Can we get a KP Demon Hunters Platinum Games joint with the same style and framerate as the movie?

@Nakatomi_Uk So if you buy a game on GOG, you don't have to connect to their or anyone else's servers to play it. But do you still need the GOG launcher to play? Like, does the game just run natively on your PC or it runs through a launcher layer?

@Oram77 Who would've guessed that, after the game key card spat, Nintendo would become the bastions of physical media.

@Bot_Bot_69 Legitimate question: aren't PC games licenses just as closed? The OS and hardware isn't. But if you buy a game on Steam, aren't you beholden to playing it through Steam?

There is GOG, which from my understanding is open. But I'm never too sure if people saying they'll be going PC over stuff like this understand the difference. I'm also not sure how good GOG's library is.

@Runex2121 That's fair.

But losing complete access to digital movie purchases is not at all a new thing. About a decade ago, I even lost a couple movies I bought on Google Movies (now for movies, I buy them physically and rip my own digital copy which I can store/access however I want — which is how ideally all digital purchases should work, but piracy). It's somewhat hard to explicitly blame Sony for that instance, either, when it was really a distributor deal falling through and probably a bit out of their hands.

In the game space, we really just have delistings as far as I'm aware. Delisted games can still be downloaded, and, of course, you don't even have to worry about losing access to the download if you already have a hard copy of the data. This is the bare minimum I would expect in the future.

@Scratchz46 But PC is also all digital.

@twitchtvpat I mean, pushback is fair and expected.

I just don't think a lot of people ardently against digital purchases know how they work. Which makes sense, because they've never made them.

@S1ayeR74 You don't seem to be understanding what I'm asking.

Let's try this: What are examples of games that have suffered the same fate as those movies?

@S1ayeR74 It does matter. A lot.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I assume those movie purchases were not downloadable. Or, if they were, the download only served as an offline option for streaming them. Which is basically an indefinite rental.

Digital games are, like I said, essentially a license to make a hard copy of data. Which is more like select purchases on Vimeo, wherein you can download content and store it however you want.

The biggest hurdles for digital ownership are revoking licenses for breaking terms and agreements, renewing licenses if servers permanently go offline, and data only being compatible with proprietary storage formats. Companies straight up deleting purchases is about as likely as them releasing system updates "bricking" physical discs. There is no precedent, and the movie thing really doesn't prove anything.

@S1ayeR74 Digital movies are different from digital games.

I don't want to sound like a corporate shill, and this is definitely bad news that limits the options of consumers. But, man, it always feels like people are too f***ing dramatic about physical vs. digital.

I think the issue is how many misconceptions there are about ownership and digital purchases. Basically, whether digital or physical, you have no ownership over the game — or really its data. Buying physical, you own a hard copy of the game's data, and that's it. Buying digital, you own a digital license that allows you to download and store the game's data. Which is to say, it's the same d*** picture. If you buy digital, you can have a hard copy of the data, and no company can take that away from you (though there should be more thorough legal protections to ensure that).

This does effectively kill the resale market (technically, it probably wouldn't be that hard to implement a digital resale system, but no company would put money into that). And this is definitely a preservationist nightmare (ignoring that modern gaming has already been that regardless of physical releases). So, again, BAD news. But digital purchases are not as bad as people are asserting.

@8th_Observer It was still an article whose only new bit of news was a Switch 2 trailer. I'm just saying, man, it's not hard to make a connection.

"10% Pay Raise at Nintendo Puts PlayStation on Notice"

Really easy to tie it back to PlayStation. It's noteworthy, relevant news, I would say.

EDIT: Also pretty sure they've written articles to the effect of, 'BLANK announced for Switch, seemingly skipping PlayStation' on several occasions. Which deflates this whole game needs to be on PlayStation to justify writing about it thought. Just like how a game skipping PlayStation can be seen as relevant PlayStation news, so too can a rival company's ostensible success be relevant to PlayStation.

@Grumblevolcano I guess...

But you still have God of War at #3. Gran Turismo barely seems like an IP to me. In the same way MLB is sports, Turismo is kinda just cars. That it had a movie I suppose helps legitimatize it as its own property... But still doesn't feel right.

And PlayStation's series of Marvel games is absolutely NOT a PlayStation IP. The rest I completely agree with the order of.

How they got 5th for God of War beats me. Maybe they're counting Spider-Man and Wolverine as different IPs...? And have MLB above it? I dunno.

@8th_Observer Sure. But they also found a reason to type up an article about Oblivion Remaster's Switch 2 trailer. And have focused heavily on Switch 2 in article bodies before.

It's not like they can't talk about the Switch. That Nintendo is doing pretty well for themselves is generally relevant during these times of weekly layoffs.

@AI-Generation Given how often Push reports on Microsoft's layoffs, I'm kinda surprised they haven't reported on Nintendo of Japan's 10% pay raise and 300 personnel growth.

