I’m ashamed that I barely remember even hearing of this game. 😅

Well, I account for 1 sale of the game and zero deaths, zero enemies killed, and zero bosses killed. 😅
My copy is still sitting on the shelf.

@Ravix Yes, that might be a good target — when the rest of the world is playing GTA6, I can be playing Witcher 3. And I will most definitely be posting thoughts. When I get to that point maybe I’ll be able to recruit some other PS users to play along. I imagine the DLC will act as a prompt for many others to jump in or do a replay.

This is probably the title I’m more curious about this year. It may end up being rubbish, but to me the trailer looked really good!

@Ravix After finishing Blood of Elves I took a break from the series, partly because I wanted to pace myself through the books to coincide with prepping for playing the game, if that makes sense. BoE was great but as you and Furious had warned me it is a slower pace table-setter of a story to establish circumstances for the main plot going forward. My understanding is that The Time of Contempt is when things really start to reach a fever pitch and so I didn’t want to waste the crescendo too early before starting the game. Even reading the first 3 books had me itching to try the game and I knew it would turn my gaming schedule upside-down if I did. Still, I probably will get to ToC sometime soon, and then it will hopefully lead into starting the game shortly after. This DLC announcement is further motivation to get back into it. There’s just too many blasted games! Rough estimate though would be read/listen to ToC and Baptism of Fire in the next couple months or so, then launch into the game late 2026 or early 2027 maybe.

@Skinny-Pete @Killionaire That makes three of us! I’ve owned it for years, started it way back on PS4 and only got a few hours along before falling off of it. The game didn’t click for me at the time but I’m convinced it was just I was in the wrong mindset at the time. Since then I’ve read a couple of the Witcher books and I’m much more excited to give it a second try.

Hmm, nothing for me. Usually there’s at least one game that I have some level of interest in, but none of these are sparking anything for me. I’ll look at the bright side since it means nothing added to the already enormous backlog.

@Zuljaras Do you feel a difference with how Dark Souls 3 plays on PS5 vs how it ran on PS4? I ask because it’s in my list to play (for the first time) maybe later this year and I think I heard the PS5 patch is decent. There’s rumors on the full PS5 remaster though and I wonder if that’s even necessary.

@TrollOfWar Yeah, I actually think GT7 and MLB have been handled quite well. I was referring to these famous 12: https://www.pushsquare.com/news/2025/01/lists-of-sonyrs-cancelled-live-service-ps5-games-paint-a-worrying-picture

I know it’s not set the world on fire, but I’ll give Marathon a little more time to see if it can squeeze out a level of “success”. And I feel lukewarm about Hunters Gathering and I’d give it a moderate chance to make a small splash. Fairgames I’m less optimistic about.

Even in the absolute best of circumstances where— Marathon holds on and has a No Man’s Sky type of resurgence with updates, Hunter’s Gathering surprises and becomes the next Marvel Rivals, and Fairgames overcomes the huge negativity to hit like Helldivers 2– even if all goes perfectly from here (chances of all that is probably <5%) I will still feel like the gamble has not been worth the closure of Bluepoint, the billions spent on Bungie and Firewalk, the opportunity cost of the years lost where ND could have had a game or two already done by now (maybe we’d be playing Intergalactic this year and TLoU3 would be getting announced), and several other games we’d have already or soon from the other studios too, and the thousands of jobs sacrificed so far across the board. To make these sacrifices (and others) worthwhile, I think Marathon, Hunter, and Fairgames need to have huge success and take in billions of dollars over the next 2-3 years leading up to PS6. Fat chance. 😅

Quite interested in this. Glad that Xbox is filling the void left behind by all of Sony’s cancelled first party games.

@themightyant Yeah, I’ve had this happen on another site/app and wasn’t able to get into email and was out of luck. Customer service at this other company didn’t have a lot on me and so there wasn’t many questions to ask and without access to the email to reset the password and without access to the credit card that had been used for the purchases, there was no recourse. I lost all the purchases. Their consolation to me was to give me some free credit to use in the store for my new account that I had to create. I was really bummed but it was mostly my fault for being an idiot and losing access to those things and not logging in for so long. But there’s so many accounts we accumulate over the years it’s such a hassle to keep up with them. The burden of the digital age has grown exponentially over the last 10-15 years.

