@rjejr The $60 is for the Switch 1 game Super Mario Party Jamboree, which is playable on Switch 2. And yes, you can absolutely buy it at $60 and play that version on the Switch 2 — both physically and digitally. Unless you think every Switch 1 game should receive a price cut now — and PS4 game, for that matter — there's really no reason to bemoan why $60 doesn't entitle you to a Switch 2 upgrade.
The Jamboree TV expansion is Switch 2 exclusive, and costs $20. The game is perfectly playable on Switch 2 without it, so arguing that it's a $80 game is like arguing Forbidden West is a $90 game because of its DLC. The Zeldas would've been a better example of what you're saying. But the original versions are still perfectly playable, meaning they're $60/$70 games with $10 upgrades that argument should've been free.
EDIT: I'm too lazy to check this, but I'm fairly certain the expansion upgrade would improve the visuals of game, like every other S2 edition does. It's likely just a resolution boost, though. I also thought that I might've misunderstood you, and you were saying you can't get the S2 edition technical upgrades at $60. Which would be a more cohesive argument, I think. But your last claim that it's a S1 game without no graphical updates regardless tells me that's not at all what you meant.
@kcarnes9051 Me not playing either doesn't mean I have a complete lack of understanding of their differences. Ghosts has you repeat a handful of the same tasks altered and compounded around its map. Rebirth has about 20 mini-games that presumably make up the bulk of its side content. Being a lifelong gamer, it's not hard to imagine how these play out differently.
I am missing details, yes. Like does Ghost not attempt any subversion or iteration to keep the side content fresh? Or does Rebirth still have you repeat these mini-games at a rate that would negate the strength of their variety and still reduce it to a series of doing the same repetitive tasks? But, given your position, I'm assuming no and no.
My big assumption on Rebirth, however, was that while side content might add a lot of variety, the main gameplay loop — as in, what you do to progress the plot — probably still gets repetitive in a way a more linear game might not. And I assume that based on my experiences with JRPGs, and what I've seen of Rebirth.
I agree with your sentiment on denser, smaller worlds. I think that's a big reason why Odyssey — and now Bananza — are so successful. Probably Yakuza too...but I haven't played that one (probably will soon, though). But I'd still argue that, fundamentally, a character-action driven open-world game necessitates repetition. I already conceded that that doesn't have to be the case, but it's very difficult for a contemporary developer to overcome the logistics that necessitate such design.
@kcarnes9051 It's less a question of imagination, and more one of logistics. I don't doubt that a developer could create an open-world of boundless variety and creativity. However, how many production timelines and budgets would actually allow for such a thing?
I haven't played Rebirth, but it sounds like it still followed repetitive open-world tropes. Having a decent amount of mini-games doesn't exactly change that, especially if the primary gameplay loop is about as repetitive as I'd expect a typical JRPG to be. It's certainly neat, and definitely helps with variety, but it's not like you're never doing the same thing twice.
Mmm, doubtful. The nature of open-world side-content kinda necessitates repetition. Heck, open-worlds in general do.
They can make it less egregious than the first one (didn't play it, so I have no reference point), but you ARE going to be doing the same things throughout.
But, to be fair to SP, I feel like that quote can be taken in a lot of different ways. Kinda sounds poorly thought out, too. It really just seems like he's saying similar events will have differing outcomes. So, you'll be doing the same things, but they'll be designed with a subversive edge.
@KillerBoy It probably didn't sell exceptionally enough for Ubi to see it as a worthwhile press release. But that doesn't mean it didn't sell well, and their focus on player count isn't much indicative of poor sales for all those reasons above.
Also, there's been plenty of non-Ubi sourced evidence that it did sell well (lookie that, others already beat me to that one). So...your mostly baseless assumption is probably wrong.
@KillerBoy I think the thing workaday gamers have proven they don't understand is that these companies don't have to answer to anyone besides their investors. Investors of Ubisoft have an interest in how well Ubi's sub service is doing, as well as microtransaction saturation. As such, it makes a lot of sense for Ubi to focus on player count instead of sales. Not because sales look bad — and certainly not because they're afraid of what Asmon has to say about them — but because their pitch to investors is that their games are a service which facilitate engagement and, ergo, foster long-term revenue.
Conversely, it makes sense for Nintendo to announce every million-dollar seller because their business is built around software/hardware sales. It's not built around NSO, so they don't really say more than it's seeing growth. They don't need to tell investors the player count of the N64 app, because that's not correlated to a significant source of revenue.
@themightyant Well therein lies the big picture issue: Sony hasn't been truly great since the PS3. That's generally what gamers like me are constantly trying to say.
But even then, if you were to compare PS4 originals to PS5 originals — on a title-by-title basis — I think there would still be a significant difference of qualitative perception. Most of the PS5's best games are PS4 remakes, after all.
I'm not here saying the PS5 is a bad console. Of course it's not. There are thousands of good games to play on the thing. But I do think it matters that a poultry 5 games aren't available anywhere else (the Switch 2, by comparison, already has half the amount of true exclusives. It's been a month... And I am counting Welcome Tour as .5 a true exclusive).
@themightyant No, of course not. But it undermines the value of the console the less content is exclusively available on it. It's the same reason people on this site often say there's no reason to own an Xbox anymore; this list makes it pretty clear that one might as well just buy a PC at this point. The ONLY things they would really be missing are Astro and Rift.
Also, while I focused more on pointing out true exclusives, I think the amount of remakes/remasters also hurts. Not so much because I disapprove of their existence, but because when you look at the original content Sony has produced years into this generation — availability on PS4/PC aside — we're still only looking at 17 games. Which, to me at least, really doesn't seem like a lot this far into it. Nevermind how that's including dead/almost dead games, VR titles, and a few games I don't think anyone really cares about...like, at all.
True exclusive (are these more PSVR2 exclusives rather than PS5 exclusives...?)
Available on PS4 and PC
PS4 game / available on PC
Available on PC
PS4 game / available on PC
Available on PS4 and PC
Available on PC
True exclusive
Available on PC
Available on PC
Available on PS4 and PC
Available on PC
PS3 game / available on PC
PS4 game / available on PC
PS4 game / available on PC
PS4 games / available on PC
PS4 game / available on PC
So that's 7 games only available on the PS5. Two of which require a peripheral that might as well be another console. One of which is an online-focused game that hardly anyone plays. Another of which is a pretty small-scale bundle game (it's fantastic, though, so I'll allow it). And the most recent of which will surely be on PC by the end of next year. We got Yotei coming by the end of the year, so that's 8. Until it inevitably also ends up on PC by the end of next year... So you lose those two, take out Destruction All-Stars (I mean, come on...come on... side eye) and we have Astro Bot, Rift Apart, and two VR games that everyone definitely loves and cares about... Hmm, and people wonder why other people call this console's support disappointing...
@UltimateOtaku91 I mean, I'm not here to say only PlayStation fanboys are praising this game. However, I do think that anecdote as evidence of the game's universal praise is a little foolhardy.
