TrollOfWar

I've been wondering how a new entry in the Ninja Gaiden franchise will be received, now after the big "souls-like" hype which resulted in several "git gud" discussions.

The Ninja Gaiden games released since 2004 are brutally difficult, but there is something appealing about that difficulty. In NG Black the lowest difficulty was called "ninja dog" just to mock you.

But I appreciate easier options for those who aren't into these difficult games and just want to experience the game without any stress.

@Stale-Bread I have to apologize. I was wrong saying that Gears of War Ultimate Edition (and this new Reloaded release) are in Unreal Engine 4. According to Digital Foundry it's a heavily modified version of Unreal Engine 3. That is actually quite impressive given how old that engine is.

I think Digital Foundry's review video is worth a watch as it highlights the improvements between the 2015 Ultimate Edition and the original 2006 release: https://youtu.be/N8jBoIvToZY

@Stale-Bread All good. It's easy to overlook certain things.

When The Coalition took over the Gears of War franchise from Epic Games, their first project was to migrate Gears of War 1 to UE4 for Xbox One to become familiar with the games and the Unreal Engine. Two years later they released Gears of War 4.

A full complete trilogy would definitely be a great offer, but I guess this is better than nothing and if it helps to get additional Gears of War games and get the game series into the hands of more players then I am OK with this.

Yes, the multiplayer can be quite frantic. I'm also personally more of a fan of the horde mode but I also had a few decent PVP matches.

@Stale-Bread

Why did they not release the whole trilogy?

Probably for the same reason why Sony hasn't released a trilogy of Killzone, Resistance, God of War or Motorstorm on PS5. It's not that easy to update those old games for the new hardware.

In case of Gears of War Reloaded, this is a re-release of the 2015 released "Gears of War Ultimate Edition" which was a remaster for Xbox One where the developers migrated the game from Unreal Engine version 3 to version 4. Gears of War 2 and 3 would have required a lot more effort than this project, as those 2 games have not been upgraded to UE4.

With all the trouble Microsoft faced with the initial release of the Halo Master Chief Collection, and the effort it took to fix it, maybe they decided, it's safer to release this as a single game.

But 40 quid for the first game is really pushing it and I don't normally complain about the price of games.

I bet it will go on sale in a few months. The thing is, compared to the remake of The Last of Us Part 1 which costs $70 and doesn't have the original game's multiplayer mode, Gears of War Reloaded is fairly moderately priced at $40 with the inclusion of the multiplayer mode. Also owners of the Ultimate Edition got a free digital copy on other systems.

Also I couldn't see anywhere if you can coop online?

"split-screen or online co-op". It's mentioned in the description on the store page: https://store.playstation.com/en-us/product/UP6312-PPSA17525_00-0219247498273183

Gears of War is a product of it's time. Edgy, bold and a mindless good fun. Those who aren't nostalgic to the series might find it less appealing.

Regarding the price, a fair comparison might be The Last of Us Part 1, which initially released during the same console generation and also received 2 remasters. Unlike Gears of War, The Last of Us Part 1 doesn't include the multiplayer mode from the original release and is being sold at $70, where GOW is $40. Which one is the better deal?

Hopefully it does well on all platforms and results in more Gears of War games being released everywhere.

@zekepliskin It's the same with all major gaming corporations. Same case with Xbox, EA, Activision, Bethesda. Their business strategy and decisions are driven by numbers and the need for growth. Not by passion and enthusiasm.

They don't care what "the fans want" because there's more money to be made with casual players.

@Questionable_Duck To be honest, I am unfamiliar with K-Pop Demon Hunters so I don't have a clue what it is about. I just remembered the headline.

But I can imagine that the target audience is much younger than the average PlayStation players. Some action platfomer like Astro Bot / Crash Bandicoot mixed with rhythm based mini-games might be a first idea.

A more successful approach would be something like Animal Crossing meets Persona 5, where you build and customize your house/secret layer/hangout-base and socialize with NPCs, and go into randomly generated dungeons to fight demons and gain materials or loot. This would allow players to stay engaged over a longer period of time. Maybe some gatcha mechanics like in Genshin Impact can be applied, probably to unlock new songs? It could be potentially very successful as a free-to-play game on mobile and all consoles.

EDIT: Maybe some hero brawler (like Smash Bros) or a hero shooter (like Splatoon or Foam Stars) could work. Another idea would be a coop rogue-like dungeon crawler (like Hades). Often it seems enough to take some popular genre and combine it with a popular IP to succeed. The more I think about it, the more ideas I get. 😄

@LogicStrikesAgain That explains why Concord failed. The dressed-up characters weren't attractive enough for the service. 😉

@MFTWrecks You raise some very good points. Some of those IPs I mentioned started out small and grew due to their timeless appeal.

The funny thing is, apparently Sony had such a monumental franchise with "K-Pop Demon Hunters" but they sold it to Netflix for $20 millions. They could have made a bunch of successful games, merchandise, etc. with auch an IP.

