect store setup but PlayStation doesn't have it.

Liam, serious props for putting together this report. Investigative journalism in gaming is a rarity, but these investigative articles are significantly more engaging to me than any other type of article here or on other sites.

When I think of journalism, this is exactly the kind of thing I think of - someone reaching out and getting the scoop. Great work!

Just leave them alone, people.

I predict it will be out in 2026. Some people told me. Be sure to bookmark this page and check back regularly to see if I'm right.

Casey Hudson is definitely one to watch!

I don't know to what extent he's right but some of his complaints seem really dumb.

Obviously Sony doesn't want a game trailer on their blog with Xbox controls on the screen. Obviously.

And it's onerous to write a description of your game for the blog? You can't even be bothered to describe your own game for promotional purposes? Does he want Sony to brush his teeth as well?

And he seems to be saying "if they don't like your game then they won't actively promote it for free." Uh . . . duh? Why would they promote stuff if they don't think it reflects well on their brand?

Having played about 15 hours after it was offered on plus, I can't say I care. With all due respect to the developers, the game has a lot of rough edges - including with core design decisions.

@Enuo
My even bolder prediction is that it will happen sometime in the past.

@Octane
I was thinking the same thing. This could be good but Ubisoft's involvement causes me concern. All of their games feel very similar.

Also they literally promoted and protected sexual predators within their leadership, so I'm inclined to avoid the developer altogether until they can correct some of those problems. I normally try not let let studio drama affect my purchases but in the case of Ubisoft it's too extreme for me to ignore.

For what it's worth I just thought I'd throw out there that Sony has supported the LGBTQ community for quite a while. They supported gay marriage in America before it was legal and celebrated the moment equal marriage became law.

Ellie was a main character in their biggest game several years ago, and development of the game started a few years before that.

Lots of companies just jump on the pride bandwagon for social cred, but my personal opinion is that Sony legit cares about these issues.

They've certainly mastered how to exploit games media. No one would have heard of this otherwise.

When people are in the market to buy a product they often find a few good options and compare them. They figure out which product has the traits they want/need and pick that one. I bought a Dyson vac because I wanted a vac with good mobility, a waste bin that's easy to empty, and a vac that's easy to take apart. I bought my kitchen table because it was relatively cheap but sturdy and matched my decor. I bought an N64 because I wanted to play Mario 64, Mario kart, and GoldenEye. I bought a PS3 to play Metal Gear Solid 4.

If your product doesn't have anything unique to offer, there is limited incentive to buy it. One of the main reasons I've never bothered with Xbox is because it has nothing unique - I can just get their games on PC if I really wanted to.

PlayStation are compromising their multi-billion dollar business strategy to chase a few million dollars in publisher sales. It seems really short-sighted. It also ignores 40 years of console sales history, and also seems to ignore basic business logic.

Sales of their own games is a drop in the bucket compared to the 30% take they have in every other product sold through their system. The console business is about getting people to buy your console, and then you get free paydays with all of the other sales. Xbox has never focused on this and they've also never been first place in any console generation.

There is no way Kojima played Modern Warfare for 147 hours.

It's takes a lot of effort for devs to get prepared for E3 and sometimes it even causes crunch. I'd rather they could keep their development schedule and run their advertising campaign how they want rather than crunch to meet some arbitrary deadline in June (usually just to be drowned out by bigger announcements).

@K1LLEGAL
True, GamePass isn't the only option, though I do think that's what Microsoft wants and is trying to move toward. Each sub strengthens their plans. In this case I think the offered choice is bad. We have to be shrewd enough to see what corporations are trying to do.

@Martsmall
Totally agree with you there. I wish Sony would allow the PS5 to be backwards compatible with all prior systems. It seems like their talented programmers could make emulators.

@Martsmall
I agree that Sony also does stuff I don't like and that isn't great for customers. I think paying for the privilege of online gaming is BS. I myself wouldn't buy the digital-only PS5. If I had my way they would ban loot boxes on their system (but they don't because they get a 30% cut).

Nintendo also does dumb crap, like manipulating markets to create demand.

That doesn't mean Microsoft isn't guilty of the things I said. I personally see their actions - including their goals with GamePass - to be the most egregious against customers and the industry as a whole.

@K1LLEGAL Yes, that's what I was getting at. People talk about how GamePass is great value but forget that simply buying and then selling to recoup costs is similar and has been available for decades.

But with that method you can keep what you want to keep, it doesn't remove the concept of ownership, it helps people buy games second-hand for cheap, etc. Though I'll acknowledge it's more hassle than GamePass.

Microsoft tried to remove game ownership (by eliminating reselling) with the Xbox One. There was an outrage. They've now found a more palatable way of accomplishing the same goal. Game media eat it up (and take money to promote the underlying concepts), and fans do the rest of the PR work.

Did someone really show Plumbers Don't Wear Ties?

I look forward to permanently owning this and playing it whenever I want for decades to come! (rather than having it locked away whenever Microsoft deems me unworthy.)

Perhaps they'll even release a physical copy and I can resell it to recoup most of the cost - that's a very cheap way to play video games!

Microsoft is part of the ESA, which runs E3. Of course they always show up - they make money from it.

At least they got this article out of that tweet.

Wait, we have to pay for video games now?

Outrage!

With Souls-like games it always comes down to how good the combat actually is, which is hard for me to tell even from gameplay videos. Team Ninja are solid devs, though, so it seems promising.

If Sony really want to respond to GamePass they just need to increase the advertising budget of PS Now. But I doubt the math adds up to a return on investment.

I like owning games and I really dislike the GamePass model. I also guarantee they will increase the price over time - all subs do - and it will have less and less value. Letting a program like this grow will take away customer ownership in the long run.

I haven't been this tempted to buy an Xbox in about 14 years. Back then I decided on PS3 due to the exclusive games I simply couldn't miss, like MGS4.

For this reason there's no way I wouldn't buy PlayStation (already have a PS5), the only question is will I also get an Xbox. Even though I have the money, it seems crazy to buy a $500 console just to play a couple of games (for me the Series S isn't really cheaper because you can't buy cheap used games for it, and I'm not going to spend hundreds on a console only to rent a couple of games via GamePass).

I personally found that the first one did not scratch my itch to play a fallout game. One reason I like fallout is the exploration and discovery, and The Outer Worlds doesn't really have a similar open world. The fights were pretty good at first but got dull for me as there wasn't much variety.

If your product is not unique and different from your competitors, people will have no incentive to buy your product over a competitors. It's basic business. It's one reason why PlayStation has done well over the years.