For instance, there is DEFINITELY overlap between big PlayStation fans and PC gamers. And if stands to reason that PC gamers playing and praising the game are predominantly of that demographic. Whereas less PlayStation-ey PC gamers might mostly have ignored Ghosts, and hence didn't bother to play or rate it.
Which I'm not saying entirely dismantles your claim. I just don't think that's the irrefutable proof to the contrary or might sound like at first impression.
@SeaDaVie He literally said "in my opinion" between both those claims. He never said anything derogatory towards people that still like the game, just that Sony stans will praise the game regardless. Which they will.
And, besides that, I don't think one needs to specify they're talking about their opinion whenever expressing an opinion for it to be clear they're speaking for themselves. If he said something unambiguously imposing, then sure. But he didn't.
Honestly though, my biggest problem with your comment is that your first response was pulling out aggregate scores. Even if you're trying to objectively show that the game isn't considered dated, those scores don't even accomplish that. Maybe the reviews liked the dated mechanics, or thought other elements compensated for them (OP even said the game has exceptional art direction — maybe that just didn't matter as much to him as it would others). It's just never the way to prove anyone wrong, unless he flat out said: 'nobody even liked the game when it was released.' Otherwise, those scores are irrelevant.
@SeaDaVie Doesn't mesh with reality? His opinion is just as real as any arbitrary score on a review aggregate site. Arguably even more so.
He brought up some actual, legitimate criticisms and questioned if the sequel will iterate enough to be worthwhile apropos said criticisms. And your response is: "well, those criticisms didn't seem to bother reviewers, so your opinion must be wrong." NO OPINIONS ARE WRONG. F***. If you want to defend the game, actually engage with his criticisms. Or just, like, accept that he doesn't like those things and move on with your day. Nobody cares about its metascore, and even its mild applicability to his claim that the game feels dated (even though I think you can argue it's been long enough since the PC release that the game could still have become dated since — but whatever) doesn't matter because it still feels dated to him and a stupid 2-digit number isn't going to make the game feel any less dated to him.
And heck, if you're only retort is his claim about combat, and all you can say is the gamefeel of it and animations are good, then yeah, you should be able to understand why someone might not have liked it. Because, to a lot of gamers, good combat doesn't just mean it feels satisfying and looks expensive. And you can disagree with that, but it shouldn't be difficult to empathize with such a position.
I mean, it's easy to scoff at this as someone who doesn't like microtransactions. But, it's not like there isn't an audience for this kinda stuff. And for that audience...yeah, it probably does increase their fun. If it didn't, one would hope they wouldn't be shelling out actual money.
Now we can argue it's more an addiction than anything. However, speaking of Ubisoft specifically, I don't think their microtransactions are often designed to prey on those types. Now a gacha game (kinda seems like this website loves most of those...), there's a stronger argument to make there. But Ubi microtransactions usually just alleviate grinding, which you could say is a little scummy due to artificially bolstering grind, but at least there's not a gambling aspect to entice gamers.
@JackiePriest I mean, it's a fair criticism if it doesn't appeal to the individual.
For me, I think the current AAA approach to interactive storytelling is very limiting and reductive of gaming as an art form. That doesn't mean I think it's bad, but if I'm getting the equivalent of mediocre popcorn flick visual storytelling in my interactive art, I fail to see the point in the constant interruptions to gameplay.
A cinematic approach can still work, and I think PlayStation has put out the best examples of that (The Last of Us, God of War (Norse), Horizon has its moments). But if the plot and writing aren't exceptional (all modern Ratchet and Clanks besides A Crack in Time comes to mind), it just seems like a waste of my time and their money.
So, personally, while I'm fine with the cinematic direction generally, I might criticize Sony for investing SO heavily in that specific direction. Nothing wrong with putting out more Astro Bots, or using AAA money on something more experimental with its storytelling (like Undertale, Braid, Disco Elysium, Celeste, Before Your Eyes, Edith Finch, or any of the indie games actually progressing interactive storytelling).
...I dunno if there were worse examples of hot takes, but the ones featured are cheeky at most.
Sony's contemporary games tend to be very cinematic. That can be to their detriment, but it really depends on the gamer. I don't think it's inherently bad, just like I don't think it's inherently wrong or bad faith to point out that PlayStation games involve a lot of watching. Kinda just seems like a nothing controversy all 'round.
More importantly, though, I gotta go to Alamo. I don't give a flying f*** about that popcorn bucket. But I absolutely relish the opportunity to watch some classic cinema in a theater.
Used to use my X1 for multimedia — mostly because it could function as a TV tuner. Then I got an LG TV and invested heavily into a Plex server (and, wouldn't you know it, it could use that same Xbox branded dongle for TV tuner functionality — it's almost like I excessively planned the whole thing years in advance, or something...).
I still use the Xbox for the occasional Blu-ray (more for testing purposes, really...because Plex), and hence felt comfortable buying a digital-only PS5. I do still sometimes watch stuff on my consoles, just because they're HDMI into a Hue Syncbox (...I have a somewhat complex set up), so I can watch/listen to things with adaptive lighting. And, in those cases, I sometimes use the PS5 over the X1 because the X1 runs kinda s***. BUT, I have have my LG remote set up to control said X1, so I often prefer the convenience of using a remote to the efficiency of the PS5's apps.
So no, I really don't use the PS5's multimedia functionality. But also don't mind it being there — even though I agree only a fraction of the population would find that a selling point. Now if the Switch 2 could just get some decent multimedia apps...
Surprised how passionate people are about 4's level design. I skipped straight from 2 to THUG as a kid, so I don't mind what is essentially a level pack for 1+2.
Still, I could've sworn 4's break from its predecessors design was strongly condemned since its release. In fact, I always though 4's reception was what brought about the reinvention of THUG (though I guess you could imagine 4 was THUG's prototype, and that was already the series' trajectory). Incidentally THUG 1+2 when...?
1.2 million signatures after a year of campaigning? Sounds like something publishers can easily ignore. I think to get enough traction for something like this, it really has to cover digital ownership holistically. Not just game servers and licenses being abandoned, but movies, music, books,etc. The movement needs to be bigger than a failed Squeenix game's worth of gamers.
Hell, you put this campaign in front of most politicians, and the "companies can't handle the burden of indefinite servers" distraction will convince them to side with the company. What's more important than giving our disgustingly rich companies all the opportunity to make money, after all? It's almost like...everything's stupid, or something...
Mmm, I dunno. I more think the excessive acquisitions, lack of a hardware/software commercial success in years, undoubtable mismanagement behind the scenes, and relentless competition from Sony/Nintendo lead to this wave of layoffs. If anyone gains from GamePass, it's Microsoft itself. I see how the model doesn't make sense for 3rd-party developers, but when Micro's making all the cash from subs, it should work. Unless they've massively discounted it for years now — which would be stupid of them to do for so long.
