Seems like we're going back into the old "console wars". I hope those who want to play all the games and want to buy all systems have a decent income. 🙄
@PSXB Based on the leaked Insomniac documents from December 2023, Insomniac Games will continue making Marvel superhero games including Marvel's Spide-Man 3 and 2 X-Men games at least until 2035. There was supposed to be a Venom game as well, but it might have gotten cancelled.
See: https://www.reddit.com/r/xmen/comments/18lv0gg/insomniac_future_games_roadmap_leaks_xmen_game/
@get2sammyb I don't really agree with you, even though I understand that PlayStation and Nintendo don't do it as they want to promote their own platform and sell the illusion that all the showcased games during the event might be exclusive to their own platform.
But let's say if I am a Switch only person and I would be curious about PlayStation's State of Play, I'd need to look up every game online to see on which platforms they release. Or just wait for the Nintendo Life article listing the games from the event which will also release on Nintendo - which would make it pointless for me to watch the State of Play. PlayStation owners will watch that event anyways and they know all those games will release on their platform, additional information will not change that.
But what do I know, I was baffled to learn that the PSN Store has a "Xbox" tag for games, but it's only applied to PlayStation published games like Helldivers 2. Games like Forza Horizon 5 or Sea of Thieves don't have it. I wonder why do they do it in first place if they don't do it consistently.
It would be great if all of the big 3 console platform holders would abandon that pointless practice where they don't show the logos of other platforms during their showcase events.
What do they have to lose? None of the viewers will abandon their favorite platform over a missing logo in a trailer and latest after 2-3 days it's cleared up on which platforms a game releases. Showing all platform logos might actually even lead to more viewers if they know that some games will be shown for their prefered platform.
@RockyOfficial I was already somewhat aware that the NRA (National Rifle Association) might be tied somehow to these games with all the licensed real-life weapons.
But I didn't know the US government was funding stuff like the Marvel movies to have the US Army strongly associated with the good guys.
I don't think this will influence my playing habits much, but it will give more critical context to what I am watching and playing.
@RockyOfficial That's an informative article, thanks for sharing. I wasn't aware how the US government is funding entertainment as a means of propaganda.
Well, an American studio certainly isn't going to make America the villain of the story
I would love to see at least one American studio try to do that.
The problem is that these games make most of their money in Western countries, especially in the US. Portraying the Americans as the bad guys would lead to players not being able to connect with the player character.
Even the games, where the Americans are the bad guys like Spec Ops: The Line, BioShock Infinite, Deus Ex, Metal Gear Revengence (even MGS to a certain extent), are rather subtle about it.
@Exerion76 As a seasoned gamer I generally agree with you that cinematic graphics doesn't necessarily translate into a better, more fun game, even if it helps with immersion. And I'd prefer more moderately budgeted games.
Many PlayStation fans are missing the old experimental phase of the PS2 and PS3 era where fun gameplay was the priority.
But "cinematic", "high fidelity" games were what saved the PS3 (Uncharted, The Last of Us, Heavy Rain, Metal Gear Solid 4) and made the PS4 (Marvel's Spide-Man, God of War, Horizon, Uncharted 4, Days Gone, TLOU2, Death Stranding, Ghost of Tsushima, Final Fantasy 7 Remake, Until Dawn) such a huge success. That's why many people chose a PlayStation.
Sony/PlayStation built up these high expectations over the last 15 years and the majority of the userbase won't accept anything less. I don't know how they could walk back on that, especially with a studio like Naughty Dog who is the leader in such cinematic games.
I mean, scale the games down? It IS ridiculous games are costing hundreds of millions of dollars. Cut back the scale, stop making everything open world, don't rely on collectibles to pad out everything - just make a solid game and take a few risks. On top of it, everything is being made with the Unreal engine which somehow makes every single game look nearly identical... nothing is unique anymore.
Easier said than done. Naughty Dog (since this article revolves around them) have their own inhouse proprietary engine, they are not using the Unreal Engine to power their games. Developing, extending and maintaining their own engine definitely costs a lot of money and time.
Large scale game worlds and additional repeatable activities/collectibles aren't all that expensive or time consuming to develop.
These are the key development activities that escalate costs:
Extensive Prototyping and Iteration: Scrapping and rebuilding large-scale systems, missions, or mechanics until they feel right is the most expensive, yet necessary, phase.
High-Fidelity Asset Creation: Generating photorealistic 3D models, complex animations, and advanced environmental physics for modern engines requires thousands of labor hours from highly specialized artists.
Cinematic Storytelling: Hiring professional actors for high-end voice acting, facial scanning, and motion capture—combined with directing and rendering lengthy cinematic sequences—drives up production bills.
Advanced R&D and Engine Customization: Developing proprietary game engines or implementing cutting-edge rendering and AI systems requires significant dedicated programming hours.
Rigorous Quality Assurance (QA): Months of exhaustive compatibility testing are necessary to ensure stability before release.
All of these points are what PlayStation 1st party games are known for and Naughty Dog has always been at the top of those qualities. They help promote PlayStation as being "the only place" you can get those cinematic qualities. Asking them to "scale the games down" is basically asking them to stop doing what they do best. It's like asking Ferrari to make utilitarian economy cars instead of their brand defining luxury sports cars.
