@ED_209 I had a month of ps plus extra last December and managed to pay £20 upgrade for Spiderman remastered thanks to miles morales registering as the owned ps5 copy with ps plus extra. Definitely worth the £20 as I hadn't played before and really dislike playing at 30fps. Also had all the dlc which was a nice addition to the base game.
Just curious if the CMA have also considered the fact that CoD might not remain the juggernaut it is today after 10 years? I remember when EA's medal of honor series was the premium first person military shooter and CoD was considered the Pro Evolution Soccer of the genre. Look at the state of Halo today Vs where it was in it's prime.
The data suggests that warzone 2.0 isn't enjoying the same levels of popularity as the first iteration, overwatch 2 definitely hasn't hit the heights of the original and warcraft is in decline. I'm sure diablo 4 will have a successful launch, but it remains to be seen whether or not it has any longevity.
Couple all of that with Microsoft's abysmal track record of studio management/output and I'd say it's just as likely that when all these 10 year deals expire, the current ActiBlizz IPs won't be anything like as big as they are currently. Some possibly might not even exist at all.
Also, with live service style titles like CoD, a decline in popularity and sales necessitates that you maximise potential sales by having your product in as many marketplaces as possible. You don't restrict access as you're just compounding the revenue loss.
@Intr1n5ic that's true, such titles can usually be played in a year or so on other platforms. I'll be playing final fantasy 16 on ps5 because timed exclusivity means it won't be coming to Xbox at launch, the information regarding exclusivity is also intentionally vague and merely states that it won't be coming to "other platforms" for at least 6 months. If it's coming to Xbox in 6-12 months I'll wait and buy it using my reward points rather than spend £70 on it. Obviously there's absolutely no clarity on this as Sony want you to buy it on ps5 rather than a rival platform. It's in the consumers interest to know the full details on exclusivity contracts and whether other platform versions are already being worked on. Are "other platforms" pc and Xbox or just pc? Is there currently any intention to bring the title to Xbox?
The same is completely true of Microsoft and their timed deals. Starfield is a confirmed exclusive now, but Microsoft went months dodging questions about launch platforms despite knowing internally exactly how things would play out. They were/are equally vague about which bethesda titles would/will be coming to PlayStation.
If Microsoft can no longer add to their studios and game catalogue with acquisitions, I could see them spending a lot more money on third party timed exclusivity and third party "day one gamepass" titles. Consolidation of publishers and titles is crap for the industry, but I think consolidation of titles through timed deals is also pretty crappy.
@Intr1n5ic my point wasn't directed at the possibility of Xbox doing that. It was highlighting the fact that the practice is harmful to both the consumer and in terms of competition (especially when using an extreme example), yet it's a persistent feature of the video game industry that has yet to be addressed. Also, as I stated before, I think it's crappy whenever Microsoft or Sony do it.
@RBMango or they could just take the $69 billion and invest it in tying up timed third party exclusives like Sony. They could probably buy up an entire year's worth of games for $69 billion leaving PlayStation with 2-3 games for 12 months - apparently that wouldn't harm competition and the consumer in any way. For the record, timed exclusivity is a crappy practice by both Microsoft and Sony and needs to die.
@thefourfoldroot1 I'm not saying it's irrational face saving, I'm saying that it's clearly an incredibly close decision that could be swayed one way or another, hence the amount of time it's taken to arrive at. Subjectivity is clearly a part of that process and blowback would definitely be a consideration at this point. There's no real negativity surrounding the prevention of a multinational mega corporation from completing a large merger Vs the blowback from allowing that merger to happen. Blocking it prevents anyone from being able to say, actually the merger was great and there were no competition issues as speculated and as can be seen 15 years down the line. Preventing something happening is a guaranteed win with regards to outcome because you're preventing being proven wrong. Surely the CMA should just block every acquisition they are required to investigate on the grounds that nothing can be guaranteed?
I'm fully aware that individual governments are appraising the deal with regards to their region, but from my understanding it's the cloud gaming aspect of this deal that appears to be the stumbling point, not PlayStation Vs Xbox. I would think that the cloud gaming landscapes between developed countries are far more similar than the physical market shares of Xbox and PlayStation consoles. Japan (your example) has one of the best internet infrastructures in the world and we've been told that Microsoft has something of a stranglehold on cloud gaming. Surely it should be even less likely that Japan would greenlight this deal given that their infrastructure is ideally suited to Microsoft's cloud product? Especially in a country where traditional console gaming has been in decline and portable gaming via mobile or switch has shown tremendous growth?