@streetshadow @TrollOfWar Yeah, the course correction we’re watching happen is the painful part (with the layoffs, the relative vacancy between large first party releases, the price hikes, the poor communication awful PR and wavering strategies, etc)

And I don’t begrudge Sony for taking a swing at the live service arena since the top tier games are more profitable than a successful single player game, but I’m just surprised that the smartest minds in the business couldn’t see the imprudence of putting 80% of your eggs in that one basket. I know it’s easy to play armchair CEO, but a lot of us out here who actually play the games every day could have foreseen some of this not working. It’s like they put all their chips in at the blackjack table and now are wondering how they are going to pay for the Uber home from the casino. It would seem wise to diversify your first party studios. Not put all off them on live service. Especially when none of them except Bungie have the expertise. Instead of 12 or 13 games, or whatever the count was, how about… I don’t know 4 or 5? I had made the calculations on an earlier post several weeks ago but it’s something like only 20% of their live service games are even going to even make it to the point of being launched, and of those all are abject failures except like maybe 2 games? I just didn’t know the corporate world had as much in common as the Vegas gambling tables.

@streetshadow @TrollofWar My comment above (#75) was tongue-in-cheek as I agree that shifting to have Bungie make games that they don’t have experience or expertise in is forcing a square peg in a round hole. But why did Sony not realize this when they asked their talented single player studios to shift to areas they have no business working in— Naughty Dog, Bluepoint, Bend, Insomniac…. all with cancelled live service projects that they really are out of their element to be spending their time on.
(That’s a rhetorical question, I’m not asking you per se, just agreeing with you and wondering out loud why the idea of Bungie shifting focus out of their comfort zone is a bad idea but yet the other studios shifting toward doing something they aren’t suited for shouldn’t also be an equally bad idea)

Here’s a thought—
Since Bungie consulted on the live service initiatives for the other first party studios and they seemed to have been a disaster, maybe Sony should turn the table and repurpose Bungie to make a traditional single player narrative action game. Naughty Dog can act as the consultant this time and return the favor of critiquing whatever they come up with.

Regarding Saros, for data that includes only 3 days of sales (the game launched in the April 30th iirc) #9 doesn’t seem too bad to me. Also considering the other factors brought up like cost and the niche audience for the game. Basically this sales data is going to only be the enthusiasts who pre-order or go out opening weekend. Positive word of mouth may carry the game for some nice additional sales through the next few months. Probably won’t chart high, but it will draw in an audience gradually, especially when it starts getting discounted.

I know this won’t make a splash with corporate revenue, but it’s one of those games, like Astro Bot and that Sons of Sparta, that help to keep the enthusiast crowd happy. There’s real value in that beyond mere dollars and cents.

“…I also could have told you Spellcasters Chronicles would end up in this situation the moment it was announced. If I, a mere blogger, could tell you that, then why are studios continuing to make these ridiculous bets?“

These are my thoughts as well. I’ve thought for a long time that studio leadership and boards are just not in touch with the market. I have no idea how these decisions are made exactly, but it feels like many of these cancelled and failed projects are being greenlit by a committee of businessmen who don’t play games, don’t visit online communities like Push Square, and are interpreting data out of context.

Honestly, it’s an issue I’m noticing in many other industries as well, not just gaming. We’ve lost the plot with our business education system I think. The wants and needs of the consumer seem to be an afterthought with a lot of these companies

@nessisonett Lol, yeah like it should be some form of responsibility that you agree to when you sign the EULA agreements for a PSN account — you agree to random selection to participate in live service betas as part of the agreement. 😂

Or better yet, players who have their account reported due to misconduct should have to participate in these for penance as an alternative to being banned from PSN.

The way this was communicated (or shall I say, miscommunicated) is really strange. Why did they wait to disclose this separately from the Easential announcement earlier? Does Sony prefer to have two PR hits instead of one? Man, the publicity and marketing department makes a lot of decisions that I don’t understand.

As far as the increase goes, yeah it sucks. Hopefully Sony has better pricing analysts than they do publicists. Will this push more of those 1 and 3 month subscribers toward an annual sub? Or will it result in a net exodus of people who will choose not to subscribe at all? There will be some of both, but apparently Sony feels fewer people will leave and so there will be a net increase. And like someone said on the other article, that has a lot to do with GTA6 and it’s likely online component, I reckon. They have the millions of GTA fans right where they want them and they will likely pay these prices and even higher to have their precious GTA online.

And here I am, wishing I could sublet the online play portion of my Premium subscription to someone else. It’s the part of my plan I could do without. Without ever using the online function, I still find my yearly Premium sub to be well worth it.