This is a patent by Sony, which means that other companies would need to pay to Sony to have ads displayed during waiting times like described in the patent (similar to how Namco had a patent on mini games during loading times). So these ads during matchmaking is potentially a PlayStation exclusive feature or exclusive to Sony published games. 🤔
@Bob_Tempura I loved the Resistance trilogy on the PS3 (and the additional ones on the PSP and PS Vita), way more than Killzone. That was one of my favorite game series on the PS3, next to Motorstorm. But I am not too hopeful of the series getting anything new in the future.
@Th3solution Gran Turismo 7 and MLB The Show, next to Helldivers 2 are actually successful live-service games for PlayStation. Nevertheless, I agree with you, it wasn't wise to have all their studios working on a live-service game.
@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)
I think you have some good questions. I must say, unfortunately the corporate executive level thinks in a different way than we gamers do. The software development business - and in the same sense the game development business - has been changing over the last few years. Sony's western studios like Naughty Dog and Sony Santa Monica are super expensive and cheaper developers from Asia can deliver comparable results especially with universal multi-platform game engines like Unreal or Unity and Gen AI tools for 1/10 of the total budget a studio in the US would cost (especially if they get some guidance from a few western senior designers and directors), like for example Stellar Blade or Lost Soul Aside
From an executive leadership's perspective it might be wiser to invest in Asia for exclusive content (which Sony/PlayStation obviously does). So what do you do with your current expensive development studios? Since successful live-service games earn way more money than traditional single-player games, it makes sense to transition those studios into live-service studios. Bungie, Blizzard, Activision, EA, Ubisoft, Rare all already achieved that transition. Unfortunately it's not that easy and I guess Sony underestimated the challenges and Bungie's ability in mentoring/consulting other studios. But it doesn't make sense to try to move Bungie back to traditional single-player games, when their expertise as a live-service studio on paper is more valuable/profitable, when they deliver a successful game. There also seems to be a trend against live-services which doesn't play in Sony's favor.
Like @streetshadow wrote, Sony is now course correcting for the other studios as the transition isn't that straight forward. And it's not just Sony. Microsoft Xbox studios face similar problems.
If Sony had any sense they'd put Bungie to work on a campaign focused shooter (single player / co op) with a PvP mode either at launch or to release as a free add on later... Let them cook with what they do, or should that be did best before they went live service, i.e. best in class FPS gameplay accompanied with an interesting campaign story. No MMO, no live service (OK, perhaps more maps for said PvP mode later on), just a damn good FPS action Sci Fi with a ton of replayability.
If the game development business is anything like the software development business, then Bungie working on a standard (not a live-service) single-player shooter is very unlikely. The developers are too expensive for those kind of projects. Their expertise in online games is expected to have a higher return of investment when they develop a live-service game. They currently have Marathon which needs to grow bigger.
Developers, India or other regions feom Asia are cheaper and can work on less complex single-player games.
What I am describing is likely the perspective of the decision making executive roles at the PlayStation leadership, and not what us gaming fans would think to bew wise to do.
This article reads as if there's some "controversy" even though there is none.
There have been track based racing games before Gran Turismo and there will be more after. Showcasing cars on a track from their best side is not a copycat of Gran Turismo.
@Skinny-Pete Exactly. It’s a genius business model: manufacture a bit of controversy, act shocked when people get annoyed, and collect the ad revenue from the resulting argument.
It’s less about a genuine vendetta and more about knowing exactly what keeps the metrics moving. If the 'Xbox negative' brand brings in the clicks, then that’s the brand they’re going to sell. It’s hard to tell where the personal bias ends and the marketing strategy begins, but at this point, does the difference even matter?
I love how the article frames the 'Xbox fans' as the ones acting out, while the author is actively refusing to type a four-letter word because it’s 'freakin’ nonsense.' The irony is almost as impressive as the sheer amount of energy spent on a platform you supposedly don't care about. Maybe next time, just label it an 'Opinion/Fan-Fiction' piece so we don't mistake it for news?
I’m sure the Xbox community is trembling in their boots knowing that the Editor of Push Square is monitoring their suggestion box. Your dedication to this 'tedious' subject is truly inspiring."
@SMJ keeping your account safe ain't free u will have a other hack ps will be down for weeks or months because u want to be group of entittied thinking this stuff should be free
But Sony is no charging money for keeping accounts safe, they are charging money for allowing us to play online.
Nowadays any company which decides to store user data is expected to do that in a highly secure way. The user data brings value to those companies. Companies like Google, Meta, X/Twitter are not charging their users a subscription, just to keep their accounts safe. I think they are actually required by governmental regulations (like GDPR, CCPA, DPA, etc.) to keep user data safe. Asking the user base to pay for the data security would be dishonest when they are obligated to do so anyways.
But the main question is IF a big chunk of PS userbase including people who keeps b*tching about Sony needs to make moreeee single player games gonna buy these exclusive single player games. OR they just talk the talk and not walk the walk. I mean...
How is a fan supposed to feel superior if the 'commoners' on PC are allowed to play the same games? The quality of the story really drops off once you realize someone else is experiencing it on an RTX 4090 instead of a console. It’s definitely about the 'numbers' and not at all about people needing their console to be a substitute for a personality.
