LogicStrikesAgain

@tangyzesty that’s fair, to each their own 👍🏼

@Cry_Zero

Played it for half an hour and i swear to god i dont see a difference in those 3 modes

there is no difference between the ray tracing and ray tracing pro presets, only internal resolution and performance, i believe. But the performance preset doesnt have ray tracing though, so that one should be pretty noticable, unless you don’t know where to look

@tangyzesty

It's funny how many times I see such-and-such game is massively improved on the Pro, and then I see side-by-side images that look identical to my eyes

That’s because they are almost identical. They are comparing Pro versions with eachother, not comparing Pro with the Base version. Compared to the Base version though, this is definitely an improvement.

People should just better check out the DF tech review. Basically they added the full suite of ray tracing (ambient occlusion, shadows, reflections, skylight and emissive lighting). Its basically the Overdrive patch for PC, it really makes a lotta difference. Add in PSSR2 for an even better image quality, and this is a pretty great update over the base version

Damn, that escalated quickly lol, from maybe next month, to possibly next week. Hope we do get one, i’d love some Wolverine and Intergalactic updates 🤞🏼

I think i’m missing something here. Why would they remove it?

@TrollOfWar

Is that behavior really sustainable for a platform?

No, not if everyone did that. But this was only about people from PC buying a Playstation. Your original question was whether it’s worth it to Sony if someone who only games on PC decided to buy a Playstation just for 1 game, right? Well, if it goes anything like the example i made, then that’s definitely worth it, because that person may have bought it just for 1 game, but ended up spending much more in their ecosystem, and through this interaction perhaps even become a fan in the process

@TrollOfWar You make very good points! Only thing i will push back a little is to the following:

So, is it profitable to just sell a subsidized PlayStation console and a first party game to them, if they're not going to spend more money in the ecosystem?

There might be some people who will never spend more than that 1 game in their ecosystem, sure. But in practice, what’s more likely to happen, is that people buy a console for 1 game, but when they interact with with the ecosystem, they might see other exclusive titles they’ve never tried and give it a shot.

For example, one buys a PS5 for Demon Souls remake, then Returnal releases and “oh wait its not on PC?”, so they buy it on their PS5, then Spider Man 2 releases and they’re like “damn that looks pretty cool i’ll get that as well”, then Godnof War Ragnarok, Stellar Blade, Death Stranding 2. They’ve never played Shadow of the Colossus, so they might as well give that a try, now that they own a PS5. They never played PS2/PS3 games, so perhaps they decide to sub to PS+ Premium for a few months and try some of their classics like Jak & Daxter, Infamous, Resistance, Uncharted etc. Then they realize GTA6 is not launching on PC anytime soon. Before you know it, they see their PS5 as their exclusives console, and they have Wolverine and Intergalactic on their wishlist, are following updates on Playstation games and are hyped for PS6.

Lol, this is just a hypothetical best case scenario ofcourse. But i genuinely think for most people coming from PC, something like this is a bit more plausible than buying a whole new console for just 1 game, and never interacting with that ecosystem ever again

@nessisonett It’s not like people dont have a choice though, Sony offers different options. Their games can be bought cheaper from third party sellers as physical copies, or even much cheaper second hand

@nessisonett apparently according to a former manager they saw $300m revenue in 3 years from PC ports. I’m sure they did a cost benefit analysis on whether thats enough to compensate for all the users that might leave the Playstation ecosystem if everything kept being ported to PC. In the end the revenue from PC ports is probably too small to risk losing part of their userbase to competing platforms.

It’s not just PC, but also upcoming consoles like Steam Machine and project Helix. If Playstation would continue porting all their IP’s, it would certainly damage their brand and some people would certainly think twice if they even need to buy their consoles.

In the long term this might hurt them more then foregoing the small extra revenue they get from single player PC ports

@nessisonett Some people want them to focus on their own platform instead of others. Look what it did to the Xbox brand focusing on everything else instead of their own console.

PC ports of live service titles will still continue, it’s only their single player games that wont be ported, and i personally think that’s a perfectly fine business strategy. Consoles need at least some kind of differentiation to stay attractive

Give us Driveclub 2 already, Sony! 😎

@RoomWithaMoose 🤣

@rjejr We’d all like next gen games from the start, but we can’t expect publishers to make games exclusively for ps6 when the userbase is still small, especially with how expensive games are to develop now, that wouldn’t make any financial sense for any publisher

@KPS Thanks for the much needed nuance. Well put! 👍🏼

I’m sure streaming will eventually replace hardware, but its not happening next gen. Perhaps the generation after that, streaming could start to become the more commonly way to play games, who knows

Curious to hear more about this handheld. If it’s dockable that would be awesome, it’d basically be a high end Switch

I can see this coming in around the $650-$750 range

Publishing articles at 2am? I’m starting to think Push Square editors might be vampires. Respect to my fellow night owl💤

Gorgeous aesthetics. So hyped for this game!