… (continued) 😅
And I think you’re seeing some evidence of this with the way other developers and publishers have come in to fill in the gaps since Sony has slowed down its single-player output. There’s money to be made and others in the industry will fill the void. Certainly Xbox and Nintendo are waiting in the wings if Sony gets too live service focused. Heck it’s already happened with how well the Xbox games have sold on PS5. There’s an untapped market that Sony partially abandoned and is getting filled by the competition.

I don’t think this list is conveying what most people think it is. As stated in the article, “Here we’re seeing the total number of unique players who started a game over the past seven days.”

First of all, starting the game counts as a “play”. So logically, free games will have a huge advantage because there is no purchase required first before launching the game. If a retail game has been launched in the last week, money has already been spent on it. And secondly, an endless live service game will tend to have a lot more ‘drop-in, drop-out’ players which also inflates some of this data.

Now I know there’s likely better data that tracks time spent in a game, which would be more useful information. Perhaps time spent still favors service games over a game that has a high entry cost and is a ‘one-and-done’ game. But ‘time spent’ still isn’t necessarily measuring success, profitability, or engagement to the same degree that people are interpreting this.

I would like to see some metrics on unique player monetary investment into the system. So, something like ‘dollar spent per hour played’. I know there’s probably a handful of people who play Fortnite for thousands of hours and spend hundreds of dollars a year on it, but I feel like that is a small minority of those millions of players who launch it, or who play it often for a few sessions with buddies but probably spend, what… $20-40 a year on it? Meanwhile I invest hundreds (thousands? … I’m scared to count) of dollars per year into the ecosystem between PS+ subs and purchasing new games regularly and I know a lot of enthusiasts on here spend way more than I do and buy and play multiple new games a month.

I don’t know if I’m making sense, but put in practical terms— I can spend 100 hours in a month playing Fortnite and maybe end up buying a couple MTX for $40, but if I’m doing that I don’t have time to play Ghost of Yotei, Pragmata, Saros, RE Requiem, and Mixtape, which I could have spent that same 100 hours doing and spent $250 into the ecosystem. There’s only so much time in the day and “engagement” or time spent in a game, doesn’t always mean “revenue” or money spent into the system, at least not at the same rate as if it was spread out. So why the industry would push toward attracting less profitable customers and abandon the highest spenders is beyond me.

For the average Fortnite player, how much does the industry make, and how much does Sony make? Per capita, I suspect not much. It’s economy of scale.

In summary, the weekly “player count” of 14 million “players” is not really a valid measure, first of all. And second of all, the majority of those players aren’t pumping money into your system. And I think that’s why, despite its popularity, Fortnite’s success did not prevent Epic from laying off thousands of employees last year. I’m sure the money is great, but clearly not enough. Honestly there’s more money being spent elsewhere and the real throughput coming from the PlayStation core is spending it across multiple titles. By my logic, if high quality single-player games disappear, the ecosystem will crumble.

I’ll echo some of the other comments about how hypocritical gamers are— So much complaining about: oh there’s too many remasters and remakes, oh Sony only does cinematic games full of cutscenes and no gameplay, oh we want more new IP and less Marvel crap, oh where’s the first party output, where’s the single player games, there’s too much live service slop…., etc. And then they don’t show up to support the excellent single-player gameplay-focused games set in new IP when Sony makes them! Well, have fun with your Marathon and your Fairgames and your Spider-Man 3!

@Flaming_Kaiser Yes, I agree— it’s not always apparent why the budget cost for indie and AA is so much less and yet sometimes the resultant game is on par with AAA, at a fraction of the cost.

But the way the quote is worded in the article it makes me think that maybe it’s more about opportunity cost of spending resources making a game that generates a small profit versus spending those resources on a game that make huge continuous profits. Big corporations have to always show “growth” and simply turning a profit isn’t enough to keep shareholders happy, apparently.

But this is the trap Sony has been in for this generation, chasing a huge payday from a golden goose, rather than taking the smaller gains

I haven’t played the Dead Space series yet, so don’t have an attachment, but some things in this article are very depressing for me as a single player fan. 15 million units needed to keep the series going sounds like a lot. Even when he drops that to 7 million (not sure why he gives two numbers that far apart…) that’s still quite a lot. Surely it turns a profit with a lot less than that, but the fact it’s not a “perennial moneymaker with live service elements” and a “dinosaur fossil of a business model” is a kick in the teeth

This is a rather foreign concept to me, although I am definitely influenced by things I read and see. But I’d like to think that reading or watching a review is me adding just a piece of the equation which factors into the whole of whether I will engage with the game and whether i ultimately like it.