It's news but I don't see why people are so hyped. It's not going to effect the consumer, we're still going to get the same games we would of if they were ported to PC. It's not like porting them to PC changed the quality of the games. I'm just assuming the numbers weren't as good as Sony hoped.
Honestly, it’s refreshing to see the PlayStation leadership finally admit that the real fun isn't playing the game—it’s the feeling of hoarding the sandbox. I mean, why would anyone want a bigger community to talk to or more people to appreciate a great story? That sounds suspiciously like 'sharing,' and we all know that the most 'elite' gamers are the ones who treat a platform like a gated community where the only reward for your loyalty is exclusivity rights. Truly, the quality of a game is measured entirely by how many people are barred from playing it.
It’s easy to argue against the general idea since this list is basically 7-17 year old IP. It’s basically set in stone by now. The fact that 2 more recent games, Arc Raiders and Marvel Rivals, are on the list does not prove much. They are at the bottom of the list with player counts far below the juggernauts and I bet they are replaced by single player games from time to time.
Those 2 recent games in the top 8 do prove that actually nothing is set in stone. Statistically 1/4 of the most played games on PlayStation is a new game IP. And even if a game only manages to stay in the top 20s for several months (like Overwatch, Diablo 4 or MLB The Show) that is still a bigger success for a publisher than something like Marvel's Spide-Man or God of War which only stay in the chart for a few weeks if they can even crack the top 10 of most played games.
That's why Sony will continue pursuing live-service games. While it's hard to crack the top 10, you see that it's possible.
@nomither6 I'm not saying it's a dire situation. I am grateful that we're still getting traditional games fairly regularly. But Sony is in the business for the money and I am pretty sure that they will try to get more live-service games to earn more money.
@MrPeanutbutterz I agree to a certain extent. There are definitely those who only play live-service games (be it GTA Online, COD, FIFA, Apex Legends or Fortnite) who are not likely to buy a single player game. But I do think that those who in the past might have avoided those annual live-service games in favor of a single player game nowadays also have 1-2 live-serviced where they are engaged.
And - what this article I think is also trying to explain - the problem is that live-service games are now the dominant design choice for many big AAA studios. Nowadays a shooter without some online live-service aspect will struggle to stay relevant. And even a live-service shooter doesn't guarantee success. The issue being that games which 15 years ago would have been designed to be "fun to play", nowadays they are designed to have "business plan for reoccurring player spendings".
Best example, from a traditional gamer's point of view, is actually Marathon: The majority of the userbase here on PushSquare would have preferred the game to have a decent single player campaign with a decent story. But that didn't happen, instead the game is designed as a live-service to keep players engaged in the online multiplayer.
What baffles me is why anyone would want to keep playing the same game for 10 years+
For me personally I’m usually waiting for a game to end after about 20-40 hours max. It probably a generational thing I guess.
In a certain sense I can understand it. Personally I've been playing a lot of Sea of Thieves. It's a unique game like no other, with enough variables to make each session feel different, and each update brings something new to play with. For me it's like a hobby within the hobby.
I can imagine people feel similar about other live-service games like Overwatch, Destiny or World of Warcraft, where they are comfortable with the main gameplay and each new content update adds something new to the experience.
I'm not saying that it's a good (or a bad) design, but I do feel sorry that these games take away people's attention from other games. For the time I spent playing Sea of Thieves I could have finished 100+ other single-player games.
I remember the Prototype vs Infamous debates back when both games were released. Having played both I think both have their qualities. I definitely enjoyed Infamous 1 & 2, never got around to play ghe 3rd. Would be nice to see new entries in both series.
I believe live-service games are the gaming industries biggest problem. Why should one buy a new premium priced single player game when you can continue playing the 10+ years old live-service game which gets frequent new updates at no apparent cost?
Us here who prefer traditional single-player games are unfortunately in the minority. Most players - as proven by the data - play live-service games. So we should be thankful when something like Crimson Desert, Baldur's Gate 3 or some other game comes around which breaks the trend and becomes a success.
Weak and feckless male characters would, at least from me, get the same criticism as overly strong female ones do.
But you’re changing the subject. My point wasn't about "weak" male characters.
You criticized "girl bosses" for being "always the strongest, never wrong, and boring." Yet, characters like the Doom Slayer, Master Chief, or John Wick are exactly that: they are always the strongest, they rarely (if ever) lose, and they are unstoppable forces of nature. Why are they celebrated as peak entertainment, while a woman written with the exact same power-fantasy traits is criticized as a "post-modern trope"? You still haven't explained why the "unstoppable power fantasy" is only acceptable when the character is male.
But you and I both know, the creators of games these days don’t see their products as “just video games”. They’re vehicles. They have clear messaging they’re trying to insert and get across.
I actually agree with you here: media has always been a vehicle for messaging. Art is never created in a vacuum.
But you are acting like this is a new phenomenon unique to modern "neo-liberal" writing. For decades, video games and action movies were vehicles for a very specific message: a hyper-masculine, traditional male power fantasy designed exclusively for a young male demographic.