I'm sure GamePass is less profitable than traditional hardware and software sales. But with the market how it is now, Xbox would probably be broke if they were still trying to compete directly with PlayStation and Switch. Now, whoever thought being in 3rd place meant it the perfect time to spend billions on studios — many of which weren't commercial rockstars — should probably be fired. Of course they won't be, and profits will be up because of layoffs. It's almost like...everything is stupid, or something.
@JohnHalo I comprehended what you said. I just think calling people NPCs is asinine behavior.
If you don't think Xbox failed because it started porting its games, why are you drawing equivalences to PlayStation in an article about PlayStation porting a game? GamePass and xCloud are very much services associated with Xbox, which compound the experience of having an Xbox. I don't see how either are "everything but Xbox." Sounds like you're making a point about selling software specifically by condemning these services in reference to Xbox's success.
Nintendo's success is not exclusively because of exclusives. If it were, the Wii U and GameCube — and N64, for that matter — would've been massive successes.
@JohnHalo As an old man, your diction confounds and perturbs me.
Xbox didn't fail because they started porting games. They started porting games because they were failing...badly...for more than 1 generation. One of the most insightful things Phil has said is that they lost the most important generation to win (apropos the X1 gen); most of their actions since have been a reaction to that loss. And guess what? They WEREN'T porting their games back then.
I don't really think it matters if it were God of War or Helldivers. If we're just talking one game, it's not going to collapse the entire PlayStation brand or devalue PlayStation hardware to the point of irrelevance.
Hell, with the way the contemporary market is, Sony could probably port their entire catalog to Xbox and PC, and the PS5 would continue to sell incredibly well. I don't think there's much Sony or Nintendo could do to destroy their stranglehold on the console market.
EDIT: I might add that Sony has already ported a fair bit of their catalog to PCs — which is a much bigger market than Xbox, at this point — and haven't seen it undermine their hardware sales.
Seems to me that Helldivers is barely even associated with the PlayStation brand, due to its mass popularity on PC. So if they were going to pick any of their relevant IPs to abandon exclusivity for, might as well be HD. Also worth considering that the game lives and dies on its player count, so the more exposure the better.
Don't really understand the sentiment that going 3rd-party is a sh****** position. Microsoft would be making bank if they didn't overspend and figured out their exact strategy sooner. And SEGA still exists, and is still successful. Honestly just sounds like something a fanboy would say.
Anyway, I look forward to seeing this on Switch 2 in a year, so I can finally buy this stupid game that all my friends have been trying to get me on (I don't pay for PS+ — or GamePass, for that matter — only NSO, because it's a fraction of the price and I hardly play online regardless).
"It was a new franchise and a live-service game entering an oversaturated market during a time when many other live-service titles have flopped. The team was also building a brand-new engine for the game while making it, which created a number of challenges."
Listen, I'm not here to justify cancellations and layoffs. But I think Schreier does a good job here explaining why the cancellation isn't so baffling. New IP, expensive, for an oversaturated market — risky in a lot of ways. Maybe it could've become a massive success, but it was far from guaranteed; I can see why execs got cold feet regardless of internal praise.
@ThroughTheIris56 Which is a fair position. I just don't think it's a recent thing, nor do I think this specific collab changed anything.
Though I will say, as someone that has been disheartened by the trajectory of many franchises over the years, all you can really do is shrug it off, enjoy older titles, look for new releases to replace it in your heart, and let the people who enjoy the contemporary version of your once beloved IP enjoy it in peace.
@dodgykebaab For the campaign, sure. For the multiplayer, with its garish gun skins, joke banners, and action design based on running around like a twitchy maniac, no.
I think there's just a big misunderstanding about the inherent tone of a realistic military shooter. They aren't inherently gritty or serious. CoD is basically a popcorn flick with the aesthetic of a military shooter. Some entries really lean into the military aspect of it (basically all of them up to Modern Warfare 2, the MW remakes, World at War, WWII), others not so much (I'd argue basically every Blops).
Spec Ops: The Line, that's gritty. Comparatively, if Spec Ops is Saving Private Ryan, CoD (in most iterations) is Commando. Yeah, it has violence and warfare. But it's much more preoccupied with action and power-fantasy to hold any legitimate grit or be taken seriously.
@dodgykebaab "Gritty"? Are we talking about the same franchise? Maybe half of CoD's campaigns could be described as gritty. But multiplayer is not gritty by association — as evidenced by the definitively not-gritty zombie mode.
Rather, CoD multiplayer has deep tonal ties to stoner and bro culture. Which, again, are emphatically not-gritty.
Also, people aren't appreciating how stupid most of Fortnite's collabs are. Aang with a gun isn't wacky. Nor does it make sense. The premise that B&B don't fit in CoD multiplayer is reasonable enough, but I think really misinterprets what CoD multiplayer is. The premise that B&B is the straw that broke the camel's back is wildly misinformed (Nicki Minaj running around shooting up soldiers is just as absurd in my book). The premise that Fortnite's collabs are all justified whereas CoD's aren't is just wrong.
@Stamp_Monkey Listen, you don't have to like the skin. I didn't even mean to imply you CAN'T criticize or critique it. I just don't think it's worth campaigning over. I don't think it's worth arguing over. I don't think it's worth with getting upset over. And giving it any more than a passing disapproval is a waste of time.
And while you could say I'm being reductive of legitimate critiques, I argue the critical camp here is being AT LEAST AS reductive of people who would legitimately enjoy this collab.
@SuntannedDuck2 My position is rooted in an understanding that stupid microtransactions collabs are inevitable, and can't be stopped. Hence, my argument is more in reference to those saying this stupid MTX collab is worse than some other stupid MTX collab.
If you think all stupid MTX collabs are problematic, I've no qualms with that position, and mostly agree. "Mostly" only because I still think it's hardly worth complaining about, and better off ignoring if it doesn't appeal to you. As someone who's just never cared about ANY MTX in ANY game, that's just the most reasonable conclusion in my eyes.
@get2sammyb Does it, though? I'd agree if the intention of CoD was being a war simulator. But, since that really hasn't consistently been the case since maybe Black Ops 2, I don't really see how B&B look anymore clumsy here than Bob's Burgers Bob looks next to that banana.
'Cartoony' does not make an all-encompassing, congruous art style.
EDIT: I also think it's important to note that Bob has a gun. If Bob with a gun shooting at Aang with another gun while in Gotham City sounds more artistically cohesive than Butthead 360 no-scoping generic military guy, then I don't know what to tell you. It's all stupid. Maybe you can argue Fortnite's style is so generic, it works with the disorder. But I would still argue CoD is just another flavor of generic, and therefore works about as well.
Also, I do feel the need to clarify that I actually did read your article before commenting. I just disagree with that point — as implied here — and didn't think I needed to address that point to make my original point.
Really don't see how this is any worse than CoD's other collabs. Or half of Fortnite's s*** (Skellington, The Incredibles, and Animation Domination made more sense there than this here, how...? At least there's more audience overlap between B&B-headers and CoD...)