I don't mean that as a criticism of Push, just still seems relevant during the current climate of layoffs throughout the industry that seem inescapable.

@wildcat_kickz I dunno...is Project Fantasy even a service of any kind...?

Pretty soon, no one will be making games besides Nintendo, the PlayStation Trinity, Capcom, and various Eastern developers predominantly founded on gooning.

@S1ayeR74 Very unrelated, and they did actually report on that.

EDIT: Also, it's been known forever that you don't in any sense own movies bought on such platforms. But digital video games are distributed differently. Ownership is still a concern, but nowhere near to the same extent.

Not surprising, but also seems like a massive fumble.

One of the best developers to come to prominence in the last decade paired with a fan-favorite Marvel property. It shouldn't be hard to make this into a success. Maybe it's the behind-the-scenes that lead to this thinking from corporate, but still emblematic of how bad management was and is.

@HIGHonLIFE1012 How's God of War not their #1 IP? I could really only see The Last of Us being bigger.

And lifetime sales are only part of IP strength. Halo circa 2001-2008 was a phenomenon. I'm not sure God of War has ever been that, despite having more high-selling titles.

@Rich33 I suppose.

But, at the same time, it's not like Sony's games are the best selling on the platform. So one might deduce the majority of players don't actually stay off PCs for PlayStation exclusives.

@Kalime78 IP growth would actually significant increase the value of the PlayStation brand.

Every game company would kill for a Super Mario Bros. Movie. And it could easily be worth compromising hardware sales to get there — which probably didn't even happen here.

@Meowmixes98 I would argue the PS5 is proof to the contrary. Barely any exclusives and it's had a fantastic run. Yotei being exclusive didn't really change anything about its prospects.

@PsBoxSwitchOwner Not a single PlayStation IP compares to Nintendo's best. I'm not even sure any of PlayStation's compare to Halo at its peak.

I wouldn't exactly say "everyone" knows them. And, while I can see arguments to the effect of the PC ports weren't growing IP and instead only devalued the PS5 proposition, it should have been a decent path to brand recognition.

As someone that's been invested since the new VCS was announced, I'm proud of Atari.

At the same time, getting increasingly weary of acquisitions... Hopefully they aren't overspending. At least everyone they've bought was undoubtedly cheap.

@ThePlaystationStan I agree that the PS5 is a better console — almost entirely because most modern Xbox games are on it. But the Series are still pretty good consoles, all considered.

Heck, even in regards to the exclusives thing, a lot of people here don't appreciate the decently large collection of backwards compatible games on Series/One you can't get on PlayStation. Including many Xbox exclusives throughout history that remain exclusive.

@Mr-Cage They all did what they were told: made cheaper games to fill out GamePass Day 1. It's much more a failure on management to make GamePass profitable than the developers for making quality — if mostly unremarkable — games.

I think that most developers only made a couple games under Microsoft says it all.

@ThePlaystationStan You know, I don't really see how Microsoft's continuous failures would affect the end-consumer. The Series still gets games, Xbox still puts out a ton of games (not for long...), GamePass remains a pretty good service for the customer, and the hardware has never not been capable.

It's no Wii U or Dreamcast — and those have a bunch of fans despite having libraries that pale in comparison to the Series. Really, the only reason to bemoan owning an Xbox is if you engage in fanboy wars. Otherwise, it's a perfectly fine console to be on, and barely a different experience from the PS5 outside of some missing support.

@Flaming_Kaiser I didn't call myself nuttin' nor beg for any port.

Makes you realize how stupid all the acquisitions were in the first place. Bought them all just to close them before most could really produce anything and came out of it with less money and less respect.

@Bot_Bot_69 ...Seems kinda telling that neither responded to you with clear examples of AI's positive effects on individuals.

If we didn't live in a global capitalism where the rich profit off us working ourselves to death, advanced automation from AI (or the LLM simulacrum of artificial intelligence we currently have — @NerdyPaul) might almost be worth the unregulated environmental strain. But we don't have that...

No company pushing AI is doing so to revolutionize the labor-exchange to workers' benefit. They're doing it to pay people less to get equatable products. In the realm of art, that translates to foregoing intent for more rapid, vapid content. Which I guess could be interpreted as a good thing, if you ask the right consumer.

To anyone saying Sony should swoop in and buy 'em: First off, no. Second off, you're really underestimating how badly Bungie and the compute crisis are going to hit them. They're not really in a position to buy anyone anymore.

@Jett I am not apart of the Master Race and have no interest in fighting their fanboy battles.

However, the argument that many PC players wouldn't be able to play GTAVI at 60fps seems entirely irrelevant to the comparison. Like, a PC fanboy wouldn't give any amount of s***s. And it feels INCREDIBLY unlikely a PC port is more than 2 years away — likely more like 1. This isn't the 360 era anymore; T2 would be throwing money away if they got cute with console exclusivity.