The messaging hasn't suddenly started existing; the target audience has just expanded. When a game features an unstoppable male hero, it's viewed as "normal, default entertainment." But when a game features an unstoppable female hero, it’s suddenly scrutinized as "forced political messaging."
If an invincible male character is just a fun power fantasy, then an invincible female character is just a fun power fantasy too. To label one as "natural" and the other as an "agenda" is the definition of a double standard.
I will always motion to Ripley from Alien and Sarah Conner from Terminator... Connors in particular finds her strength in being a mother, the most female-empowering thing there is, instead of some sense of trying to out-men other men.
This is a massive rewrite of who Sarah Connor and Ellen Ripley actually are. If Terminator 2 or Aliens were released today, the exact same critics using them as shields now would be calling them "woke girl bosses."
Let’s look at the actual text: In T2, Sarah Connor is a hyper-aggressive, jacked, cynical, tactical survivalist who aggressively rejects traditional femininity. Her "motherhood" isn't a warm, traditional caretaker role; she is a deeply traumatized, cold military commander to John, to the point where John literally has to cry and beg her not to assassinate a man in front of his family. She is absolutely trying to "out-man the men" to survive. Ripley in Aliens literally overrides the colonial marines, takes their heaviest weapons, commands a mech suit, and does the fighting because the men failed.
You accepted them because nostalgia grants them a pass, but they occupy the exact same "force of nature" power fantasy space you are criticizing today.
Men are naturally hunters, fighters, providers. Women are naturally lovers, caretakers, supporters... Biology is undefeated...
We are talking about video games—the ultimate medium of escapism and fantasy.
We play games where men can cast magic, absorb dragon souls, survive falling from skyscrapers, and fight aliens. "Biology" is defeated the second we press Start. Why is it that we can suspend our disbelief for literal mythology, but the moment a female character is a dominant, stoic fighter, "biology" suddenly becomes an unbreakable law that fiction must obey?
By saying women can only be empowered in fiction through motherhood, caretaking, or visible vulnerability, you are restricting female characters to a tiny, traditional box while male characters get the entire universe of power fantasies to play in. Why can't a female character in a fantasy game just be a badass fighter simply because it's a video game?
I remember reading an article many years ago that Microsoft was actually playing with the thoughts of bringing Halo 3 to the PS3. But of course, since both PlayStation and Xbox were engaged in the console wars via exclusives, that idea has been dormant until now.
@opo02 You're absolutely right. I just did some research and Returnal 1st week sales estimates was around 100K. There's also a year estimates around 860K-1 million. It's not even sold well in Japan with Famitsu showed the game only sold 6K in the 1st week.
So if 300K report is true then Saros is selling faster than Returnal.
It's worth being mentioned, that the early PS5 adopters, who bought Returnal are the hardcore fans who enjoy single player games which shows off the capabilities of their new console. The 93 million playerbase now includes a large chunk of casual players who probably only care about what everyone else is playing (COD, FIFA, Minecraft, Roblox, etc.). So I wouldn't be surprised if Saros mostly follows a similar sales trend as Returnal, as it's the same hardcore playerbase which would be interested in this game.
@PuppetMaster I wonder why? Stating that the source of the information is questionable, which undermines the credibility and the quality of this site is a very constructive feedback in my opinion.
With prices dropping on software, it’s sort of tone deaf that Sony didn’t think to adjust. Only the super blockbuster games are launching full price now, it feels like, and sorry but Saros is b-tier Sony first party for most people and Sony should know that.
Didn't Sony state to their shareholders a few months ago that given the expected slowdown of hardware unit sales, they plan to monetize the user base more heavily? Here it is.
Comments 705
Re: Talking Point: What Are You Playing This Weekend? - Issue 637
LEGO Batman (2008)
Sea of Thieves - gotta get those last season pass levels
Ghost Pilots
Garden work (IRL)
Happy weekend everyone!
Re: Talking Point: What Are You Playing This Weekend? - Issue 636
Happy weekend everyone!
Re: After Describing Them as 'Antiquated', Xbox Now Says It 'Must Have Exclusive Content and Services'
Seems like we're going back into the old "console wars". I hope those who want to play all the games and want to buy all systems have a decent income. 🙄
Re: PS5 Early Access Pre-Orders Truly Are Getting Out of Hand
I'll probably play it years later when the bugs are fixed and all story DLCs are available.
Re: Wolverine PS5 Pre-Orders Expected to Open Next Week, After State of Play
@PSXB Based on the leaked Insomniac documents from December 2023, Insomniac Games will continue making Marvel superhero games including Marvel's Spide-Man 3 and 2 X-Men games at least until 2035. There was supposed to be a Venom game as well, but it might have gotten cancelled.
See: https://www.reddit.com/r/xmen/comments/18lv0gg/insomniac_future_games_roadmap_leaks_xmen_game/
Re: Talking Point: What Are You Playing This Weekend? - Issue 635
Same things as last weekend:
Happy weekend everyone!
Re: Despite Uncertainty Over Exclusivity, Xbox Will Still Show PS5 Logos at Showcase
@get2sammyb I don't really agree with you, even though I understand that PlayStation and Nintendo don't do it as they want to promote their own platform and sell the illusion that all the showcased games during the event might be exclusive to their own platform.
