Neonix

@Exerion76 same here. Can't stand these inflated play times full of filler content. 15-25 hour games with a solid story and varied content is ok. I have a life outside gaming, so anything that takes 80-150hrs just feel like a drag no matter how good it might be. Including BG3 which took me 150 hours to complete, and never ever again.

This is actually one of the few games I do want a remake of. We got MGS remake, and I wish for a few more remakes in the MGS series also, but I absolutely loved Splinter Cell, especially the first one, and I'd love a proper remake.

@LogicStrikesAgain Release it finished and complete on day one. That's all. It clearly wasn't. Not a problem for me, since it's a copy-paste of the first one, which I did play and found to be one of the most repetitive and boring games I've ever played. So I will never buy this sequel. But people that pre-order or play on day one should get the best experience, not the people buying it at %50 discount a year or two later.

It was clearly not finished and properly optimized at launch, otherwise this patch would not have to exist. Why on earth are you sheep encouraging and accepting this BS from studios?

LAUNCH IT DONE, OR DONT.

I'd love a patch for this game that made it less dweeby and cliche in some of the dialogue options and voice acting. It just sounds so lame, it's just trying too hard to be cool, and it's a huge embarrasing turnoff.

I feel sorry for all the players that played the game on release. Personally I always wait aroun 6 months before I play a new title, just to be sure that things are patched up and optimized properly.
It shouldn't be necessariy.

Sucker Punch should have released the game with this patch baked in. Can developers please start making things right BEFORE they ship?

Sounds good. Destiny 2 never clicked for me. But I loved Destiny 1. Hopefully they can actually try to make a decent and coherent story. D2 was just so disconnected, confusing, and all over the place, it just never grabbed me.

@windxtravelerx I don't want to see it flop. But it seems like just another mediocre live service attempt with color characters and skins to appeal to the Fortnite crowd. Not my cup of tea. And not what most Bungie fans were asking for or hoping for either. And the last playtest was garbage, so... I'm expecting this will fail. Maybe not as miseraly as Concord, but not far from it.

Looking forward to see this game flop.

I'd much rather have shadow drops than all these delays and disappointments and hype articles on games that are years away... I'm sure websites like this disagrees with me, but I don't care. I hate reading fiction based rumors and garbage news.

There is a hidden cost to these ports that nobody talks about. The cost is the value of the PlayStation ecosystem. Me and many people I personally know don't consider the PlayStation a necessary purchase any more, the games will come to PC some day in a patched and fixed state anyway, so it's just better to wait than to buy a PlayStation console. Most people have patience to wait to play a game. I never ever play games day 1 because I know it takes 6-12 months for a game to be fully patched, fixed and optimized anyway.

This attitude from very very many people is a huge direct cost to the PlayStation brand and value of the PlayStation console business as a whole. I don't subscribe to PSN any more, and I plan on selling my PlayStation once I've finished a few more games from my backlog. I know very many people share the same thought.

Compare that to the Switch 2, which I won't sell for anything. Why? Because I know the next Zelda game will be there and only there, I love replaying BotW and ToTK - especially at 4K60 now. I love replaying Super Mario Galaxy 1 & 2. The console itself is worth holding on to because it is the ONLY place my favorite games exist. Can't say the same for PlayStation any more, I can play many of my favorite PS games on a Steam Deck and Steam Machine in the future, and that's a better solution for me as a customer. I don't need the PS console any more, thanks for Sony's effort in putting their games on PC. Talk about shooting themselves in the foot.

And the only storefront I will use is Steam. Not interested in any of the other stores, even though I have a huge collection of games on Epic Store that I got for free over the years, I just have zero interest in using anything but Steam personally. Sony can release a launcher, but no thanks, I won't buy the games there.

To everyone saying Microsoft should have seen this coming. Microsoft is and always will be a software company (its kinda in the name even!). It has never been a hardware company. The company is founded on software for office and productivity, that is where 95% of Microsoft's revenues comes from. The Xbox was just a tiny little spec of dust on the balance sheet.