More importantly, though: SHRUGS Who cares regardless. These stupid collabs happen all the time, and if you don't see the appeal, it just wasn't made for you. Don't buy it and move on. I kinda get tired of gamers complaining about things they could simply not buy.
@AdamNovice I guess... It's kinda like if there was an article about the SNES dropping off and losing support, and someone commented, "Mario is Missing JUST came out."
Which is funny. But I don't think quite in the same way you were going for.
@StopBeingTribal Never let the Internet kill your good vibes. It's all just noise; at a certain point, it's less the Internet's fault for being toxic and more yours for letting that irrelevant toxicity bend you.
I guess that's my PSA for the day. Regardless, I don't think anyone besides trolls are dogging on people enjoying the thing. It's just, with such miniscule support, it's hard to objectively say it's a good purchase. You know, I have an Atari VCS and have gotten a lot of enjoyment out of it. But I absolutely would not say it's a great console, and would advise anyone but the most specifically tailored for it to avoid it.
I don't think an interactive climate lesson that's playable without VR really invalidates anything in this article or saves PSVR2 from obscurity.
Also, incidentally, kinda ironic a hardware/software company would put out something detailing the irreparable damage we've done to our climate. Reads like the billion-dollar conglomerate version of community service.
It WAS officially over when they announced PCVR support.
I think wiredVR only has a place for high-end PC enthusiasts; PSVR2 was kinda doomed from the start dropping when standalone is commonplace and limiting compatibility to a home console. They should've either made it standalone (and backwards compatible, so everyone with a PSVR would upgrade), or made a wired cross-compatible with PS5 and PC — and PS4, for that matter. And, you know...more games. More games would've helped.
Oh well. Another failed Sony peripheral. Gotta see what they manage with the handheld market now. Although I really don't think they'll be converting many Deckers or Switchers.
Absolutely agree that all entertainment is competing with all other entertainment. I never really get that 'mutually exclusive demographics' angle. If someone spends their free time watching Netflix, the goal should be to get that demo' to spend that time playing a PlayStation. If someone prefers Nintendo's games to PlayStation's, why not try to make games that captures their attention?
It's also weird that Sony specifically would think it more worthwhile to compete with Fortnite than Nintendo. A few more Astro Bots, bring back some more mass appeal franchises like Ape Escape or Loco Roco, release a PS4-spec handheld, and actually commit to it, and I can see them legitimately pulling people away from the Switch. But nothing will buckle Fortnite's success, and there's not too much space in the GaaS sphere if you can't manage that. Maybe they already feel like they failed to directly compete with Nintendo — on Nintendo's terms, at least. PSP, Move, and most of their Nintendo-esque franchises did commercially fail, after all. I think they need to figure out how to say: get an experience comparable to Nintendo, PLUS the contemporary PlayStation experience all in one place.'
Surprised seeing the general contrarian sentiment to this seems to be, "well, they had the stock, so of course it sold well." Which is just...not how supply and demand works.
Nintendo knew their new console would have high demand, and, since they start generations on their time and the Switch was still selling really well, they had nothing pressuring them into launching ASAP. So they smartly built up their stock. This isn't some matter of fact thing, it was a conscious business decision by Nintendo.
You can say the PS5 would've sold at the same rate if not for stock issues. You can say the PS2 only sold so well because it was a cheap DVD player. All that's conjecture, though — barely constituting context. The context was Sony couldn't figure out their business during COVID fast enough to pump out PS5s, and Nintendo had the stock and demand to sell 3.5 million consoles in a few days.
I thought it was pretty good. Had game announcements, nothing looked too generic or boring, and PlayStation actually unveiled something. Plus PlayStation Classics I actually give a **** about.
Of course, there was almost no sign of PlayStation Studios proper. And I wouldn't say any particular announcement was amazing (Grasshopper, enhance, and Marvel were close, though). So it wasn't phenomenal. Still, probably one of their best showings in years.
"Sony shouldn’t do a presentation if it doesn’t have meaningful content to share."
See, the issue isn't that Sony might not do a Summer showcase. The issue is that they might not have anything meaningful to share, dispute not really sharing anything so far this year. That we're presuming they might not, I'd argue, is even worse.
Looks like a lot of people here aren't reading the "Milan" part. On one hand, having played both Mario + Rabbits, I have a lot of love and faith in their team. On the other hand, there's a good chance this is an un-Mario'ed + Rabbits title (with or without Rayman). Which is fine — those games are great — but that wouldn't be the new platformer Rayman fans want. And even if it was, I don't know that the team is well suited for a platformer.
Comments 1,155
Re: Xbox Backtracks on $80 Price Tag for The Outer Worlds 2 Following Public Outcry
@rjejr The $60 is for the Switch 1 game Super Mario Party Jamboree, which is playable on Switch 2. And yes, you can absolutely buy it at $60 and play that version on the Switch 2 — both physically and digitally. Unless you think every Switch 1 game should receive a price cut now — and PS4 game, for that matter — there's really no reason to bemoan why $60 doesn't entitle you to a Switch 2 upgrade.
The Jamboree TV expansion is Switch 2 exclusive, and costs $20. The game is perfectly playable on Switch 2 without it, so arguing that it's a $80 game is like arguing Forbidden West is a $90 game because of its DLC. The Zeldas would've been a better example of what you're saying. But the original versions are still perfectly playable, meaning they're $60/$70 games with $10 upgrades that argument should've been free.
EDIT: I'm too lazy to check this, but I'm fairly certain the expansion upgrade would improve the visuals of game, like every other S2 edition does. It's likely just a resolution boost, though. I also thought that I might've misunderstood you, and you were saying you can't get the S2 edition technical upgrades at $60. Which would be a more cohesive argument, I think. But your last claim that it's a S1 game without no graphical updates regardless tells me that's not at all what you meant.
Re: Marvel Tokon Could Have Up to 35 Characters, Fans Hypothesise
@Oram77 It absolutely did. Still, where's a remake/sequel dammit?!
Re: Marvel Tokon Could Have Up to 35 Characters, Fans Hypothesise
I think "deduce" might be giving elementary multiplication a little too much credit...
Re: 'We Won't Make You Do the Same Thing Over and Over': Ghost of Yotei PS5 Will Keep You Guessing
@kcarnes9051 Me not playing either doesn't mean I have a complete lack of understanding of their differences. Ghosts has you repeat a handful of the same tasks altered and compounded around its map. Rebirth has about 20 mini-games that presumably make up the bulk of its side content. Being a lifelong gamer, it's not hard to imagine how these play out differently.
I am missing details, yes. Like does Ghost not attempt any subversion or iteration to keep the side content fresh? Or does Rebirth still have you repeat these mini-games at a rate that would negate the strength of their variety and still reduce it to a series of doing the same repetitive tasks? But, given your position, I'm assuming no and no.
My big assumption on Rebirth, however, was that while side content might add a lot of variety, the main gameplay loop — as in, what you do to progress the plot — probably still gets repetitive in a way a more linear game might not. And I assume that based on my experiences with JRPGs, and what I've seen of Rebirth.