But let's say if I am a Switch only person and I would be curious about PlayStation's State of Play, I'd need to look up every game online to see on which platforms they release. Or just wait for the Nintendo Life article listing the games from the event which will also release on Nintendo - which would make it pointless for me to watch the State of Play. PlayStation owners will watch that event anyways and they know all those games will release on their platform, additional information will not change that.
But what do I know, I was baffled to learn that the PSN Store has a "Xbox" tag for games, but it's only applied to PlayStation published games like Helldivers 2. Games like Forza Horizon 5 or Sea of Thieves don't have it. I wonder why do they do it in first place if they don't do it consistently.
Re: Despite Uncertainty Over Exclusivity, Xbox Will Still Show PS5 Logos at Showcase
It would be great if all of the big 3 console platform holders would abandon that pointless practice where they don't show the logos of other platforms during their showcase events.
What do they have to lose? None of the viewers will abandon their favorite platform over a missing logo in a trailer and latest after 2-3 days it's cleared up on which platforms a game releases. Showing all platform logos might actually even lead to more viewers if they know that some games will be shown for their prefered platform.
Re: Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4 Is Official, Launching This October on PS5
@RockyOfficial I was already somewhat aware that the NRA (National Rifle Association) might be tied somehow to these games with all the licensed real-life weapons.
But I didn't know the US government was funding stuff like the Marvel movies to have the US Army strongly associated with the good guys.
I don't think this will influence my playing habits much, but it will give more critical context to what I am watching and playing.
Re: Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4 Is Official, Launching This October on PS5
@RockyOfficial That's an informative article, thanks for sharing. I wasn't aware how the US government is funding entertainment as a means of propaganda.
Re: Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4 Is Official, Launching This October on PS5
@PuppetMaster
The problem is that these games make most of their money in Western countries, especially in the US. Portraying the Americans as the bad guys would lead to players not being able to connect with the player character.
Even the games, where the Americans are the bad guys like Spec Ops: The Line, BioShock Infinite, Deus Ex, Metal Gear Revengence (even MGS to a certain extent), are rather subtle about it.
Re: 'Absurd': Social Media Misquotes Journalist, Erroneously Claims Sony Is Angry at Naughty Dog
@Exerion76 As a seasoned gamer I generally agree with you that cinematic graphics doesn't necessarily translate into a better, more fun game, even if it helps with immersion. And I'd prefer more moderately budgeted games.
Many PlayStation fans are missing the old experimental phase of the PS2 and PS3 era where fun gameplay was the priority.
But "cinematic", "high fidelity" games were what saved the PS3 (Uncharted, The Last of Us, Heavy Rain, Metal Gear Solid 4) and made the PS4 (Marvel's Spide-Man, God of War, Horizon, Uncharted 4, Days Gone, TLOU2, Death Stranding, Ghost of Tsushima, Final Fantasy 7 Remake, Until Dawn) such a huge success. That's why many people chose a PlayStation.
Sony/PlayStation built up these high expectations over the last 15 years and the majority of the userbase won't accept anything less. I don't know how they could walk back on that, especially with a studio like Naughty Dog who is the leader in such cinematic games.
Re: 'Absurd': Social Media Misquotes Journalist, Erroneously Claims Sony Is Angry at Naughty Dog
@ItsAlwaysSunnyyy
Easier said than done. Naughty Dog (since this article revolves around them) have their own inhouse proprietary engine, they are not using the Unreal Engine to power their games. Developing, extending and maintaining their own engine definitely costs a lot of money and time.
Large scale game worlds and additional repeatable activities/collectibles aren't all that expensive or time consuming to develop.
These are the key development activities that escalate costs:
All of these points are what PlayStation 1st party games are known for and Naughty Dog has always been at the top of those qualities. They help promote PlayStation as being "the only place" you can get those cinematic qualities. Asking them to "scale the games down" is basically asking them to stop doing what they do best. It's like asking Ferrari to make utilitarian economy cars instead of their brand defining luxury sports cars.
Re: 'Absurd': Social Media Misquotes Journalist, Erroneously Claims Sony Is Angry at Naughty Dog
@TheDarts I thought the same when I read that line. I don't remember any time PushSquare debunked something.
On the contrary, they jump on any controversial opinion on Reddit or X/Twitter and give those opinions a spotlight.
Re: Sony Wants to Make PS5 Matchmaking More Interesting, But It Could Lead to Ads
This is a patent by Sony, which means that other companies would need to pay to Sony to have ads displayed during waiting times like described in the patent (similar to how Namco had a patent on mini games during loading times). So these ads during matchmaking is potentially a PlayStation exclusive feature or exclusive to Sony published games. 🤔
Re: Talking Point: What Are You Playing This Weekend? - Issue 634
Happy weekend!
Re: Bungie Is Not Making Destiny 3, Dev to Be Rocked by 'Significant' Layoffs
@Bob_Tempura I loved the Resistance trilogy on the PS3 (and the additional ones on the PSP and PS Vita), way more than Killzone. That was one of my favorite game series on the PS3, next to Motorstorm. But I am not too hopeful of the series getting anything new in the future.