@thefourfoldroot1 it's not a reach to assume the people in positions of authority within the CMA could be under-fire for a perceived wrong decision. The CMA is still accountable. A failing government organisation obviously doesn't result in it being dissolved, but it does often result in job losses, particularly for those responsible in decision making.
Their decision making is sound, but there is still a level of subjectivity involved, hence why there have been differing views from other organisations. If the CMA are in the large minority with regard to their decision making, it is logical to assume the majority are correct.
@thefourfoldroot1 I think it quite likely that it is partly a marker point against big multinational corporations given the fact that the power of such companies has been under scrutiny for several years. Meta's acquisitions of WhatsApp and Instagram went unchallenged and many feel this was a miss, large multinationals have also been under fire for tax evasion and other questionable practices in the UK. This decision sends a message that the CMA is active and does act against large multinational corporations rather than if they were, again, to do nothing. It is in the CMAs personal interest to block this acquisition and justify their existence having received criticism in the past.
@thefourfoldroot1 I agree, but the fact that that as things stand, the UK CMA are the only authority to block the acquisition (US right to appeal seems likely to go through), the decision seems more like self motivated marker statement than an objective one. It will be interesting if the EU and US (right to appeal fails) follow suit and block, or if the UK are alone in their assessment (further lending credibility to the idea it is a decision influenced by non objective factors).
@thefourfoldroot1 they do today - netflix owned 100% of their market in the beginning too. Much like netflix, cloud gaming is still very much in its infancy, current market share is certainly unlikely to represent market share in 10 years or so. Predicting the impact of the ActiBlizz on a market this immature seems pointless when the current market is so more relevant to the discussion.
Amazing news for everyone here, fantastic that Sony will be able to maintain their 70/30 split of the premium home console market. Consumers win when Sony dominate... until they don't. There's a small possibility that Microsoft decide the home console market is no longer yielding sufficient returns and either close the Xbox division or sell it off. If that day happens Sony will inherit a monopoly and PlayStation consumers will get to enjoy all the benefits that come from having a singular entity controlling prices and output.
Whether people here like to admit it or not, most of Sony's consumer friendly decisions this generation have come as a result of Microsoft's actions and competition. Titles released on PC - Microsoft's doing, a subscription service offering similar features to gamepass - Microsoft's doing, crossplay - Microsoft's doing. Sony's market dominance means they were the first to increase game prices across the board, the first to increase hardware prices, the last to agree to crossplay, the last to give consumers the choice of EA access (which apparently didn't represent good value to players and Sony knew better than their player base).
You guys all celebrate Sony's continued dominance whilst completely oblivious to the long term implications this has for you as the consumer. When the Xbox 360 was wrecking the PS3 I was rooting for Sony to come back and kill it, which they did because they were getting hammered. As the consumer I benefitted hugely from this. I had an Xbox 360 and a PS3, but I wasn't cheering for the death of PlayStation and celebrating Microsoft's dominance. PS4 was amazing because of the Xbox 360, and Xbox one was abysmal because of the PS3.
Dominance is fine to a degree if the competition still believes there's something to fight for. You remove their ability to compete, they leave and you're left with a monopoly that will trash your hobby and wallet in a heartbeat.
I wasn't a huge fan of horizon: forbidden west when tried it on ps5 - the open world and story just didn't grab me. However the visuals on display, specifically, the detail of character models and animations/presentation during conversations with NPC's, really blew me away. This was made all the more impressive by the fact that the game was running at 60fps in performance mode. The decima engine is absolutely fantastic and I would welcome it's use in more titles from PlayStation studios.
@thefourfoldroot1 you made the comparison. They're not a completely different market, they're different segments of the same market. For the enthusiast they're very different, for the mass market consumer they're both seen as part of the same video game market.
@thefourfoldroot1 ford and McDonald's, Nintendo and PlayStation. Ford make cars, Macdonald's is a fast food restaurant franchise. Nintendo make video games and consoles, PlayStation make... video games and consoles. Comparing Nintendo and PlayStation is exactly like a comparison between ford and McDonald's? Or maybe I missed McDonald's recent announcment that they're selling off their food business and launching the McCar?
Extremely likely that a version of hi-fi rush was in development? Likely, yes, but not substantiated. The facts are that redfall was in development and pulled from ps5. Microsoft will have launched three Minecraft games on PlayStation platforms by April - base minecraft, Minecraft dungeons and Minecraft legends. Technically they have brought three more games to Playstation platforms. Again no confirmation that I can find anywhere that hi-fi rush was in development for PlayStation so it's still just conjecture.