I agree with your sentiment on denser, smaller worlds. I think that's a big reason why Odyssey — and now Bananza — are so successful. Probably Yakuza too...but I haven't played that one (probably will soon, though). But I'd still argue that, fundamentally, a character-action driven open-world game necessitates repetition. I already conceded that that doesn't have to be the case, but it's very difficult for a contemporary developer to overcome the logistics that necessitate such design.
Re: 'We Won't Make You Do the Same Thing Over and Over': Ghost of Yotei PS5 Will Keep You Guessing
@kcarnes9051 It's less a question of imagination, and more one of logistics. I don't doubt that a developer could create an open-world of boundless variety and creativity. However, how many production timelines and budgets would actually allow for such a thing?
I haven't played Rebirth, but it sounds like it still followed repetitive open-world tropes. Having a decent amount of mini-games doesn't exactly change that, especially if the primary gameplay loop is about as repetitive as I'd expect a typical JRPG to be. It's certainly neat, and definitely helps with variety, but it's not like you're never doing the same thing twice.
Re: 'We Won't Make You Do the Same Thing Over and Over': Ghost of Yotei PS5 Will Keep You Guessing
Mmm, doubtful. The nature of open-world side-content kinda necessitates repetition. Heck, open-worlds in general do.
They can make it less egregious than the first one (didn't play it, so I have no reference point), but you ARE going to be doing the same things throughout.
But, to be fair to SP, I feel like that quote can be taken in a lot of different ways. Kinda sounds poorly thought out, too. It really just seems like he's saying similar events will have differing outcomes. So, you'll be doing the same things, but they'll be designed with a subversive edge.
Re: Assassin's Creed Shadows Tops 5 Million Players, Performs 'In Line with Expectations'
@KillerBoy Because of a myriad of problems the company was/is facing that were never going to be solved by the sales of a single title.
You can grab every little piece of information and tailor it to suite your narrative. It doesn't mean it's reality.
Re: Assassin's Creed Shadows Tops 5 Million Players, Performs 'In Line with Expectations'
@KillerBoy It probably didn't sell exceptionally enough for Ubi to see it as a worthwhile press release. But that doesn't mean it didn't sell well, and their focus on player count isn't much indicative of poor sales for all those reasons above.
Also, there's been plenty of non-Ubi sourced evidence that it did sell well (lookie that, others already beat me to that one). So...your mostly baseless assumption is probably wrong.
Re: Assassin's Creed Shadows Tops 5 Million Players, Performs 'In Line with Expectations'
@KillerBoy I think the thing workaday gamers have proven they don't understand is that these companies don't have to answer to anyone besides their investors. Investors of Ubisoft have an interest in how well Ubi's sub service is doing, as well as microtransaction saturation. As such, it makes a lot of sense for Ubi to focus on player count instead of sales. Not because sales look bad — and certainly not because they're afraid of what Asmon has to say about them — but because their pitch to investors is that their games are a service which facilitate engagement and, ergo, foster long-term revenue.
Conversely, it makes sense for Nintendo to announce every million-dollar seller because their business is built around software/hardware sales. It's not built around NSO, so they don't really say more than it's seeing growth. They don't need to tell investors the player count of the N64 app, because that's not correlated to a significant source of revenue.
Re: All PS5 First-Party Exclusives
@themightyant Well therein lies the big picture issue: Sony hasn't been truly great since the PS3. That's generally what gamers like me are constantly trying to say.
But even then, if you were to compare PS4 originals to PS5 originals — on a title-by-title basis — I think there would still be a significant difference of qualitative perception. Most of the PS5's best games are PS4 remakes, after all.
I'm not here saying the PS5 is a bad console. Of course it's not. There are thousands of good games to play on the thing. But I do think it matters that a poultry 5 games aren't available anywhere else (the Switch 2, by comparison, already has half the amount of true exclusives. It's been a month... And I am counting Welcome Tour as .5 a true exclusive).
Re: All PS5 First-Party Exclusives
@themightyant No, of course not. But it undermines the value of the console the less content is exclusively available on it. It's the same reason people on this site often say there's no reason to own an Xbox anymore; this list makes it pretty clear that one might as well just buy a PC at this point. The ONLY things they would really be missing are Astro and Rift.
Also, while I focused more on pointing out true exclusives, I think the amount of remakes/remasters also hurts. Not so much because I disapprove of their existence, but because when you look at the original content Sony has produced years into this generation — availability on PS4/PC aside — we're still only looking at 17 games. Which, to me at least, really doesn't seem like a lot this far into it. Nevermind how that's including dead/almost dead games, VR titles, and a few games I don't think anyone really cares about...like, at all.
Re: All PS5 First-Party Exclusives
Mmm, sooo...
So that's 7 games only available on the PS5. Two of which require a peripheral that might as well be another console. One of which is an online-focused game that hardly anyone plays. Another of which is a pretty small-scale bundle game (it's fantastic, though, so I'll allow it). And the most recent of which will surely be on PC by the end of next year. We got Yotei coming by the end of the year, so that's 8. Until it inevitably also ends up on PC by the end of next year... So you lose those two, take out Destruction All-Stars (I mean, come on...come on... side eye) and we have Astro Bot, Rift Apart, and two VR games that everyone definitely loves and cares about... Hmm, and people wonder why other people call this console's support disappointing...
Re: Ghost of Yotei's State of Play Has Been Watched More Than Sony's Summer Showcase
@UltimateOtaku91 I mean, I'm not here to say only PlayStation fanboys are praising this game. However, I do think that anecdote as evidence of the game's universal praise is a little foolhardy.
For instance, there is DEFINITELY overlap between big PlayStation fans and PC gamers. And if stands to reason that PC gamers playing and praising the game are predominantly of that demographic. Whereas less PlayStation-ey PC gamers might mostly have ignored Ghosts, and hence didn't bother to play or rate it.
Which I'm not saying entirely dismantles your claim. I just don't think that's the irrefutable proof to the contrary or might sound like at first impression.
Re: Ghost of Yotei's State of Play Has Been Watched More Than Sony's Summer Showcase
@SeaDaVie He literally said "in my opinion" between both those claims. He never said anything derogatory towards people that still like the game, just that Sony stans will praise the game regardless. Which they will.
And, besides that, I don't think one needs to specify they're talking about their opinion whenever expressing an opinion for it to be clear they're speaking for themselves. If he said something unambiguously imposing, then sure. But he didn't.
Honestly though, my biggest problem with your comment is that your first response was pulling out aggregate scores. Even if you're trying to objectively show that the game isn't considered dated, those scores don't even accomplish that. Maybe the reviews liked the dated mechanics, or thought other elements compensated for them (OP even said the game has exceptional art direction — maybe that just didn't matter as much to him as it would others). It's just never the way to prove anyone wrong, unless he flat out said: 'nobody even liked the game when it was released.' Otherwise, those scores are irrelevant.