Re: Bungie Is Not Making Destiny 3, Dev to Be Rocked by 'Significant' Layoffs
@Th3solution Gran Turismo 7 and MLB The Show, next to Helldivers 2 are actually successful live-service games for PlayStation. Nevertheless, I agree with you, it wasn't wise to have all their studios working on a live-service game.
Re: Bungie Is Not Making Destiny 3, Dev to Be Rocked by 'Significant' Layoffs
@Th3solution
I think you have some good questions. I must say, unfortunately the corporate executive level thinks in a different way than we gamers do. The software development business - and in the same sense the game development business - has been changing over the last few years. Sony's western studios like Naughty Dog and Sony Santa Monica are super expensive and cheaper developers from Asia can deliver comparable results especially with universal multi-platform game engines like Unreal or Unity and Gen AI tools for 1/10 of the total budget a studio in the US would cost (especially if they get some guidance from a few western senior designers and directors), like for example Stellar Blade or Lost Soul Aside
From an executive leadership's perspective it might be wiser to invest in Asia for exclusive content (which Sony/PlayStation obviously does). So what do you do with your current expensive development studios? Since successful live-service games earn way more money than traditional single-player games, it makes sense to transition those studios into live-service studios. Bungie, Blizzard, Activision, EA, Ubisoft, Rare all already achieved that transition. Unfortunately it's not that easy and I guess Sony underestimated the challenges and Bungie's ability in mentoring/consulting other studios. But it doesn't make sense to try to move Bungie back to traditional single-player games, when their expertise as a live-service studio on paper is more valuable/profitable, when they deliver a successful game. There also seems to be a trend against live-services which doesn't play in Sony's favor.
Like @streetshadow wrote, Sony is now course correcting for the other studios as the transition isn't that straight forward. And it's not just Sony. Microsoft Xbox studios face similar problems.
Re: Bungie Is Not Making Destiny 3, Dev to Be Rocked by 'Significant' Layoffs
@Bob_Tempura
If the game development business is anything like the software development business, then Bungie working on a standard (not a live-service) single-player shooter is very unlikely. The developers are too expensive for those kind of projects. Their expertise in online games is expected to have a higher return of investment when they develop a live-service game. They currently have Marathon which needs to grow bigger.
Developers, India or other regions feom Asia are cheaper and can work on less complex single-player games.
What I am describing is likely the perspective of the decision making executive roles at the PlayStation leadership, and not what us gaming fans would think to bew wise to do.
Re: Talking Point: Sony, Don't Re-Reveal Fairgames at the Next State of Play
@ChikaBambus I really hope they aren't that dumb.
Re: Talking Point: Sony, Don't Re-Reveal Fairgames at the Next State of Play
It will the "Just one more thing..." moment of the show. 😉
Re: Copycat Gran Turismo Games Now Ripping Off PS5 Racer's Marketing
"Forza Motorsport Copycat Games Now Ripping Off Xbox Racer's Marketing"
Gran Turismo 7 - 2022
Forza Motorsport 6 - 2016
XbotGamerX wrote:
😜
Re: Ahead of Humongous State of Play, Sony Trademarks New PS5 Game 'Break In'
Does PlayStation expect their audience to be so short minded to not realize that they renamed Fairgame$ to Break In?
Re: Copycat Gran Turismo Games Now Ripping Off PS5 Racer's Marketing
This article reads as if there's some "controversy" even though there is none.
There have been track based racing games before Gran Turismo and there will be more after. Showcasing cars on a track from their best side is not a copycat of Gran Turismo.
Re: Xbox Fans Flock to Online Suggestions Box to Tell Microsoft to Keep Games Off PS5
@SMJ You could try reporting the comment for trolling or flaming other users. 😉
Re: Free on Xbox, PS5 Owners Made to Pay $10 for New Darksiders Upgrade
This is good, right? Sony get 30% from that $10 upgrade so more money for Sony which they can invest into single player exclusive games. 😀
Re: Xbox Fans Flock to Online Suggestions Box to Tell Microsoft to Keep Games Off PS5
@JackMate Usually www.videogameschronicle.com and thisweekinvideogames.com are fairly professional in their news reporting. VGC even offers a filter for "PlayStation" related content.
Re: Xbox Fans Flock to Online Suggestions Box to Tell Microsoft to Keep Games Off PS5
@Skinny-Pete Exactly. It’s a genius business model: manufacture a bit of controversy, act shocked when people get annoyed, and collect the ad revenue from the resulting argument.
It’s less about a genuine vendetta and more about knowing exactly what keeps the metrics moving. If the 'Xbox negative' brand brings in the clicks, then that’s the brand they’re going to sell. It’s hard to tell where the personal bias ends and the marketing strategy begins, but at this point, does the difference even matter?
Re: Xbox Fans Flock to Online Suggestions Box to Tell Microsoft to Keep Games Off PS5
@LogicStrikesAgain I know, but he is making a fuss about it like it's something dirty when you write Xbox in caps.
Re: Xbox Fans Flock to Online Suggestions Box to Tell Microsoft to Keep Games Off PS5
I love how the article frames the 'Xbox fans' as the ones acting out, while the author is actively refusing to type a four-letter word because it’s 'freakin’ nonsense.' The irony is almost as impressive as the sheer amount of energy spent on a platform you supposedly don't care about. Maybe next time, just label it an 'Opinion/Fan-Fiction' piece so we don't mistake it for news?