I remember when this game first got featured after a Xbox direct, and i thought it looked pretty good. This, and Fable, were the only Xbox titles that have actually piqued my interest. Then reviews started coming out, gameplay footage, and it definitely soured any enthousiasm i had for the title.

But yeah i still kind of want to try it. But we’ll see, there’s just so many games i plan to buy this year, that this doesnt have any priority for me

@IOI

Port-begging much?

It’s not really port begging though. People aren’t really asking if it’ll be ported, but rathen when it’ll be ported

@Oram77 You’re probably right, i can see that happening as well

@Oram77 unless they are spamming Microsofts twitter, then its not exactly the same, i’d say. People can discuss things on Reddit or Push Square without it immediately being “port begging.”
It’s not like when they were literally spamming Housemarque directly on their Twitter, demanding a PC port

Really curious to see whether its Day 1 or not, as it might give an indication whether MS has changed their exclusive strategy.

Anyway, i’m ready with my popcorn 🍿

Oversaturation and too high costs of development. Thousands of games release every year, no way that they can all find an audience, theres only so much time people have to spend on games, especially when their attention is already hooked by other types of content like social media etc.

AAA gaming costs have ballooned to incredible budgets, where studios instantly are at risk if a game fails.

The market is likely in the process of correcting itself. Expect closures, mergers and consolidation to continue until market has stabilized into a more sustainable one.

Personally i hope that future includes more of an emphasis on smaller titles, less bloat, less 50+ hr games, shorter development cycles (2-4 year).

I remember it took me like 12 hrs or so to finish MGS2 back in the day, and it’s still one of the best experiences i’ve had in gaming

@ShadowRJ I know, i’m just playin 😉

This must be awful then, seeing as Marathon has an 81 (an 84 on Xbox), and people are calling that game trash.

Just kidding 😎

@themightyant I agree, i’ve said this a bunch of times here as well, except for the Covid overinvestment, which is a good point! The market is indeed oversaturated. Too many games releasing and trying to compete for our attention, and not enough time and money for us to maintain that supply. Game development has also become much too expensive.

So the market seems to be correcting itself. Closures, mergers and consolidation will continue, until the market reaches a point of a more balances sustainability

I’ve had an Xbox since the OG, except for this gen, but i’ve never been interested in the Gears and Halo franchises. I’ve only played Halo once, and only watched other people play Gears, and i respect them as great franchises, but somehow these games have never appealed to me 🤷🏻‍♂️

Everything is getting more expensive in game development, but costumers hate to be presented with the bill

For everyone saying they can’t release the PS6 for cheaper than the current PS5 Pro price, i just wanna remind you that Sony released the PS4 for $399, and the PS5 for $499. Even though the PS3 released at $599.

I’m not saying i’m sure that the PS6 will be cheaper, but there is a precedent.

Also, Pro consoles aren’t subsidized, because they’re not intended to be mass sellers. So i personally think we should be looking to base PS5 pricing, not the Pro, if we want to guestimate the price of the PS6

@Sulleymonster

stop it with these "will the PS6 be greater or less $1000".

well tbf, there hasnt been any article about it being less than a $1000. The previous article was about it possibly releasing with a $1000 price tag, and that got a lot of comments, so there is interest in the topic.

So when a highly reliable and reputabable leaker like Kepler2 insinuates it might release cheaper, then that might be interesting to some. Also, it’s marked as rumours so no need to get so worked up about. Some of us like these little insights, and if people dont like it, everyone’s free to ignore the article right?

@rjejr Lol dude, whatever floats your boat. You seem to have missed a few other points i made though. But as i said, if people want to continue playing on base PS5 when next gen rolls in, that’s totaly fine as well, just keep in mind that it might not be a pleasurable experience, that’s all

@dskatter

The whole point of console gaming is that it is, in general, less expensive and annoying than a gaming PC. (I know there are exceptions, calm down PC master race folks.)
That seems to be no longer the case.

This will continue to be the case though. Even if PS6 launches at $1000, it’ll still be the most affordable high end console, and much cheaper than equivalent PC builds

@Dalamar Not a jab at all. I’m just very curious what people will do if they opt out of next gen gaming consoles

@Bizzy

There's a difference between need and would like.

I understand.

But ever improving graphic tech needs better hardware to play. You can’t expect to play RE9 at 4K60 with full raytracing and high settings on a base PS5 right?