I wonder how this will affect a future PS6 release. I'm sure Sony and Nintendo has solid contracts in place that ensures them a fixed price for a very long time / for the duration of the hardware generation they are in. But the PS5 is at the end of it's generation soon, so...

At this point Intergalactic and GTA6 should just be PS6 launch titles. And I mean that seriously. I don't want a "remaster" with PS6 upgrades for a upgrade fee one year after release, that would be disgusting.

Everything that Microsoft touches rots. Although CODs death is long overdue.

@Gedrick You can upgrade the RAM (It uses standard SO-DIMM sticks) and SSD (it uses a standard NVME interface that fits all normal sizes). But the CPU/GPU (APU) and VRAM can't be upgraded.

@add286 Thats fine, then they cannot play online, a restriction imposed by Sony by having the $80/yearly paywall.

@Mythologue Exactly. My favorite thing to do on Steam Deck is emulation. Playing SSX Tricky, the original game, is fantastic for me. It was my favorite game on PS2. With the Steam Machine I could emulate anything, and have it properly on my TV with a proper controller. That is a huge WIN. And I can play moderns like Baldurs Gate 3 and other games. Maybe not at the best settings, but good enough, and have access to run everything I want via emulation without having to pay ANY MONTHLY FEES. WIN!

@add286 It's not a strange comparison at all. Because PSN is REQUIRED for online play and cloud saves, something which is 100% free on Steam and PC. So yes, if you want to play online, which many people do, then the comparison is 100% valid.

Over the lifetime of a console generation, the fact is, that PSN subscription to be able to play online costs MORE than what the console cost to purchase for BASIC functionality like playing online and cloud saves.

It's time for COD to rest in peace.

@Shinnok789 Yeah thanks to the AI bubble RAM prices has skyrocketed for everyone, and that'll affect everyone in the future. If the price of RAM stabilize at its current or even higher level, then it's gonna make ALL devices noticeably more expensive in the future.

@Toot1st Depends what you play. I don't personally care for Sony's "movie like" cinematic games. Good graphics doesn't make an interesting game. For me personally TLOU, Horizon and Ghost of Tsushima/Yotei are very repetitive and uninteresting/boring games. I'd much rather play an older game like Dishonored 1/2 at 4K60 than these new boring games. And the Steam Machine will have no problems doing that. I can't even buy a decent version of Dishonored on PlayStation, it's still stuck at a sub 1080p 30fps version because I cannot go into the settings and simply increase the resolution or framerate myself, something I can do on every Steam device easily without having to wait and pay for a "performance patch" that might not never come (Bloodborne).

By the way, you also have to factor in the cost of PSN. Let's say you buy a new console for an entire generation, which let's say lasts 7 years. Sony's cheapest subscription with a yearly price is $80 yearly for cloud saves and online play. Over a generation (7 years) you would have paid $560 to be able to play online and have your saves synced... Which is more than what you paid for the console!

The Steam Machine offers free online play and free cloud saves. So you save $560 over the course of a generation. On top of that games are overall cheaper on Steam.

Power isn't everything. The freedom of the Steam Machine + Steam Deck combination is a breath of fresh air in the current market, where all these consoles are walled gardens that limits you in where and how you can play your games. I don't need to buy remasters or remakes just to get 30>60fps on a Steam Machine or Steam Deck. I can just go in and change the settings. So that is even more money saved. Software support is significantly better on Steam because you can change these settings yourself. Upgrade the hardware? No problemo, just go into the settings and increase the fidelity and fps, you don't have to wait for slow developers to make a "performance patch" that costs you $10 on top the wait time. Want to mod your game? You have the freedom to do so in any way you want, without the ecosystem owner telling you what mods you can and cannot install due to their policies.