I’m sure the Xbox community is trembling in their boots knowing that the Editor of Push Square is monitoring their suggestion box. Your dedication to this 'tedious' subject is truly inspiring."
Re: 'It Should Be Free to Play Online Games': PS Plus Price Squeeze Taken to Task by PS5 Owners
@Slayer25c
But Sony is no charging money for keeping accounts safe, they are charging money for allowing us to play online.
Nowadays any company which decides to store user data is expected to do that in a highly secure way. The user data brings value to those companies. Companies like Google, Meta, X/Twitter are not charging their users a subscription, just to keep their accounts safe. I think they are actually required by governmental regulations (like GDPR, CCPA, DPA, etc.) to keep user data safe. Asking the user base to pay for the data security would be dishonest when they are obligated to do so anyways.
Re: Sony Reportedly Confirms Shift Back to PS5 Single Player Exclusive Games
@PuppetMaster
How is a fan supposed to feel superior if the 'commoners' on PC are allowed to play the same games? The quality of the story really drops off once you realize someone else is experiencing it on an RTX 4090 instead of a console. It’s definitely about the 'numbers' and not at all about people needing their console to be a substitute for a personality.
Re: Sony Reportedly Confirms Shift Back to PS5 Single Player Exclusive Games
@SBBuds
Honestly, it’s refreshing to see the PlayStation leadership finally admit that the real fun isn't playing the game—it’s the feeling of hoarding the sandbox. I mean, why would anyone want a bigger community to talk to or more people to appreciate a great story? That sounds suspiciously like 'sharing,' and we all know that the most 'elite' gamers are the ones who treat a platform like a gated community where the only reward for your loyalty is exclusivity rights. Truly, the quality of a game is measured entirely by how many people are barred from playing it.
Re: PS5's New Weekly Player Tracker Has Revealed Some Brutal Truths for Fans
@Oxy
Those 2 recent games in the top 8 do prove that actually nothing is set in stone. Statistically 1/4 of the most played games on PlayStation is a new game IP. And even if a game only manages to stay in the top 20s for several months (like Overwatch, Diablo 4 or MLB The Show) that is still a bigger success for a publisher than something like Marvel's Spide-Man or God of War which only stay in the chart for a few weeks if they can even crack the top 10 of most played games.
That's why Sony will continue pursuing live-service games. While it's hard to crack the top 10, you see that it's possible.
Re: PS5's New Weekly Player Tracker Has Revealed Some Brutal Truths for Fans
@nomither6 I'm not saying it's a dire situation. I am grateful that we're still getting traditional games fairly regularly. But Sony is in the business for the money and I am pretty sure that they will try to get more live-service games to earn more money.
Re: PS5's New Weekly Player Tracker Has Revealed Some Brutal Truths for Fans
@MrPeanutbutterz I agree to a certain extent. There are definitely those who only play live-service games (be it GTA Online, COD, FIFA, Apex Legends or Fortnite) who are not likely to buy a single player game. But I do think that those who in the past might have avoided those annual live-service games in favor of a single player game nowadays also have 1-2 live-serviced where they are engaged.
And - what this article I think is also trying to explain - the problem is that live-service games are now the dominant design choice for many big AAA studios. Nowadays a shooter without some online live-service aspect will struggle to stay relevant. And even a live-service shooter doesn't guarantee success. The issue being that games which 15 years ago would have been designed to be "fun to play", nowadays they are designed to have "business plan for reoccurring player spendings".
Best example, from a traditional gamer's point of view, is actually Marathon: The majority of the userbase here on PushSquare would have preferred the game to have a decent single player campaign with a decent story. But that didn't happen, instead the game is designed as a live-service to keep players engaged in the online multiplayer.
Re: PS5's New Weekly Player Tracker Has Revealed Some Brutal Truths for Fans
@Boxmonkey
In a certain sense I can understand it. Personally I've been playing a lot of Sea of Thieves. It's a unique game like no other, with enough variables to make each session feel different, and each update brings something new to play with. For me it's like a hobby within the hobby.
I can imagine people feel similar about other live-service games like Overwatch, Destiny or World of Warcraft, where they are comfortable with the main gameplay and each new content update adds something new to the experience.
I'm not saying that it's a good (or a bad) design, but I do feel sorry that these games take away people's attention from other games. For the time I spent playing Sea of Thieves I could have finished 100+ other single-player games.
Re: New inFAMOUS PS5 Project Rumours Give Fans Fresh Hope
I remember the Prototype vs Infamous debates back when both games were released. Having played both I think both have their qualities. I definitely enjoyed Infamous 1 & 2, never got around to play ghe 3rd. Would be nice to see new entries in both series.
Re: PS5's New Weekly Player Tracker Has Revealed Some Brutal Truths for Fans
I believe live-service games are the gaming industries biggest problem. Why should one buy a new premium priced single player game when you can continue playing the 10+ years old live-service game which gets frequent new updates at no apparent cost?