Re: Ghost of Yotei's State of Play Has Been Watched More Than Sony's Summer Showcase
@SeaDaVie Doesn't mesh with reality? His opinion is just as real as any arbitrary score on a review aggregate site. Arguably even more so.
He brought up some actual, legitimate criticisms and questioned if the sequel will iterate enough to be worthwhile apropos said criticisms. And your response is: "well, those criticisms didn't seem to bother reviewers, so your opinion must be wrong." NO OPINIONS ARE WRONG. F***. If you want to defend the game, actually engage with his criticisms. Or just, like, accept that he doesn't like those things and move on with your day. Nobody cares about its metascore, and even its mild applicability to his claim that the game feels dated (even though I think you can argue it's been long enough since the PC release that the game could still have become dated since — but whatever) doesn't matter because it still feels dated to him and a stupid 2-digit number isn't going to make the game feel any less dated to him.
And heck, if you're only retort is his claim about combat, and all you can say is the gamefeel of it and animations are good, then yeah, you should be able to understand why someone might not have liked it. Because, to a lot of gamers, good combat doesn't just mean it feels satisfying and looks expensive. And you can disagree with that, but it shouldn't be difficult to empathize with such a position.
Re: Ubisoft Reckons Microtransactions Make Games 'More Fun'
I mean, it's easy to scoff at this as someone who doesn't like microtransactions. But, it's not like there isn't an audience for this kinda stuff. And for that audience...yeah, it probably does increase their fun. If it didn't, one would hope they wouldn't be shelling out actual money.
Now we can argue it's more an addiction than anything. However, speaking of Ubisoft specifically, I don't think their microtransactions are often designed to prey on those types. Now a gacha game (kinda seems like this website loves most of those...), there's a stronger argument to make there. But Ubi microtransactions usually just alleviate grinding, which you could say is a little scummy due to artificially bolstering grind, but at least there's not a gambling aspect to entice gamers.
Re: Official Ghost of Yotei Popcorn Bucket Triggers Tedious Takes on PS5 Exclusives
@JackiePriest I mean, it's a fair criticism if it doesn't appeal to the individual.
For me, I think the current AAA approach to interactive storytelling is very limiting and reductive of gaming as an art form. That doesn't mean I think it's bad, but if I'm getting the equivalent of mediocre popcorn flick visual storytelling in my interactive art, I fail to see the point in the constant interruptions to gameplay.
A cinematic approach can still work, and I think PlayStation has put out the best examples of that (The Last of Us, God of War (Norse), Horizon has its moments). But if the plot and writing aren't exceptional (all modern Ratchet and Clanks besides A Crack in Time comes to mind), it just seems like a waste of my time and their money.
So, personally, while I'm fine with the cinematic direction generally, I might criticize Sony for investing SO heavily in that specific direction. Nothing wrong with putting out more Astro Bots, or using AAA money on something more experimental with its storytelling (like Undertale, Braid, Disco Elysium, Celeste, Before Your Eyes, Edith Finch, or any of the indie games actually progressing interactive storytelling).
Re: Official Ghost of Yotei Popcorn Bucket Triggers Tedious Takes on PS5 Exclusives
...I dunno if there were worse examples of hot takes, but the ones featured are cheeky at most.
Sony's contemporary games tend to be very cinematic. That can be to their detriment, but it really depends on the gamer. I don't think it's inherently bad, just like I don't think it's inherently wrong or bad faith to point out that PlayStation games involve a lot of watching. Kinda just seems like a nothing controversy all 'round.
More importantly, though, I gotta go to Alamo. I don't give a flying f*** about that popcorn bucket. But I absolutely relish the opportunity to watch some classic cinema in a theater.
Re: Reaction: Sony's PS5 Games Keep Getting Better After Launch, and Often for Free
@Oram77 Astro Bot's post launch support was great. But "half a new game"...? Nah. More like a whole bonus world — cumulatively, at least.
Which is great, but let's not get crazy with the recognition.
Re: Sony Says PS5 Is the Best Place to Watch in TV Centric Ad
Used to use my X1 for multimedia — mostly because it could function as a TV tuner. Then I got an LG TV and invested heavily into a Plex server (and, wouldn't you know it, it could use that same Xbox branded dongle for TV tuner functionality — it's almost like I excessively planned the whole thing years in advance, or something...).
I still use the Xbox for the occasional Blu-ray (more for testing purposes, really...because Plex), and hence felt comfortable buying a digital-only PS5. I do still sometimes watch stuff on my consoles, just because they're HDMI into a Hue Syncbox (...I have a somewhat complex set up), so I can watch/listen to things with adaptive lighting. And, in those cases, I sometimes use the PS5 over the X1 because the X1 runs kinda s***. BUT, I have have my LG remote set up to control said X1, so I often prefer the convenience of using a remote to the efficiency of the PS5's apps.
So no, I really don't use the PS5's multimedia functionality. But also don't mind it being there — even though I agree only a fraction of the population would find that a selling point. Now if the Switch 2 could just get some decent multimedia apps...
Re: Astro Bot Has Added Its Most Wanted Cameo in Huge PS5 Update
@wildcat_kickz Not really. You could get through all of it in about an hour — faster yet if you aren't going for gold.
I've generally enjoyed these updates, but the Christmas one was really the only substantial stage added.
Re: Round Up: Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 3 + 4 PS5 Reviews Say Shove-It to the Sceptics
Surprised how passionate people are about 4's level design. I skipped straight from 2 to THUG as a kid, so I don't mind what is essentially a level pack for 1+2.
Still, I could've sworn 4's break from its predecessors design was strongly condemned since its release. In fact, I always though 4's reception was what brought about the reinvention of THUG (though I guess you could imagine 4 was THUG's prototype, and that was already the series' trajectory). Incidentally THUG 1+2 when...?
Re: Industry Body Representing Publishers Like PlayStation Says Stop Killing Games' Proposals Would Be 'Prohibitively Expensive'
1.2 million signatures after a year of campaigning? Sounds like something publishers can easily ignore. I think to get enough traction for something like this, it really has to cover digital ownership holistically. Not just game servers and licenses being abandoned, but movies, music, books,etc. The movement needs to be bigger than a failed Squeenix game's worth of gamers.
Hell, you put this campaign in front of most politicians, and the "companies can't handle the burden of indefinite servers" distraction will convince them to side with the company. What's more important than giving our disgustingly rich companies all the opportunity to make money, after all? It's almost like...everything's stupid, or something...
Re: 'I Much Prefer PS Plus' Lifecycle Management Strategy': Devs Weigh in on Xbox Game Pass Impact
Mmm, I dunno. I more think the excessive acquisitions, lack of a hardware/software commercial success in years, undoubtable mismanagement behind the scenes, and relentless competition from Sony/Nintendo lead to this wave of layoffs. If anyone gains from GamePass, it's Microsoft itself. I see how the model doesn't make sense for 3rd-party developers, but when Micro's making all the cash from subs, it should work. Unless they've massively discounted it for years now — which would be stupid of them to do for so long.