As of today, hi-fi rush is the only exclusive from their Bethesda acquisition not available on PlayStation Vs 2 Minecraft games from their previous mojang studios acquisition. Technically, even correctly omitting ghost wire and deathloop, Microsoft have more games from acquisitions on PlayStation than they've made exclusive.
@ItsBritneyB_tch is paying for exclusive content, timed early access to beta content, xp boosts and marketing rights also a fair practice? Especially when other platforms are charged the same price for the end product with "missing" content? Didn't the spec ops from modern warfare have a 12 month timed exclusivity window on PlayStation? I'm pretty sure some of the zombies modes also had similar timed exclusivity.
"It might not be the only reason people buy a PS5 but it could be enough of a reason to make you reconsider and maybe purchase an Xbox instead - especially if your friends are thinking the same."
Doesn't your statement currently hold true for people considering buying an Xbox, but who also play a considerable amount of call of duty?
I'm not pretending Microsoft are innocent of pursuing similar practices, but let's not pretend Sony aren't guilty of underhand tactics.
@BranJ0 share the exact same sentiment. I enjoyed elden ring, but definitely preferred a more linear structured souls like. The repeated dungeons and bosses did detract from the open world and made the game seem bloated. Was also slightly disappointed that the combat hadn't really changed from the dark souls series - sekiro was absolutely amazing due to the complete overhaul and reimagining of the combat systems.
Really looking forward to playing a completely different game in the form of armored core. A departure from the souls games with new mechanics and combat sounds fantastic to me.
I have a PlayStation with a PlayStation plus extra sub and a series X with gamepass. I don't believe in paying £70 for games in much the same way Sony don't actually believe in generations. It sounds like the majority of people here don't like paying £70 for games either as there's a lot of comments taking issue with the fact that cod will likely be on gamepass.
The three year deal for cod on PlayStation is fine, after which it will be renegotiated and more than likely extended for a further three years. The live service game revenue model relies heavily on player numbers, PlayStation gamers make up a substantial share of the player base and will continue to do so. Cod will remain on a Sony machine for the foreseeable future. Nothing will change for the people that spend £70 on a new release every year.
You have nothing to fear from people jumping ship to Xbox because, according to everyone here, gamepass is crap and represents terrible value. The last thing any PlayStation gamer would want is the option to have gamepass appear on their console, let alone have to purchase an Xbox or gain access to it via streaming on hundreds of different devices. Everyone wants to pay £70 for new releases on their playstation and would always want ownership for their games*
*Unless of course they buy their games digitally, in which case they're actually just leasing a non transferable license
Does anyone know if the ps5 version of spider man is included with the ps5 miles morales game on this list? Or do subscribers only have access to the PS4 version, as listed separately?
@Integrity I agree with a lot of your points. Sony's investment in VR is admirable, the technology has the potential to revolutionise gaming in much the same way the move from 2d to 3d did. It is definitely pushing the envelope for gaming as a medium and is a technology unique to Sony in the console market. Unfortunately VR still has issues with accessibility - 3d televisions are largely attributed to have failed due to the requirements of wearing glasses which were perceived by the mass market as expensive and an inconvenience Vs 2d content viewing. VR has this same issue Vs 2d gaming, only on a greater scale. Secondly, VR sickness is a very real and problematic byproduct of the technology and can be experienced at various levels by a significant proportion of users. This issue is still something that has yet to be properly addressed and solved. The resolution of these two key issues will be key in this technology becoming mass market (like current consoles) and therefore generating the revenue and profit required to ensure future investment from shareholders. If psvr2 fails to have a large enough impact on the playstation business Vs its traditional approach I doubt we will see a psvr3 any time soon.
Secondly, while Sony have, in the past, invested heavily in new IP they now seem to be focused on sequels and remakes. PS5 has had one new IP, Returnal, since launch with the Demons Souls remake and sequels (miles moreles, ratchet and clank) making up the rest of their lineup. This year we are getting three more sequels with horizon, gran turismo and God of war and another uncharted rerelease. It's also been confirmed that we will be getting a ghosts of Tsushima sequel from sucker punch, spider man 2 from insomniac, and it is heavily rumoured that naughty dog are working on a last of us remake.