Theres many examples of people who have sold me on a game and I’ve been very grateful for it. If I didn’t consume reviews and user impressions about games, I’d probably be stuck playing the same 3 or 4 genres of games like I used to do back in the PS1 and PS2 eras. Using the internet to expose me to other games has added so much diversity to my gaming.

So I take it Sweet Baby Inc. isn’t consulting on this one.

Ah man, I forgot this comes out this year. Gratefully I’m not a GTA fan, but there’s still so many games coming out and I’m already so far behind….
Control Resonant might get priority though, as I absolutely loved the first one. I didn’t really connect with the Dylan character though, so they have to sell me on that. But it had an interesting setting and I can appreciate the studio’s goals of trying to avoid the AAA monotony. I think part of the uniqueness of the first game was the Oldest House setting, so if they are branching out to make this more open and not all indoors, then I can see how they might worry about becoming yet another game that takes place in a gritty or apocalyptic outdoor urban environment. There’s only so many ways to make it work, but I hope they pull it off.

@The_Elder Thanks, buddy! Worked for me as well and that saved me from the website log-in hassle and I could just copy and paste into the mobile app. 👍🏼

Oh no… someone check on @Zuljaras 😱

For some reason this rubs me the wrong way. I definitely would love to have the game released and hold to the theory that it would be more successful than most of their other live service attempts so far. But this seems, I don’t know… entitled maybe? Of course I say this as someone who was so upset at the closure of BluePoint that I would have signed a petition asking for that decision to be changed. But this feels different.

Either way, it’ll never carry any weight. More power to ‘em though. Nothing wrong with asking for something. Worst that can happen is they say ‘No.’

…Actually, scratch that. Worst that can happen is they say ‘Yes, okay’ and the game is released, siphons off tons of resources, is a commercial and critical flop, Intergalactic ends up being cancelled and Naughty Dog shuttered as a result of the game’s colossal failure. 😅 Yeah, that’s the worst outcome.

I do have a lot of confidence in ND, as I do for a lot of other developers (FromSoft, Insomniac, Housemarque, Capcom, Remedy, etc) based on prior games. I don’t think it’s a sin to feel optimistic or bullish about a developer to deliver. Obviously we all will have to withhold final judgement and I’m perfectly willing to levy criticism when the time comes. But I’d be very surprised if this game isn’t fantastic.

And I do think ND have evolved and changed over the years as she alludes to (“challenged themselves” and tried new things), from the Jak & Daxter era to the Uncharted era to The Last of Us era, and now to this. I feel that progression to be a positive development, but I know there are some who wish for an old ND and for them to make a new J&D or Uncharted. It’s not what I want from them, but to each their own.

I really liked the Injustice games. The DC Universe IP is what really drew me in, as I’m not a fan of fighters usually. I wouldn’t mind a third.

As a big fan of narrative action adventures and especially historical fiction, I liked the first two games a lot. I also find this level of AA development to be extremely charming from time to time. The games aren’t nearly as polished as the TLoU games, which are what seem to be the inspiration, but the smaller development team often bring unique creative choices and fresh ideas. Some of the mechanics and narrative choices are hit-or-miss, but overall the games fill a very singular space and if you’re a fan of Sony’s style of game design and storytelling but want something a little different then definitely check these out. Excited to see what this prequel will be like!

I’m glad people are excited for these. Personally I don’t feel much for any and all three will go down deep into my library backlog, with at least 100 games in line in front of them. But just maybe I’ll play Nine Sols one day. Or boot up the soccer game when I have a mate over who wants to play it. Or try Wuchang after I’ve played all the Soulslikes ahead of it.

I’m interested to see more gameplay. I suspect there will be some Insomniac ingredients that will make it feel familiar, but inherently Wolverine should play differently from Spider-Man, and I expect the game will stand on its own as unique. We already know it will be more story driven and more violent and mature than Spider-Man, but I’m wondering how the controls, combat, and general design of the gameplay will work out. I know the development has been a bit rough and run into some snags the last couple years, but I believe that Insomniac will pull it together and this will be a good game and sell well.