I'm sure GamePass is less profitable than traditional hardware and software sales. But with the market how it is now, Xbox would probably be broke if they were still trying to compete directly with PlayStation and Switch. Now, whoever thought being in 3rd place meant it the perfect time to spend billions on studios — many of which weren't commercial rockstars — should probably be fired. Of course they won't be, and profits will be up because of layoffs. It's almost like...everything is stupid, or something.
Anyhoo, how long until more layoffs hit Bungie?
Re: PS5 Fans Divided Over Helldivers 2 on Xbox Pivot
@JohnHalo I comprehended what you said. I just think calling people NPCs is asinine behavior.
If you don't think Xbox failed because it started porting its games, why are you drawing equivalences to PlayStation in an article about PlayStation porting a game? GamePass and xCloud are very much services associated with Xbox, which compound the experience of having an Xbox. I don't see how either are "everything but Xbox." Sounds like you're making a point about selling software specifically by condemning these services in reference to Xbox's success.
Nintendo's success is not exclusively because of exclusives. If it were, the Wii U and GameCube — and N64, for that matter — would've been massive successes.
Re: PS5 Fans Divided Over Helldivers 2 on Xbox Pivot
@JohnHalo As an old man, your diction confounds and perturbs me.
Xbox didn't fail because they started porting games. They started porting games because they were failing...badly...for more than 1 generation. One of the most insightful things Phil has said is that they lost the most important generation to win (apropos the X1 gen); most of their actions since have been a reaction to that loss. And guess what? They WEREN'T porting their games back then.
Re: PS5 Fans Divided Over Helldivers 2 on Xbox Pivot
@naruball shrugs
I don't really think it matters if it were God of War or Helldivers. If we're just talking one game, it's not going to collapse the entire PlayStation brand or devalue PlayStation hardware to the point of irrelevance.
Hell, with the way the contemporary market is, Sony could probably port their entire catalog to Xbox and PC, and the PS5 would continue to sell incredibly well. I don't think there's much Sony or Nintendo could do to destroy their stranglehold on the console market.
EDIT: I might add that Sony has already ported a fair bit of their catalog to PCs — which is a much bigger market than Xbox, at this point — and haven't seen it undermine their hardware sales.
Re: PS5 Fans Divided Over Helldivers 2 on Xbox Pivot
Seems to me that Helldivers is barely even associated with the PlayStation brand, due to its mass popularity on PC. So if they were going to pick any of their relevant IPs to abandon exclusivity for, might as well be HD. Also worth considering that the game lives and dies on its player count, so the more exposure the better.
Don't really understand the sentiment that going 3rd-party is a sh****** position. Microsoft would be making bank if they didn't overspend and figured out their exact strategy sooner. And SEGA still exists, and is still successful. Honestly just sounds like something a fanboy would say.
Anyway, I look forward to seeing this on Switch 2 in a year, so I can finally buy this stupid game that all my friends have been trying to get me on (I don't pay for PS+ — or GamePass, for that matter — only NSO, because it's a fraction of the price and I hardly play online regardless).
Re: Xbox's Promising MMORPG Sounds Like the Most Baffling Cancellation
"It was a new franchise and a live-service game entering an oversaturated market during a time when many other live-service titles have flopped. The team was also building a brand-new engine for the game while making it, which created a number of challenges."
Listen, I'm not here to justify cancellations and layoffs. But I think Schreier does a good job here explaining why the cancellation isn't so baffling. New IP, expensive, for an oversaturated market — risky in a lot of ways. Maybe it could've become a massive success, but it was far from guaranteed; I can see why execs got cold feet regardless of internal praise.
Re: What the Hell Has Happened to Call of Duty?
@ThroughTheIris56 Which is a fair position. I just don't think it's a recent thing, nor do I think this specific collab changed anything.
Though I will say, as someone that has been disheartened by the trajectory of many franchises over the years, all you can really do is shrug it off, enjoy older titles, look for new releases to replace it in your heart, and let the people who enjoy the contemporary version of your once beloved IP enjoy it in peace.
Re: What the Hell Has Happened to Call of Duty?
@dodgykebaab For the campaign, sure. For the multiplayer, with its garish gun skins, joke banners, and action design based on running around like a twitchy maniac, no.
I think there's just a big misunderstanding about the inherent tone of a realistic military shooter. They aren't inherently gritty or serious. CoD is basically a popcorn flick with the aesthetic of a military shooter. Some entries really lean into the military aspect of it (basically all of them up to Modern Warfare 2, the MW remakes, World at War, WWII), others not so much (I'd argue basically every Blops).
Spec Ops: The Line, that's gritty. Comparatively, if Spec Ops is Saving Private Ryan, CoD (in most iterations) is Commando. Yeah, it has violence and warfare. But it's much more preoccupied with action and power-fantasy to hold any legitimate grit or be taken seriously.
Re: What the Hell Has Happened to Call of Duty?
@dodgykebaab "Gritty"? Are we talking about the same franchise? Maybe half of CoD's campaigns could be described as gritty. But multiplayer is not gritty by association — as evidenced by the definitively not-gritty zombie mode.
Rather, CoD multiplayer has deep tonal ties to stoner and bro culture. Which, again, are emphatically not-gritty.
Also, people aren't appreciating how stupid most of Fortnite's collabs are. Aang with a gun isn't wacky. Nor does it make sense. The premise that B&B don't fit in CoD multiplayer is reasonable enough, but I think really misinterprets what CoD multiplayer is. The premise that B&B is the straw that broke the camel's back is wildly misinformed (Nicki Minaj running around shooting up soldiers is just as absurd in my book). The premise that Fortnite's collabs are all justified whereas CoD's aren't is just wrong.
Re: What the Hell Has Happened to Call of Duty?
@Stamp_Monkey Listen, you don't have to like the skin. I didn't even mean to imply you CAN'T criticize or critique it. I just don't think it's worth campaigning over. I don't think it's worth arguing over. I don't think it's worth with getting upset over. And giving it any more than a passing disapproval is a waste of time.
And while you could say I'm being reductive of legitimate critiques, I argue the critical camp here is being AT LEAST AS reductive of people who would legitimately enjoy this collab.
Re: What the Hell Has Happened to Call of Duty?
@SuntannedDuck2 My position is rooted in an understanding that stupid microtransactions collabs are inevitable, and can't be stopped. Hence, my argument is more in reference to those saying this stupid MTX collab is worse than some other stupid MTX collab.
If you think all stupid MTX collabs are problematic, I've no qualms with that position, and mostly agree. "Mostly" only because I still think it's hardly worth complaining about, and better off ignoring if it doesn't appeal to you. As someone who's just never cared about ANY MTX in ANY game, that's just the most reasonable conclusion in my eyes.
Re: What the Hell Has Happened to Call of Duty?
@get2sammyb Does it, though? I'd agree if the intention of CoD was being a war simulator. But, since that really hasn't consistently been the case since maybe Black Ops 2, I don't really see how B&B look anymore clumsy here than Bob's Burgers Bob looks next to that banana.