In terms of whether or not gamepass or similar subscription services are going to be the future of the video game industry, who knows? I would, however, be inclined to look at the current evolution of the film and television media markets. In particular, with regards to their transition from physical media to digital, and live content to subscription services. The market has embraced the licensing of content over physical ownership. The same is true of music in terms of physical media to MP3 and iTunes, followed by Spotify, apple music and other subscription services. Video games have already followed suit in terms of digital sales now surpassing physical, I would not be surprised to see them also move towards a subscription model of content consumption. Particularly in the field of the mass market.
@anoyonmus so do we blame Microsoft for putting Bethesda titles on gamepass day one or Sony for not facilitating gamepass on their systems? I remember when Microsoft scored EA access on Xbox and Sony stated that the reason it wasn't on playstation was that "it didn't represent good value to their player base." How about you put it on your system and let the player base decide what's good value? I'm pretty sure some of these f2p console titles that are riddled with mtx's don't represent good value, yet you're more than happy leave purchasing decisions to the players. Ironically the service did eventually come to playstation, despite it not representing "good value."
@Col_McCafferty actually it's to pull people over to gamepass. You also realise that there's no law against buying multiple consoles from different manufacturers? I own playstation, Nintendo and Xbox consoles. You're also aware that if Sony allowed gamepass on playstation you'd be able to play every bethesda and Microsoft game at launch and you wouldn't have to pay $70 for each title either. I probably wouldn't even have an Xbox if gamepass were on playstation.
@Dezzy70 it's a shame you can't respond like an adult too. I drive an e-niro, so I have no need for petrol. Also, it seems your mental age matches your reading age as you seem to have failed to read my comment properly. Or are you admitting that you were one of those people complaining about multi-generational Xbox titles and lording the "we believe in generations" lie?
@Dezzy70 about a year ago half the people on this site were saying that xbox's approach to multi-generational launches was laughable as every game would be severely held back by catering to the ancient hardware of the previous systems. These multi-generational games would therefore be nothing more that higher resolution Xbox one games with last gen gameplay according to a lot of playstation owners. I guess these guys won't be paying $70 for H:FB, GT7 or GoWR on their PS5s
@Dezzy70 I must have missed the release date for God of war 2, I thought they just had it as some time in 2022. Luckily Sony don't actually believe in generations so I'll be able to enjoy gt7, horizon forbidden west and God of war ragnorok on my launch day PS4
This article is definitely click-baiting and fanboy flaming. Sounds to me like Spencer was merely stating the difference between Microsoft and Sony's policies regarding PC support. Nothing said is factually incorrect, and as both have exclusive IP on PC a comparison doesn't seem unwarranted.
Your article conceeds that Spencer is correct but states that his reasoning is flawed. Unless I'm missing something, there's nothing provided in your article that actually states Spencer's reasoning. I'm guessing you've therefore just assumed his reasoning as you've not provided a quotation of this.
@Murray was literally just about to write something similar. Push square has become quite skilled at providing stories to incite a lot of fanboys - although it doesn't seem to take much right now. I guess this drives a large proportion of their advertising revenue so it pays, literally, to report information in this way.
Unfortunately both Sony and Xbox fanboys just serve as a reminder that there are a very vocal group of people that are too immature to enjoy the hobby in the way it is intended.
Comments 379
Re: Marvel's Spider-Man Remastered Finally Gets Standalone Release on PS5
@ED_209 I had a month of ps plus extra last December and managed to pay £20 upgrade for Spiderman remastered thanks to miles morales registering as the owned ps5 copy with ps plus extra. Definitely worth the £20 as I hadn't played before and really dislike playing at 30fps. Also had all the dlc which was a nice addition to the base game.
Re: Activision Blizzard's Player Numbers Have Taken a Tumble
Just curious if the CMA have also considered the fact that CoD might not remain the juggernaut it is today after 10 years? I remember when EA's medal of honor series was the premium first person military shooter and CoD was considered the Pro Evolution Soccer of the genre. Look at the state of Halo today Vs where it was in it's prime.
The data suggests that warzone 2.0 isn't enjoying the same levels of popularity as the first iteration, overwatch 2 definitely hasn't hit the heights of the original and warcraft is in decline. I'm sure diablo 4 will have a successful launch, but it remains to be seen whether or not it has any longevity.
Couple all of that with Microsoft's abysmal track record of studio management/output and I'd say it's just as likely that when all these 10 year deals expire, the current ActiBlizz IPs won't be anything like as big as they are currently. Some possibly might not even exist at all.
Also, with live service style titles like CoD, a decline in popularity and sales necessitates that you maximise potential sales by having your product in as many marketplaces as possible. You don't restrict access as you're just compounding the revenue loss.