Fantastic interview and an interesting read. I really like what Housemarque makes. Obviously I haven’t played Saros yet, but that’s spot-on about each of their games having a common DNA that you can go back and play and feel the connection, so like he mentions playing Saros or Returnal will make you appreciate Resogun, and vice versa.

Most studios have an identity, of course. When you play a Bethesda game it feels a certain way, or a Naughty Dog game, or a FromSoft game. But I can’t think of another studio besides Housemarque that has that special sauce that no one else is replicating in the industry, at least not on a AAA or AA level.

I feel like I already need to request a refund and the games not even out yet! And it’s free to play!
I guess I need a refund from Sony for all the pain and suffering caused by hearing about this game.

I haven’t even played (or bought) any of the Xbox games they brought over so far. I have some interest in a couple of them, but honestly can live without them too. And the only one I can think of that’s coming soon that I’m interested in is Fable. But if they don’t port it I’m not buying an Xbox to play it. I’ll just skip it and keep working on my PlayStation backlog.

@Dogbreath Can’t say that I’ve been in a car that has pedals I can’t reach, but I have been in cars where the seating is too small to comfortably fit where my knees hit the steering wheel, head hits the roof, and girth spills over the bucket seats. 😅

Regardless of the analogy not quite applying, it’s perfectly fine for you and others to not like the game. We all like different things. It seems Housemarque took the time commitment criticisms to heart with this game though and it fixes those issues you mention about respecting the players time. But if they’ve already burned the bridge for you with Returnal, you’re within your rights to hold it against them and not play Saros.

I would put my life schedule up against anyone’s, as far as how busy and time limited it is. I still loved Returnal. But it took some significant effort and a few late night runs that weren’t always a good idea the next morning, and had several really good runs that I had to abandon three hours along because life events made me shut it down, which was painful to lose progress but the game felt so incredibly good to play that I ended up not minding. I completed the game before they added the save states which really fixed a lot of that. Still, it’s a tough game, no doubt. But it’s still one of my favorite PS5 experiences.

@For-Kier Yeah, I do wonder if either game will have any legs. The decline for Marathon is already concerning and it might have a resurgence if they can make appropriate adjustments, but I think it’s a lot harder to do that now than it was for other service game redemption projects like Final Fantasy 14 and No Man’s Sky. There’s just too much competition in the space now. Even Fortnite was slow out of the gates and didn’t become a phenomenon until it had been going for a while. But lately, these games have to hit big right from the start, or people lose interest real fast.

@Yor-sama FF16 had a DLC The Rising Tide recently also. Lots of love for the word Tide lately. 😄
(I’m quite looking forward to ToA, by the way)

This game definitely caught my interest. The only kind of multiplayer that I like to engage with is the asynchronous kind, like Death Stranding, player messages in the Souls games, pawns in Dragon’s Dogma, etc.

On the surface the game looks absolutely competent and of high quality. It’s probably great fun for those who are fans of online co-op and the multiplayer dungeon crawling stuff. I’m not one of those, but I can see it might appeal to some people.

The art is ok, imo. People are comparing it to Fortnite stylized and that’s partly true. It also reminds me of Marvel Rivals for some reason. I’ve not played that but the whole multiplayer, pick your hero, colorful cartoon styling seems similar. The gameplay is probably quite different though.

I don’t think this will be as bad as people think, but I also suspect it won’t be a big hit either. Similar to Marathon in other words. 😅

Uh oh… Marathon is already discounted.

@11001100110zero It’s not singularly the PS+ catalog per se, but rather all the games we own in the ecosystem too. Those are the ones expensive to replace (or impossible, in the case of exclusives). If I buy a PC merely because I can get online for free, I still need to buy games I already own like Elden Ring, Dark Souls 3, No Man’s Sky, GT7, etc. (most of which are unlikely to be found for $5 very soon, if ever. I can’t remember a FromSoft game ever being less than $20). It’s hundreds of dollars of investment just to catch up on the small slice of my library which have an online component.

Personally, I very rarely engage in online play so I’d be happy to give it up, but still I find no compelling reason to jump ship to the PC side.
To take your $800/10 yr. vs $5 games example a little further, say that I decide to cancel my PS+ today and use that $800 to buy a PC. Is it still going to be capable to play games in 10 years? Would an $800 PC even play most games today?! Well, I think maybe I could get an $800 PC that plays $5 indie games but will it play Baldur’s Gate 3 or Elden Ring at 60 fps? Regardless, say I get a great deal on an $800 rig that actually is competent to last me 10 years, I still need games. Add a $5 game once a quarter and I’ll splurge once a year to hopefully pick up a $20 game (= $40 per year) Now by the end of 10 years I have 50 (old and steeply discounted) games, but I’m also $400 further into the investment, so at $1200 over the ten years, with a library of all heavily discounted games and a ten year old PC that probably is creaking along limiting my options to older games anyway. All because I wanted free online.