@AI-Generation I always thought 30fps was perfectly fine. 60fps is notably better, but I wouldn't call it essential. Frame pacing is really what kills it for me.

120fps always seemed pointless and unnecessary, though. Again, it is better than 60fps — marginally. But has never made enough of a difference for me to care.

@get2sammyb That matters not to PC Master Race.

Either through emulation or an official release, they'll hoot and holler incessantly about how they have the real version of GTAIV, and yadda yadda — something about consoles sucking.

Give PC Master Race a year and they'll be ALL over this.

@johnedwin Prices will go up regardless of when they release it. The question is whether or not it's worth releasing at all, not so much when.

The only way kinda around increasing prices is to front load manufacturing so you have a heavy stock built at lower prices. But, from the sounds of it, it's already too late to do that. So unless Sony already built that stock...they really don't have a good option.

@DanteDevilHunter Yeah...

Doesn't mean Xbox didn't popularize it.

@GamingGod Yeah, but practically no one gave a s*** about PS2 online play. I only even remember them advertising it with Deadlock and SOCCOM.

SEGA implemented it before either of them, but Xbox undisputably popularized it in the console space.

@ShadowRJ And Xbox Live basically beat PSN to the punch by, like, 5 years.

Xbox was pretty much the defacto place for online multiplayer for nearly a decade.

Don't really see the connection to that junk GTA data. I mean, tangentially, sure. But this data doesn't really prove the other data, and vice versa.

Surely what this would support is the idea that cannibalizing your single-player resources to make a bunch of live-service multiplayer games is stupid, right?

So, wait, this is based exclusively on IGNdeals' affiliate link clicks after 1 week of pre-orders? That tells us literally f***ing nothing.

At most, we can assume this ratio is representative of an inclination towards PS5 over Xbox Series. Except we can already assume that based on install bases. But there's way too many variables at play here to assume that specific ratio is accurate in any way, nor that it will continue being just as accurate as time goes on. It's junk data from a nebulous population over a miniscule amount of time.

@AhmadSumadi I think most people who buy $1000+ phones get them on a payment plan, with an overpriced network plan, or with a trade-in deal. And I'm not super certain they make up a big enough portion of consumers for said phones to be seen as anything other than luxury products.

Which is to say, the markets are very different, and the seeming success of expensive phones doesn't mean video game consoles can charge similar prices and expect to sell.

Seems like a lot of commenters aren't reading that it takes nearly $1000 JUST to put the d*** thing together. We're not looking at an $800 release when sold at a loss. Adding up all the other expenses in producing and shipping a console, even hitting $1000 with subsidies is probably practically impossible.

Y'all really need to grasp that the Steam Machine, with comparable output to a base PS5, costs $1050 when sold at a presumable profit. If the PS6 is significantly stronger, subsidies and whatever special manufacturing deals Sony can pull out of its a** aren't going to save that price tag.

EDIT: Also, everyone in the know are saying component prices are going to double by the end of next year. If it costs $1000 to assemble now, we're probably looking at a $1400 minimum by then. Maybe they can stock up now, but that could just lead to a s***ton of product already too expensive to produce.

@AI-Generation Too much hype. It'll get 10s galore from journalists just for a bunch of video essatists to release videos throughout next year calling its praise into question.

Whether it's good or not will depend on how tired one is of R*'s formula. If GTAV and/or Red Dead 2 are what you consider the best games of all time, you'll love it. If you think games like Breath of the Wild or Ghosts of Tsushima ran circles about R*'s efforts, I doubt VI will do much of anything to convince you it deserves its generational status.

No, but it is stupid.

@Oram77 Well yeah, no game is a guaranteed success. That's exactly the point.

Making a GaaS doesn't guarantee revenue anymore than making a single-player game does. So why scramble to heavily invest in the fad that's already come and gone? No one's gonna be making Fortnite money, so why try so hard to compete with it. There's no sense to it.

EDIT: This accidentally kinda works as a response to the Astro thing, too. So...there ya go.

I literally do not get how fans are still justifying Sony's live-service push.

Every time I bemoan the lack of PaRappa:
"PlayStation already tried that, it didn't work and they should never try again."

The live-service push proves time and time again to be a fool's errand rife with failures:
"I mean, it made sense that they tried. And they should keep trying, because Fortnite makes a lot of money."

I just don't get this fanbase half the time...

@Oram77 But why prioritize that specific type of game when their biggest success in the space is about as profitable as any of their top-selling titles? Why even care about the space when efforts therein have made nothing close to Fortnite money?

There's no sense to it. If they want to make a live-service game — whatever. But it should never compromise their usual output again, nor should they expect anything close to the top dogs.

@Oram77 The live-service graveyards are brimming with quality games.

Also, is Helldivers 2 Sony's most profitable game of all time? Because, if it isn't, I don't see how that's justification to keep compromising their software lineup to chase the dragon.