Re: Microsoft Goes Scorched Earth Over UK's Activision Buyout Block
@Intr1n5ic that's true, such titles can usually be played in a year or so on other platforms. I'll be playing final fantasy 16 on ps5 because timed exclusivity means it won't be coming to Xbox at launch, the information regarding exclusivity is also intentionally vague and merely states that it won't be coming to "other platforms" for at least 6 months. If it's coming to Xbox in 6-12 months I'll wait and buy it using my reward points rather than spend £70 on it. Obviously there's absolutely no clarity on this as Sony want you to buy it on ps5 rather than a rival platform. It's in the consumers interest to know the full details on exclusivity contracts and whether other platform versions are already being worked on. Are "other platforms" pc and Xbox or just pc? Is there currently any intention to bring the title to Xbox?
The same is completely true of Microsoft and their timed deals. Starfield is a confirmed exclusive now, but Microsoft went months dodging questions about launch platforms despite knowing internally exactly how things would play out. They were/are equally vague about which bethesda titles would/will be coming to PlayStation.
If Microsoft can no longer add to their studios and game catalogue with acquisitions, I could see them spending a lot more money on third party timed exclusivity and third party "day one gamepass" titles. Consolidation of publishers and titles is crap for the industry, but I think consolidation of titles through timed deals is also pretty crappy.
Re: Microsoft Goes Scorched Earth Over UK's Activision Buyout Block
@Intr1n5ic my point wasn't directed at the possibility of Xbox doing that. It was highlighting the fact that the practice is harmful to both the consumer and in terms of competition (especially when using an extreme example), yet it's a persistent feature of the video game industry that has yet to be addressed. Also, as I stated before, I think it's crappy whenever Microsoft or Sony do it.
Re: Microsoft Goes Scorched Earth Over UK's Activision Buyout Block
@Intr1n5ic they already have an entire year's worth of games on timed exclusivity? My bad, I didn't realise
Re: Microsoft Goes Scorched Earth Over UK's Activision Buyout Block
@RBMango or they could just take the $69 billion and invest it in tying up timed third party exclusives like Sony. They could probably buy up an entire year's worth of games for $69 billion leaving PlayStation with 2-3 games for 12 months - apparently that wouldn't harm competition and the consumer in any way. For the record, timed exclusivity is a crappy practice by both Microsoft and Sony and needs to die.
Re: Microsoft Dealt Major Blow as UK Blocks Activision Buyout
@thefourfoldroot1 I'm not saying it's irrational face saving, I'm saying that it's clearly an incredibly close decision that could be swayed one way or another, hence the amount of time it's taken to arrive at. Subjectivity is clearly a part of that process and blowback would definitely be a consideration at this point. There's no real negativity surrounding the prevention of a multinational mega corporation from completing a large merger Vs the blowback from allowing that merger to happen. Blocking it prevents anyone from being able to say, actually the merger was great and there were no competition issues as speculated and as can be seen 15 years down the line. Preventing something happening is a guaranteed win with regards to outcome because you're preventing being proven wrong. Surely the CMA should just block every acquisition they are required to investigate on the grounds that nothing can be guaranteed?
I'm fully aware that individual governments are appraising the deal with regards to their region, but from my understanding it's the cloud gaming aspect of this deal that appears to be the stumbling point, not PlayStation Vs Xbox. I would think that the cloud gaming landscapes between developed countries are far more similar than the physical market shares of Xbox and PlayStation consoles. Japan (your example) has one of the best internet infrastructures in the world and we've been told that Microsoft has something of a stranglehold on cloud gaming. Surely it should be even less likely that Japan would greenlight this deal given that their infrastructure is ideally suited to Microsoft's cloud product? Especially in a country where traditional console gaming has been in decline and portable gaming via mobile or switch has shown tremendous growth?
Re: Microsoft Dealt Major Blow as UK Blocks Activision Buyout
@thefourfoldroot1 it's not a reach to assume the people in positions of authority within the CMA could be under-fire for a perceived wrong decision. The CMA is still accountable. A failing government organisation obviously doesn't result in it being dissolved, but it does often result in job losses, particularly for those responsible in decision making.
Their decision making is sound, but there is still a level of subjectivity involved, hence why there have been differing views from other organisations. If the CMA are in the large minority with regard to their decision making, it is logical to assume the majority are correct.