'Cartoony' does not make an all-encompassing, congruous art style.
EDIT: I also think it's important to note that Bob has a gun. If Bob with a gun shooting at Aang with another gun while in Gotham City sounds more artistically cohesive than Butthead 360 no-scoping generic military guy, then I don't know what to tell you. It's all stupid. Maybe you can argue Fortnite's style is so generic, it works with the disorder. But I would still argue CoD is just another flavor of generic, and therefore works about as well.
Also, I do feel the need to clarify that I actually did read your article before commenting. I just disagree with that point — as implied here — and didn't think I needed to address that point to make my original point.
Re: What the Hell Has Happened to Call of Duty?
Shrugs
Really don't see how this is any worse than CoD's other collabs. Or half of Fortnite's s*** (Skellington, The Incredibles, and Animation Domination made more sense there than this here, how...? At least there's more audience overlap between B&B-headers and CoD...)
More importantly, though: SHRUGS Who cares regardless. These stupid collabs happen all the time, and if you don't see the appeal, it just wasn't made for you. Don't buy it and move on. I kinda get tired of gamers complaining about things they could simply not buy.
Re: Microsoft Rivals PSVR2 with Meta Quest 3S Xbox Headset
The only thing they're rivaling is a lack of commitment.
Re: Talking Point: Is It Officially Game Over for PSVR2?
@AdamNovice I guess... It's kinda like if there was an article about the SNES dropping off and losing support, and someone commented, "Mario is Missing JUST came out."
Which is funny. But I don't think quite in the same way you were going for.
Re: Talking Point: Is It Officially Game Over for PSVR2?
@StopBeingTribal Never let the Internet kill your good vibes. It's all just noise; at a certain point, it's less the Internet's fault for being toxic and more yours for letting that irrelevant toxicity bend you.
I guess that's my PSA for the day. Regardless, I don't think anyone besides trolls are dogging on people enjoying the thing. It's just, with such miniscule support, it's hard to objectively say it's a good purchase. You know, I have an Atari VCS and have gotten a lot of enjoyment out of it. But I absolutely would not say it's a great console, and would advise anyone but the most specifically tailored for it to avoid it.
Re: Talking Point: Is It Officially Game Over for PSVR2?
@AdamNovice Climate Station?
I don't think an interactive climate lesson that's playable without VR really invalidates anything in this article or saves PSVR2 from obscurity.
Also, incidentally, kinda ironic a hardware/software company would put out something detailing the irreparable damage we've done to our climate. Reads like the billion-dollar conglomerate version of community service.
Re: Talking Point: Is It Officially Game Over for PSVR2?
@yoda87960 If Sony's goal with PSVR was to keep Meta in check, they failed miserably.
Re: Talking Point: Is It Officially Game Over for PSVR2?
@Bamila I think it's fine in limited bursts. But I'd definitely be feelin' some kinda way if I had them on for 4+ hours.
Re: Talking Point: Is It Officially Game Over for PSVR2?
It WAS officially over when they announced PCVR support.
I think wiredVR only has a place for high-end PC enthusiasts; PSVR2 was kinda doomed from the start dropping when standalone is commonplace and limiting compatibility to a home console. They should've either made it standalone (and backwards compatible, so everyone with a PSVR would upgrade), or made a wired cross-compatible with PS5 and PC — and PS4, for that matter. And, you know...more games. More games would've helped.
Oh well. Another failed Sony peripheral. Gotta see what they manage with the handheld market now. Although I really don't think they'll be converting many Deckers or Switchers.
Re: Ex-PlayStation Boss Says Sony Has Never Really Seen Nintendo As a Rival
Absolutely agree that all entertainment is competing with all other entertainment. I never really get that 'mutually exclusive demographics' angle. If someone spends their free time watching Netflix, the goal should be to get that demo' to spend that time playing a PlayStation. If someone prefers Nintendo's games to PlayStation's, why not try to make games that captures their attention?
It's also weird that Sony specifically would think it more worthwhile to compete with Fortnite than Nintendo. A few more Astro Bots, bring back some more mass appeal franchises like Ape Escape or Loco Roco, release a PS4-spec handheld, and actually commit to it, and I can see them legitimately pulling people away from the Switch. But nothing will buckle Fortnite's success, and there's not too much space in the GaaS sphere if you can't manage that. Maybe they already feel like they failed to directly compete with Nintendo — on Nintendo's terms, at least. PSP, Move, and most of their Nintendo-esque franchises did commercially fail, after all. I think they need to figure out how to say: get an experience comparable to Nintendo, PLUS the contemporary PlayStation experience all in one place.'
Re: Sony Seems Eager to Explore Anime to Appeal to Younger Audiences
Does that mean they're bringing back the PaRappa anime?
Re: Sony Seems Eager to Explore Anime to Appeal to Younger Audiences
@SilentS I would watch Smurf Slayer...
Re: Switch 2 Absolutely Destroys PS2's Launch Record in Japan
Surprised seeing the general contrarian sentiment to this seems to be, "well, they had the stock, so of course it sold well." Which is just...not how supply and demand works.
Nintendo knew their new console would have high demand, and, since they start generations on their time and the Switch was still selling really well, they had nothing pressuring them into launching ASAP. So they smartly built up their stock. This isn't some matter of fact thing, it was a conscious business decision by Nintendo.
You can say the PS5 would've sold at the same rate if not for stock issues. You can say the PS2 only sold so well because it was a cheap DVD player. All that's conjecture, though — barely constituting context. The context was Sony couldn't figure out their business during COVID fast enough to pump out PS5s, and Nintendo had the stock and demand to sell 3.5 million consoles in a few days.
Re: Poll: How Would You Rate State of Play for June 2025?
I thought it was pretty good. Had game announcements, nothing looked too generic or boring, and PlayStation actually unveiled something. Plus PlayStation Classics I actually give a **** about.
Of course, there was almost no sign of PlayStation Studios proper. And I wouldn't say any particular announcement was amazing (Grasshopper, enhance, and Marvel were close, though). So it wasn't phenomenal. Still, probably one of their best showings in years.
Re: Talking Point: Does Sony Really Need Some Kind of Summer Showcase?
"Sony shouldn’t do a presentation if it doesn’t have meaningful content to share."
See, the issue isn't that Sony might not do a Summer showcase. The issue is that they might not have anything meaningful to share, dispute not really sharing anything so far this year. That we're presuming they might not, I'd argue, is even worse.
Re: Ubisoft Hiring for a 'Prestigious' Big-Budget Rayman Game
Looks like a lot of people here aren't reading the "Milan" part. On one hand, having played both Mario + Rabbits, I have a lot of love and faith in their team. On the other hand, there's a good chance this is an un-Mario'ed + Rabbits title (with or without Rayman). Which is fine — those games are great — but that wouldn't be the new platformer Rayman fans want. And even if it was, I don't know that the team is well suited for a platformer.