Now imagine future next gen games. You wont get nearly the same fidelity and performance as next gen consoles, and will even lose some features like path tracing etc

@Kang81 Exactly! Some people saying they dont see the need for next gen hardware, dont seem to consider that graphic engines and other tech are also moving forward, and will require stronger hardware to perform properly

@Dalamar

If that will be a norm, then PS5 will be my last Sony's console, plain and simple.

Out of curiosity. Will you go to more expensive alternatives? Or opt out of next gen gaming entirely?

nothing about a console is even close to being worth $1000
at all
Also, i bet the same ppl that are voting yes/maybe are the same ppl that criticized the early ps3 for being “too expensive” despite being worth the price and offering more as a console in its respective time period than any other console ever has. ppl called sony greedy despite each system being sold at a loss, meanwhile the ps5 and ps5 pro were overpriced from the get-go

This sounds a bit contradictory. Maybe i’m reading it wrong. But are you saying the $599 PS3 at launch was worth the price, but the more powerful PS5 that released almost 15 years later for $499 wasn’t?

If you mean that they aren’t subsidizing it like they used to, you have to consider that the current economic climate isn’t the same as 15-25 years ago. With games being much more expensive to develop across the board for everyone, their low profit margins in softwate might not be enough to subsidize their hardware the same way they used to in past generations. Economic landscapes change, and business models go along with it. We can’t always compare things to how it was 15-25 years ago

@rjejr well, you dont have to upgrade. There’s surely going to be a long cross gen period, so you can continue gaming on a PS5. Problem is, games are going to run worse on it, without some of the next gen features. Imagine 720p, lower graphic settings like textures, shadows etc, no new features like path tracing, and perhaps even struggling to hit 30fps consistently for some games. Can’t imagine it being much fun

@vikramsingh Fair enough. But i bet an equivalent gaming laptop would also cost significantly more than $1000, so i dont know everyone will be able to afford that choice though, but it might make sense if you want next gen gaming and happen to buy a new laptop anyway

For everyone saying no, while i totally understand, i am curious. Even though these prices are high, Playstation would still likely be the cheapest high end consoles around. If PS6 will be $1000, i can only assume Helix must be $1500+, and any equivalent PC will probably be in the $2000+.

So my question: If you dont go for a PS6, will you be opting out of next gen gaming for good? Or move to PC? Or stick to current hardware waiting for prices to come down?

@naruball those are good points. But without going too deep into the economics of it all, i’m just going to say that the global economic landscape of today is very different from 20 years ago. And companies might make very different decisions than back then.

Also, the PS3 launched at $599. So if they were already losing money back then on hardware, imagine going back to $499 consoles almost 20 years later. I understand the Cell tech was very expensive, but just accounting for inflation, we’ve been enjoying pretty low console prices for a while. These might just not be the right market conditions for Sony to be willing to subsidize so much anymore, especially when software profitn margins aren’t anything to write home about and will probably even shrink more since games are getting even more expensive to make for every publisher

Their prices are now in line with their main competitor. Seeing how console prices have stayed relatively the same for the past few decades while everything else has soared in price due to inflation, i think this increase is overdue.

Does that mean i’m happy with it? No.

@naruball I mean, you have a point there, and maybe i was being a bit too absolute in my comment, they do have a choice.

However RAM prices havent just increased a little, but doubled or tripled, as well as some othercomponents. At that scale, i think its a bit unrealistic for a company to shoulder those costs. Also, software profit margins are shrinking across the board, and they will have taken that into account. Even Sony has it’s limits with how much it’s willing to subsidize

@Art_Vandelay Well, thats true as well. I guess you do have a point there!

I love how some people blame Sony for this. They were the last one to even hold on to such low prices. It’s not like companies have any choice in this economic climate.

Sure this sucks, but if you follow a bit of news, you can’t expect companies not to react. Component prices have skyrocketed. PC prices have tripled over the last year. They just can’t keep the prices low when the numbers dont make sense anymore. This is not how a business operates, unfortunately.

I guess were just going to have to accept that console gaming is not going to be for the masses anymore, or at least be satisfied with lower powered hardware

@Carnage That’s a good point! So things might even get worse 🤦🏻‍♂️

@Art_Vandelay oh yeah, absolutely! Looking at the bigger picture, no one is really in a good position in the gaming market today. Its just very hard to succeed in such a crowded market. Maybe my comment sounded too much as if i thought Sony is doing great or something, but it’s not, the whole market is actually pretty F’ed because of the reasons you also mentioned. I guess i just reacted because they specifically singled out Intergalactic, which again, i think Sony is probably in a slight better position than most publishers, to handle a game failing

@Art_Vandelay Good points btw (post #188). I actually commented not long ago about the gaming market being way too saturated. There are way too many games releasing, and not enough time and money for people to spend on it, so the supply will have to shrink