Re: Microsoft Dealt Major Blow as UK Blocks Activision Buyout
@thefourfoldroot1 I think it quite likely that it is partly a marker point against big multinational corporations given the fact that the power of such companies has been under scrutiny for several years. Meta's acquisitions of WhatsApp and Instagram went unchallenged and many feel this was a miss, large multinationals have also been under fire for tax evasion and other questionable practices in the UK. This decision sends a message that the CMA is active and does act against large multinational corporations rather than if they were, again, to do nothing. It is in the CMAs personal interest to block this acquisition and justify their existence having received criticism in the past.
Re: Microsoft Dealt Major Blow as UK Blocks Activision Buyout
@thefourfoldroot1 I agree, but the fact that that as things stand, the UK CMA are the only authority to block the acquisition (US right to appeal seems likely to go through), the decision seems more like self motivated marker statement than an objective one. It will be interesting if the EU and US (right to appeal fails) follow suit and block, or if the UK are alone in their assessment (further lending credibility to the idea it is a decision influenced by non objective factors).
Re: Microsoft Dealt Major Blow as UK Blocks Activision Buyout
@thefourfoldroot1 they do today - netflix owned 100% of their market in the beginning too. Much like netflix, cloud gaming is still very much in its infancy, current market share is certainly unlikely to represent market share in 10 years or so. Predicting the impact of the ActiBlizz on a market this immature seems pointless when the current market is so more relevant to the discussion.
Re: Microsoft Dealt Major Blow as UK Blocks Activision Buyout
Amazing news for everyone here, fantastic that Sony will be able to maintain their 70/30 split of the premium home console market. Consumers win when Sony dominate... until they don't. There's a small possibility that Microsoft decide the home console market is no longer yielding sufficient returns and either close the Xbox division or sell it off. If that day happens Sony will inherit a monopoly and PlayStation consumers will get to enjoy all the benefits that come from having a singular entity controlling prices and output.
Whether people here like to admit it or not, most of Sony's consumer friendly decisions this generation have come as a result of Microsoft's actions and competition. Titles released on PC - Microsoft's doing, a subscription service offering similar features to gamepass - Microsoft's doing, crossplay - Microsoft's doing. Sony's market dominance means they were the first to increase game prices across the board, the first to increase hardware prices, the last to agree to crossplay, the last to give consumers the choice of EA access (which apparently didn't represent good value to players and Sony knew better than their player base).
You guys all celebrate Sony's continued dominance whilst completely oblivious to the long term implications this has for you as the consumer. When the Xbox 360 was wrecking the PS3 I was rooting for Sony to come back and kill it, which they did because they were getting hammered. As the consumer I benefitted hugely from this. I had an Xbox 360 and a PS3, but I wasn't cheering for the death of PlayStation and celebrating Microsoft's dominance. PS4 was amazing because of the Xbox 360, and Xbox one was abysmal because of the PS3.
Dominance is fine to a degree if the competition still believes there's something to fight for. You remove their ability to compete, they leave and you're left with a monopoly that will trash your hobby and wallet in a heartbeat.
Be careful what you wish for people.
Re: Sounds Like PlayStation Has Grand Plans for Guerrilla's 'Ambitious' Decima Engine
I wasn't a huge fan of horizon: forbidden west when tried it on ps5 - the open world and story just didn't grab me. However the visuals on display, specifically, the detail of character models and animations/presentation during conversations with NPC's, really blew me away. This was made all the more impressive by the fact that the game was running at 60fps in performance mode. The decima engine is absolutely fantastic and I would welcome it's use in more titles from PlayStation studios.
Re: UK Regulator No Longer Concerned About Activision Buyout's Impact on Console Competition
@thefourfoldroot1 you made the comparison. They're not a completely different market, they're different segments of the same market. For the enthusiast they're very different, for the mass market consumer they're both seen as part of the same video game market.
Re: UK Regulator No Longer Concerned About Activision Buyout's Impact on Console Competition
@thefourfoldroot1 ford and McDonald's, Nintendo and PlayStation. Ford make cars, Macdonald's is a fast food restaurant franchise. Nintendo make video games and consoles, PlayStation make... video games and consoles. Comparing Nintendo and PlayStation is exactly like a comparison between ford and McDonald's? Or maybe I missed McDonald's recent announcment that they're selling off their food business and launching the McCar?
Re: Microsoft Thinks It Hasn't 'Pulled Any Games' from PS5, PS4
Extremely likely that a version of hi-fi rush was in development? Likely, yes, but not substantiated. The facts are that redfall was in development and pulled from ps5. Microsoft will have launched three Minecraft games on PlayStation platforms by April - base minecraft, Minecraft dungeons and Minecraft legends. Technically they have brought three more games to Playstation platforms. Again no confirmation that I can find anywhere that hi-fi rush was in development for PlayStation so it's still just conjecture.