@LogicStrikesAgain

I think Sony is doing their best to diversify their content by focusing on single player, love service, indie (through their many hero projects) while also trying to create IP that they can utilize through the rest of their businesses like Sony Pictures and Music.

I think Sony should charge more money for those "love services". 😉

Great typo. 😄

@UltimateOtaku91 The "unicorn" franchises which Herman Hurst is probably alluding to are Mario, Pokemon, Sonic and Minecraft, which all had tremendously successful movies in recent years, are selling tons of merchandise including clothes worn by kids and have (or will have) theme parks. Hulst might think that Horizon has the potential to become such franchises, but personally I'm not sure if they have a popular franchise which is beloved by young and old players alike.

In case of the Borderlands movie the creators didn't care about making a good movie. Tales from the Borderlands has proven how compelling stories work in the Borderlands universe.

While it's great that PlayStation puts more focus on the quality of their (live-service) games, this also sounds a bit like longer development periods and less creative/innovating ideas:

We have since put in place much more rigorous and more frequent testing in very many different ways.

Additionally feedback loops take time to evaluate and incorporate the changes

@armondo36

Days Gone makes sense because it's a "failed" IP, so why not squeeze a few more sales out of it?

I think Sony would rather port games to other platforms where they are confident that those games will sell well. No point in porting games which aren't succeeding on their own platform.

With that said, while Days Gone probably didn't sell as well as Sony though on PlayStation, it did do quite well on PC. Plus it's easier to port thanks to being an Unreal Engine 4 game.

No surprise, PlayStation is promoting Helldivers 2 on Xbox, because they want the game to sell well.

@Dimey Not sure if Activision ever released a collection, but COD Modern Warfare 1 & 2 haven been released as remasters on PS4 some years ago:
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare Remastered
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 Campaign Remastered

Reminds me of Resident Evil 6's multiplayer missions in the campaign. If the rumors are true, depending on the implementation it could be pretty interesting. In best case there could be some offline alternative with bots for those who don't want to play online.

@madmaxrules

And if it is coming together, I’d not be surprised if released across PS5, PC and Xbox simultaneously. That status alone could give it some impact! And why not - is anyone realistically going to buy a PS5 solely for this game if it is an exclusive?

While I am fully in support of multiplatform game releases, the problem is that if the game is bad or just mediocre, even a release on Xbox and Nintendo wouldn't be enough to keep Fairgames "alive". It might only prolong the inevitable. I believe Concord would have met the same faith if it would have simultaneously released on Xbox as well.

@Ainu20 I would differentiate between the more enthusiastic PlayStation fanbase, which cares about console exclusive games, is often met on these forums and follow gaming news closely and the more casual, general PlayStation playerbase, which care mostly about the big AAA titles (COD, FIFA, Assassin's Creed, GTA) & live services, don't go online to discuss games and hardly follow any gaming news. Playing on PlayStation doesn't necessarily mean you are a "fan".

Many PS fans here on PushSquare often state their dislike for multiplayer live-service games. They are not the target audience for Fairgames. The more casual playerbase that mostly plays Fortnite, COD & GTA Online is the target audience.

But that's just my opinion. 😉

@PuppetMaster

wasted towards Jade Raymond BS that no PS fans ask.

The sad truth is that Sony doesn't care what PS fans are asking. They are a business and the only thing they care about is making more money and satisfying shareholders. Fairgames was never targeted at the PlayStation fanbase, that's why it's perceived so negatively.

If they'd care about the opinion of PS fans, dormant IPs (Jak & Daxter, Sly Racoon, Syphon Filter, Resistance, Gravity Rush, etc.) would receive new entries and a Bloodborne Remastered instead of a remaster for Days Gone or Until Dawn.

Rumor or not Fairgames at this point doesn't seemed to be Sony's best investment. It's based on popular trends from 5 years ago, similar games like Sega's "Hyenas" have been cancelled, Fairgames target audience is on TikTok, not on PlayStation, and it will be competing with other (objectively better) games including Sony's own extraction shooter Marathon.

Releasing and marketing Fairgames is a big risk for Sony. I personally wouldn't bet on it being a success, but I could be totally wrong and Fairgames might become the next best thing. 😄

@themightyant Well said.

I just finished reading the article and there are actually more interesting points than Shawn Layden disliking GamePass. Like how free-to-play might become the default in the future, how the young audience will only play games on devices which they already have (mobile, PC), how difficult finding the correct price of a game is. Mat Piscatella (Circana) and Piers Harding-Rolls (Ampere Analysis) have quite insightful thoughts to share. It's definitely worth reading.

@Oram77 Sorry, my bad. Only saw the message by lazurus11. That's where I picked up the discussion. My fault. 😅

Off-topic: It's a bit difficult to follow conversations here as quotes/conversations are not properly reflected in the comments.