Us here who prefer traditional single-player games are unfortunately in the minority. Most players - as proven by the data - play live-service games. So we should be thankful when something like Crimson Desert, Baldur's Gate 3 or some other game comes around which breaks the trend and becomes a success.
Re: No One Noticed Intergalactic's Hidden Naughty Dog Easter Egg
@DadJKP
But you’re changing the subject. My point wasn't about "weak" male characters.
You criticized "girl bosses" for being "always the strongest, never wrong, and boring." Yet, characters like the Doom Slayer, Master Chief, or John Wick are exactly that: they are always the strongest, they rarely (if ever) lose, and they are unstoppable forces of nature. Why are they celebrated as peak entertainment, while a woman written with the exact same power-fantasy traits is criticized as a "post-modern trope"? You still haven't explained why the "unstoppable power fantasy" is only acceptable when the character is male.
I actually agree with you here: media has always been a vehicle for messaging. Art is never created in a vacuum.
But you are acting like this is a new phenomenon unique to modern "neo-liberal" writing. For decades, video games and action movies were vehicles for a very specific message: a hyper-masculine, traditional male power fantasy designed exclusively for a young male demographic.
The messaging hasn't suddenly started existing; the target audience has just expanded. When a game features an unstoppable male hero, it's viewed as "normal, default entertainment." But when a game features an unstoppable female hero, it’s suddenly scrutinized as "forced political messaging."
If an invincible male character is just a fun power fantasy, then an invincible female character is just a fun power fantasy too. To label one as "natural" and the other as an "agenda" is the definition of a double standard.
Re: No One Noticed Intergalactic's Hidden Naughty Dog Easter Egg
@DadJKP
This is a massive rewrite of who Sarah Connor and Ellen Ripley actually are. If Terminator 2 or Aliens were released today, the exact same critics using them as shields now would be calling them "woke girl bosses."
Let’s look at the actual text: In T2, Sarah Connor is a hyper-aggressive, jacked, cynical, tactical survivalist who aggressively rejects traditional femininity. Her "motherhood" isn't a warm, traditional caretaker role; she is a deeply traumatized, cold military commander to John, to the point where John literally has to cry and beg her not to assassinate a man in front of his family. She is absolutely trying to "out-man the men" to survive. Ripley in Aliens literally overrides the colonial marines, takes their heaviest weapons, commands a mech suit, and does the fighting because the men failed.
You accepted them because nostalgia grants them a pass, but they occupy the exact same "force of nature" power fantasy space you are criticizing today.
We are talking about video games—the ultimate medium of escapism and fantasy.
We play games where men can cast magic, absorb dragon souls, survive falling from skyscrapers, and fight aliens. "Biology" is defeated the second we press Start. Why is it that we can suspend our disbelief for literal mythology, but the moment a female character is a dominant, stoic fighter, "biology" suddenly becomes an unbreakable law that fiction must obey?
By saying women can only be empowered in fiction through motherhood, caretaking, or visible vulnerability, you are restricting female characters to a tiny, traditional box while male characters get the entire universe of power fantasies to play in. Why can't a female character in a fantasy game just be a badass fighter simply because it's a video game?
Re: Talking Point: What Are You Playing This Weekend? - Issue 633
Re: PS5 Will Reveal the Most Played Games with Steam-Like Player Numbers
I misread "Minecraft" for " Marathon" in 3rd place for a second.😅
Re: PS5, PS4 Racer LEGO 2K Drive Is Getting Bricked: PS Store Removal and Online Server Shutdown
Wasn't this in PS Plus Essential some years ago? Anyways, it currently sits at 19.99 instead of the launch price 69.99.
Re: Halo PS5 Spotted in Stores, And It's Making Everyone Feel Weird
@TDHorizon I think the Warzone multiplayer was the highlight of Halo 5. It was such a fun large-scale multiplayer mode.
Re: Halo PS5 Spotted in Stores, And It's Making Everyone Feel Weird
I remember reading an article many years ago that Microsoft was actually playing with the thoughts of bringing Halo 3 to the PS3. But of course, since both PlayStation and Xbox were engaged in the console wars via exclusives, that idea has been dormant until now.
Re: Saros PS5 Sales Estimates at 300k, Selling Slower Than Returnal on a Bigger Install Base
@PuppetMaster
It's worth being mentioned, that the early PS5 adopters, who bought Returnal are the hardcore fans who enjoy single player games which shows off the capabilities of their new console. The 93 million playerbase now includes a large chunk of casual players who probably only care about what everyone else is playing (COD, FIFA, Minecraft, Roblox, etc.). So I wouldn't be surprised if Saros mostly follows a similar sales trend as Returnal, as it's the same hardcore playerbase which would be interested in this game.
Re: Saros PS5 Sales Estimates at 300k, Selling Slower Than Returnal on a Bigger Install Base
@PuppetMaster I wonder why? Stating that the source of the information is questionable, which undermines the credibility and the quality of this site is a very constructive feedback in my opinion.
Unless feedback is not wanted. 🤷🏼
Re: Saros PS5 Sales Estimates at 300k, Selling Slower Than Returnal on a Bigger Install Base
@somnambulance
Didn't Sony state to their shareholders a few months ago that given the expected slowdown of hardware unit sales, they plan to monetize the user base more heavily? Here it is.