As of today, hi-fi rush is the only exclusive from their Bethesda acquisition not available on PlayStation Vs 2 Minecraft games from their previous mojang studios acquisition. Technically, even correctly omitting ghost wire and deathloop, Microsoft have more games from acquisitions on PlayStation than they've made exclusive.
Re: Call of Duty Is the Main Reason People Buy PS5, PS4, Says New Survey
@ItsBritneyB_tch is paying for exclusive content, timed early access to beta content, xp boosts and marketing rights also a fair practice? Especially when other platforms are charged the same price for the end product with "missing" content? Didn't the spec ops from modern warfare have a 12 month timed exclusivity window on PlayStation? I'm pretty sure some of the zombies modes also had similar timed exclusivity.
"It might not be the only reason people buy a PS5 but it could be enough of a reason to make you reconsider and maybe purchase an Xbox instead - especially if your friends are thinking the same."
Doesn't your statement currently hold true for people considering buying an Xbox, but who also play a considerable amount of call of duty?
I'm not pretending Microsoft are innocent of pursuing similar practices, but let's not pretend Sony aren't guilty of underhand tactics.
Re: Armored Core 6 Won't Adopt Elden Ring, Bloodborne Style Gameplay
@BranJ0 share the exact same sentiment. I enjoyed elden ring, but definitely preferred a more linear structured souls like. The repeated dungeons and bosses did detract from the open world and made the game seem bloated. Was also slightly disappointed that the combat hadn't really changed from the dark souls series - sekiro was absolutely amazing due to the complete overhaul and reimagining of the combat systems.
Really looking forward to playing a completely different game in the form of armored core. A departure from the souls games with new mechanics and combat sounds fantastic to me.
Re: Shocking: Sony Doesn't Want Game Pass on PlayStation, Microsoft Has a Pop at PS Plus
I have a PlayStation with a PlayStation plus extra sub and a series X with gamepass. I don't believe in paying £70 for games in much the same way Sony don't actually believe in generations. It sounds like the majority of people here don't like paying £70 for games either as there's a lot of comments taking issue with the fact that cod will likely be on gamepass.
The three year deal for cod on PlayStation is fine, after which it will be renegotiated and more than likely extended for a further three years. The live service game revenue model relies heavily on player numbers, PlayStation gamers make up a substantial share of the player base and will continue to do so. Cod will remain on a Sony machine for the foreseeable future. Nothing will change for the people that spend £70 on a new release every year.
You have nothing to fear from people jumping ship to Xbox because, according to everyone here, gamepass is crap and represents terrible value. The last thing any PlayStation gamer would want is the option to have gamepass appear on their console, let alone have to purchase an Xbox or gain access to it via streaming on hundreds of different devices. Everyone wants to pay £70 for new releases on their playstation and would always want ownership for their games*
*Unless of course they buy their games digitally, in which case they're actually just leasing a non transferable license
Re: Shocking: Sony Doesn't Want Game Pass on PlayStation, Microsoft Has a Pop at PS Plus
@Torque must be nice not to have to worry about a mortgage with rising interest rates, utility bills and inflation in today's financial climate
Re: PS Plus Games for Asia Officially Confirmed
Does anyone know if the ps5 version of spider man is included with the ps5 miles morales game on this list? Or do subscribers only have access to the PS4 version, as listed separately?
Re: Talking Point: In Theory, Could Xbox Game Pass Come to PS5, PS4?
@Integrity I agree with a lot of your points. Sony's investment in VR is admirable, the technology has the potential to revolutionise gaming in much the same way the move from 2d to 3d did. It is definitely pushing the envelope for gaming as a medium and is a technology unique to Sony in the console market. Unfortunately VR still has issues with accessibility - 3d televisions are largely attributed to have failed due to the requirements of wearing glasses which were perceived by the mass market as expensive and an inconvenience Vs 2d content viewing. VR has this same issue Vs 2d gaming, only on a greater scale. Secondly, VR sickness is a very real and problematic byproduct of the technology and can be experienced at various levels by a significant proportion of users. This issue is still something that has yet to be properly addressed and solved. The resolution of these two key issues will be key in this technology becoming mass market (like current consoles) and therefore generating the revenue and profit required to ensure future investment from shareholders. If psvr2 fails to have a large enough impact on the playstation business Vs its traditional approach I doubt we will see a psvr3 any time soon.