If I paid $800 and just stayed in the PS ecosystem, I have hundreds (if not thousands of games by that point) without spending an additional dime. Granted my PS5 Pro in 2036 it’s outdated too and doesn’t play the latest games either, but I’ve spent less money and have “infinitely” (😜 figure of speech) more games to play. Sure, this example doesn’t take into account the hundreds (or perhaps thousands!) of dollars I’ve already spent accumulating this PS library, but that’s kind of the point— we already own the games, why jump ship and spend additional money to “save” money?

Of course the average PS player doesn’t have a huge backlog library like me, so maybe the free online is enough to entice them to start over in a new ecosystem, so there is that case out there, certainly. Not everyone is “stuck” as deep as me. 😅 For me, I’d feel stuck if I had an $800 PC and one $5 game to play right now.

(By the way, I’m not being contrary. I’m happy for people to play and do whatever they want, but just showing my thought process in the value proposition)

@MrPeanutbutterz That’s a solid point about the underlying value of the longstanding investment in the ecosystem. The fact is that a lot of us have huge PlayStation libraries, and so it doesn’t make sense to abandon them and switch to PC just because we have to pay for online.
This is the point I was making last year when I got a Portal instead of a SteamDeck. One has an instant library for me of hundreds of games versus the other I have no games at all and hundreds of dollars needed to build a comparable library.

@Rich33 Me too— I’m wondering what the difference is between system and native PSSR use.

“NTE: Neverness to Everness” is a title that rolls off the tongue and also feels awkward at the same time. These anime games sure love using those colons in their titles though, don’t they? 😅

@Kiltedhaggis Ha, ha, indeed! Stop releasing games, or maybe another pandemic to make me stay shut-in where I can churn through all these games I want to get to!

Honestly, I’ve toyed with the idea of getting a Switch and/or an Xbox, and I simply couldn’t wrap my head around further expanding my gaming options since I’m having trouble with keeping up with just the one ecosystem on PlayStation. Then when Xbox started putting its exclusives on PlayStation it just happened anyway. 😅

Like you mentioned, I’ll be the first to admit that Sony have fumbled many things this generation, primarily surrounding the live service debacle, but to say the generation as a whole or the console itself has been a failure is just simply a strange take, imho. I’m upset that studios have closed, people have been laid off, prices have skyrocketed, and that in general the management has been subpar and frustrating at times. But the quality of my gaming experience has been outstanding! So many unique and sensational experiences.

The main thing here that excites me (besides more God of War) is the multiple/diverse mythologies. Greek and Norse mythology have been thoroughly explored in this series and many other games over the last 3 generations and so I’m excited to see other cultures’ mythologies used. Granted, the recent explosion of Chinese game development has brought an avalanche of Asian myth and historical backdrop, so they’re a bit late to the party with those settings. The Mayan angle sounds great though. A really untapped and fascinating mythology. And surprisingly there’s not been much Arthurian legend in gaming lately, so I’ll take that too. Although Tides of Annihilation (ironically from a Chinese studio) will beat it to market with a twist on Arthurian myth.

@Kiltedhaggis I completely agree. Sometimes I feel like I’m being gaslit by online discourse and am supposed to be hating the PS5 whilst I actually have never had such a treasure trove of quality games to play.

No doubt I’ve loved every generation in its own way. Nostalgia and rose-tinted spectacles often do some heavy lifting when trying to compare consoles. I’ve oft said my favorite generation was PS2, but then when I try to remember actual games on that console that I liked, very few of them are among my all time favorites, none are the level of quality that I have on PS5, and the entire PS2 library is dwarfed by what’s available now. I think a lot of it is just ‘time-and-place’ selective memory. I don’t begrudge anyone who wants to keep playing older gen games and there’s plenty to love about them, but the PS5 generation has been fantastic for me. My current backlog is probably twice as large as the entire PS1 and PS2 library. I’ll never get them all played. Whereas I remember playing some stinkers on older generations just because there wasn’t much to play between big releases. Now I’m like 3-4 years behind and losing ground every month! 😄