People keep saying that the system is weaker than a PS5. It's not. The GPU is. The CPU is much stronger. The amount of memory combined is much stronger. It will have FSR4, which is much better than FSR and PSSR on the PS5 Pro. For example, the PS5 can't do 60fps in many cases because of the CPU - not the GPU. Even the PS5 Pro is stuck on the ancient Zen2 CPU architecture.

That's what you get when you keep making the same slop year after year... It was bound to happen, especially when Microsoft Gaming entered the picture. Take a look at Microsoft's history in entertainment and media software and devices. There's a lot of products and services in that graveyard. Microsoft's approach to consumer and entertainment is productivity, which will never ever work. And they never ever learn, and keep making the same mistakes over and over again. I bet that in 5-10 years Microsoft Gaming will be VERY different than what it is today. And not in a good way.

@nomither6 Nah, I'm just saying its much better to pay $20 yearly than $80 yearly (PSN). Are you seriously defending Sony's insane greed of requiring you to pay $80 yearly to play online and have cloud saves?!

This article doesn't belong on this site. It belongs on an Xbox site. Stick to your theme or loose focus and the market down the road, just like team green.

@Comic_bookguy I don't think it'll compete with the Switch honestly. As the PS Portable will always be a "addon" to the main console, and there will be severe compromises in the games I think, so there will always be this choice of sacrificing fidelity. And the online play at $80 yearly is a bloody ripoff on PSN. Nintendo charges $20 yearly for cloud saves and online play. Sony charges $80. Insane. And it matters.

@Rodimusprime13 It's not so much the form factor, it's more about the games. Japanese people in general don't like to play super-serious-bloody-dark-grim-gory games, which has become Sony's specialty it seems. Cinematic trash. The reason why the Japanese buy Nintendo is to play Nintendo games.

@RoomWithaMoose Fact is most Nintendo buyers (myself included) buy it to play Nintendo exclusive games! Zelda, Mario, Mario Kart, Smash, Splatoon, Metroid, and more!

The reason for me is that Nintendo is the only company that makes games that are good but still POSITIVE. All these Sony and Microsoft games are so DARK and depressing in their narratives, all the time! Soooo serious. It gets old after a while. The 3rd party support for the Switch 2 is just a bonus.

Personally I got hooked on the PlayStation during the PS2 era (and had the PS1 also) because of Gran Turismo and SSX Tricky. And then the Unchartered series. All games that aren't so dark and depressing like the TLOU games and all this other super-serious-dark-bloody-grim-grotesque and bloody boring games.

Which is why Nintendo is awesome. They make great games that make you feel good at the same time. Can't say that about TLOU or God of War and so on and so on.

So this price reduction wont do anything unless Sony starts making games that aren't depressing cinematic dark bloody boring games again. Astro Bot is a good start. But they need more, a lot more!

Flop. PlayStation is doing everything and at the same time ignoring their own platform. Take a look at what happened to Xbox after they started putting their focus all over the place... And learn from it. Because Microsoft didn't, and now the platform is dying.

Rumors say that Half-Life 3 will launch alongside with the Steam Machine. That could ship some boxes.

The announced Steam Machine doesn't really pose a threat. But I see this machine as a testbed/first step into a new market.

If Valve makes a "Steam Machine Pro" and dials that up to 11 on the performance front, and release that within the timeframe of the next-gen consoles (PS6, nextXbox), then I can see myself moving away from consoles completely. I have a huge Steam library, and I love the Steam Deck, and the flexibility and opennes of the platform (I don't have to wait for YEARS and PAY to increase fps from 30-60, which is STUPID, for example). Oh and I don't have to pay the insane $80 yearly to just be able to play online and have cloud saves!!!