Secondly, while Sony have, in the past, invested heavily in new IP they now seem to be focused on sequels and remakes. PS5 has had one new IP, Returnal, since launch with the Demons Souls remake and sequels (miles moreles, ratchet and clank) making up the rest of their lineup. This year we are getting three more sequels with horizon, gran turismo and God of war and another uncharted rerelease. It's also been confirmed that we will be getting a ghosts of Tsushima sequel from sucker punch, spider man 2 from insomniac, and it is heavily rumoured that naughty dog are working on a last of us remake.
In terms of whether or not gamepass or similar subscription services are going to be the future of the video game industry, who knows? I would, however, be inclined to look at the current evolution of the film and television media markets. In particular, with regards to their transition from physical media to digital, and live content to subscription services. The market has embraced the licensing of content over physical ownership. The same is true of music in terms of physical media to MP3 and iTunes, followed by Spotify, apple music and other subscription services. Video games have already followed suit in terms of digital sales now surpassing physical, I would not be surprised to see them also move towards a subscription model of content consumption. Particularly in the field of the mass market.
Re: The Elder Scrolls 6 Isn't Coming to PS5, But It's Not About 'Punishing Other Platforms'
@anoyonmus so do we blame Microsoft for putting Bethesda titles on gamepass day one or Sony for not facilitating gamepass on their systems? I remember when Microsoft scored EA access on Xbox and Sony stated that the reason it wasn't on playstation was that "it didn't represent good value to their player base." How about you put it on your system and let the player base decide what's good value? I'm pretty sure some of these f2p console titles that are riddled with mtx's don't represent good value, yet you're more than happy leave purchasing decisions to the players. Ironically the service did eventually come to playstation, despite it not representing "good value."
Re: The Elder Scrolls 6 Isn't Coming to PS5, But It's Not About 'Punishing Other Platforms'
@Col_McCafferty actually it's to pull people over to gamepass. You also realise that there's no law against buying multiple consoles from different manufacturers? I own playstation, Nintendo and Xbox consoles. You're also aware that if Sony allowed gamepass on playstation you'd be able to play every bethesda and Microsoft game at launch and you wouldn't have to pay $70 for each title either. I probably wouldn't even have an Xbox if gamepass were on playstation.
Re: Tomb Raider, Marvel's Avengers Maker Now Co-Developer on Xbox Exclusive
@Dezzy70 it's a shame you can't respond like an adult too. I drive an e-niro, so I have no need for petrol. Also, it seems your mental age matches your reading age as you seem to have failed to read my comment properly. Or are you admitting that you were one of those people complaining about multi-generational Xbox titles and lording the "we believe in generations" lie?
Re: Tomb Raider, Marvel's Avengers Maker Now Co-Developer on Xbox Exclusive
@Dezzy70 about a year ago half the people on this site were saying that xbox's approach to multi-generational launches was laughable as every game would be severely held back by catering to the ancient hardware of the previous systems. These multi-generational games would therefore be nothing more that higher resolution Xbox one games with last gen gameplay according to a lot of playstation owners. I guess these guys won't be paying $70 for H:FB, GT7 or GoWR on their PS5s
Re: Tomb Raider, Marvel's Avengers Maker Now Co-Developer on Xbox Exclusive
@Dezzy70 I must have missed the release date for God of war 2, I thought they just had it as some time in 2022. Luckily Sony don't actually believe in generations so I'll be able to enjoy gt7, horizon forbidden west and God of war ragnorok on my launch day PS4
Re: Xbox Head Targets Sony for Not Launching Games Day and Date on PC
This article is definitely click-baiting and fanboy flaming. Sounds to me like Spencer was merely stating the difference between Microsoft and Sony's policies regarding PC support. Nothing said is factually incorrect, and as both have exclusive IP on PC a comparison doesn't seem unwarranted.
Your article conceeds that Spencer is correct but states that his reasoning is flawed. Unless I'm missing something, there's nothing provided in your article that actually states Spencer's reasoning. I'm guessing you've therefore just assumed his reasoning as you've not provided a quotation of this.
Re: Unsurprisingly, Xbox Game Pass Will Not Be Coming to PS5, PS4
@Murray was literally just about to write something similar. Push square has become quite skilled at providing stories to incite a lot of fanboys - although it doesn't seem to take much right now. I guess this drives a large proportion of their advertising revenue so it pays, literally, to report information in this way.
Unfortunately both Sony and Xbox fanboys just serve as a reminder that there are a very vocal group of people that are too immature to enjoy the hobby in the way it is intended.