Actually if everything works as good as I hope, I can see myself replacing my PS5/PS6, Switch, Meta Quest 3 with a Steam Machine, Steam Frame and Steam Deck. It is a dream setup, instead of the fragmented setup I have now where I literally have to buy the games in 3 different places to be able to play them where I want to play them. With SteamOS based devices I can just buy it on Steam, and that's it. Cloud saves syncs between devices, and I can even play a normal game in the VR headset if I want to, or on the TV, or on the Deck. PERFECT. No online/cloud save fee, no Windows OS to deal with, no sitting in front of the computer desk, buy the game once, full syncing between devices, no ***** roadblocks which Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo has. Full access to settings. Fully able to test EVERY game I buy for 2 hours and get a FULL REFUND - no questions asked! it's exactly the setup I've been dreaming about for a LONG time!

well i know which game im playing. and its not wolverine.
i hope insomniac doesnt just make another spiderman clone with similar fighting, outposts, and similar mechanics... time for something entirely new please. i wont buy into the same formula a 4th time.

Missing an option for "I had one but sold it". It's a great device, as long as I stay at home only. But at home I have my PS5 Pro on my LG OLED, so... And the Portal works like crap on any hotel wifi or anything else really, so it's kinda pointless unless you just want an option for playing on the couch at home, or if your partner his taking the TV all the time, or if you have an injury and need to stay in bed or something like that. But factor in a proper Wifi router, something like the Asus RT-BE92U or similar. If your network is bad, the experience on the Portal is gonna be equally bad, even if you sit right next to your PS5 and wifi. And make sure your PS5 is plugged in with Ethernet. If the Portal and PS5 are both on wifi, it's gonna be laggy at times no matter what.

Keep making these moves Sony, and give me all the reasons why I don't need a PlayStation console in my life. PC + Switch 2 it is. No PSN subscription required to play online and to get cloud saves, saves me $80 yearly. Seems like Nintendo is the only company focusing on the console business only, and the games show that...

@PressTurn Exactly the same here. NSO is the only sub I'm willing to pay because the price is alright. And I also get cloud saves, online play and access to the best SNES, NES and Gameboy classics which I grew up with. Those classics are worth far more than any of Sonys monthly games. All for $19.99 yearly.

And even cheaper during sales. I think I subbed for 2 years when the yearly was at 40% discount even, which makes it about $12 a year! And Sony wants $80 a year for the same?! They seem to have stopped PS Plus subscription sales as well. No thanks.

@11001100110zero No you don't get access to any of the PS Plus games and monthly games if you stop your subscription. They will still show up in your library, but if you try to install or play any PS Plus gane you are told you need to subscribe again to get access.

So no, we don't get any monthly games to keep. We only get access as long as we keep paying.

I'm not subscribed to PSN any more due to the cost. I could pay for a much cheaper sub that only includes online play and cloud saves. I don't need the monthly games and the other stuff.

Those "free" games get locked behind the subscription paywall when you stop subscribing anyway.

This is one thing Nintendo does right. The cheapest sub gives online play, cloud saves and access to tons of the best SNES, NES and Gameboy classics for a yearly cost of $19.99.

Why does the PS Plus Essential cost $79.99? Remove those monthly rental games and give me a sub that costs 20 bucks a year that only gives cloud saves and online play like Nintendo does and I'd get it in a heartbeat. PS Plus Essential is just way too expensive for what it is.

So my PS5 is just for single player games now. Online games I play elsewhere, although I'd rather play them on my PS5 if Sony could get their act together on the PS Plus pricing tiers.

@fheeevvhhvse 😅😂
I do love Hogwarts Legacy, and I'm looking forward to the sequel. But it seems WBs best games are the ones they don't own the IP for. So it's pointless.

So Microsoft is choosing to become the next Sega.

Seems like the management sees everything as a competitor, except the platform holders they lost to, of course. Oh we messed up and lost? Let's just move the goalpost and say that we didn't really compete with the one's we lost to.

It seems like Booty and Bond is living happily in denial. Not so sure about Phil to be honest, I'm sure his hands are tied, but I think he knows better, but can't do anything about it.