@Oram77 Hmmm... I replied to @lazarus11 about the marketing of Clair Obscur Expedition 33, but you feel addressed. 🤔

@lazarus11

@DennisReynolds what's this big marketing push ms did for e33,you've mentioned it 3 times now

Clair Obscur Expedition 33 was first revealed during the Xbox Games Showcase in June 2024 and was featured again in the Xbox Devloper_Direct in January 2025. Both events had more than a million viewers on the Xbox YouTube channel alone and being featured in such events is not cheap.

Of course it's understandable that one might miss those events if one only cares about PlayStation or Nintendo events. 😉

@Ainu20

The big difference is that Sony does not see the subscription model as the preferred way to deliver games to customers, while Microsoft does. Both services reflect that.

I was commenting on the idea that "GamePass is the only subscription service damaging the gaming industry".

I believe in the end all subscription services impact the gaming industry including GamePass, PS+, Ubisoft+, EA Play, even Apple Arcade, Google Play Pass and Netflix Mobile Games. And if the gaming industry is perceivably getting worse, GamePass ain't the major reason.

Yes, Sony (and Nintendo) have a different gaming strategy. The majority of their games are heavily promoted single-player games (The Last of Us, God of War, Marvel's Spider-Man, Horizo). Many Microsoft developed games are designed to be played over a long period of time (Sea of Thieves, Forza Horizon, MS Flight Simulator, Halo Infinite). Also Microsoft spends less money to promote their games. So of course for Sony, with the games they've been creating in the past 10-15 years, the GamePass day-1 model doesn't make sense.

The elephant in the room is of course Call of Duty. It's a series which definitely is doing better when it's being sold, but I guess it was a strategic investment for Microsoft to put it on GamePass to increase subscriber numbers.

Nintendo doesn't really belong in this discussion as they only provide a retro subscription service, mostly for games that aren't easily playable on modern systems, if at all.

I wouldn't ignore Nintendo in this discussion. Their subscription might not be on the same level as GamePass and PS+ yet. But now that they have a subscription infrastructure, they can change their strategy whenever they choose. Also it's Nintendo's decision to put their older games on a subscription service. They could have chosen to sell those games like they did on the Wii/U and 3DS via the eShop.

@Oram77

Sony literally said Game pass would be unsustainable for them to do

I guess the difference is that Sony spends a ton of money on marketing to sell their high-budget single player games, which of course were planned to be sold and aren't feasible to be day 1 on subscription services. Microsoft spends much less on marketing their games and most of their games are made to be played over a long period so in case of a subscription service, people would need to stay subscribed over long periods. So what works for Microsoft doesn't necessarily need to work for Sony and vice versa.

@Rich33

GP may be good for some consumers right now, but in the long term the model is bad for the industry, and will be bad for gamers. The only thing that has served to limit its damage so far is XBox's poor hardware sales performance in comparison to Sony and Nintendo this generation.

Sony and Nintendo also have their own subscription service. Isn't that bad as well for the industry? You already hear people say, they'll wait for certain games to be on PS Plus or how they were planning to buy somethings but didn't as games became available on PS Plus. Nintendo could resell their old "virtual console" games like they did after the Wii, but instead opted to put games on their NSO subscription model? Wouldn't it be wiser for Nintendo to re-release their old games on modern platform? Their services are truly damaging the gaming industry. And let's not forget Ubisoft+, it's not only bad for the game industry, it's bad for Ubisoft. /s 😄

@UltimateOtaku91

... also less games that we actually own as these games are only rented. The less money these devs actually make from game sales will effect their budgets for their next game which could result in a lesser quality game or rushed development.

It used to be okay to rent games during the PS1 to PS3/4 periods (or to resell games 2nd hand). Why is it now bad to rent games?

And why are players to blame if the gaming market is oversaturated with games which aren't compelling enough for many of them to own?

@UltimateOtaku91

Gaming has been going downhill very fast since subscription services have took off.

But is gaming going downhill very fast because or despite of subscription services? And did it already start with Xbox Live & PSN or only now with GamePass & PS+ Extra?

While Shawn Layden has a questionable choice of words, I agree to a certain extent that subscription services like GamePass and PS+ can impact the design of games which are developed to be on a subscription.

But many developers are already "wage slaves” and that's unrelated to GamePass. How often have we read stories about crunch periods and minimum wages for QAs at Rockstar, Activision, Naughty Dog, Ubisoft. That was before GamePass existed. Big corporations with the goal to maximize profits are the problem, not GamePass.

Also one thing that is never mentioned is how these big corporations tried to get rid of second-hand game sales and game rentals, as they deemed them bad for the industry, by having 1-time redeemable online passes for their games during the PS3/X360 period. GamePass and PS+ offer a replacement for the lack of rental services.

A bit of a shame, but a reasonable decisions in this case if the budget is limited and the multiplayer mode is more of a bonus.

Also, as far as I know, unlike other publishers (Epic, Blizzard, Microsoft, Capcom, PSN) Konami doesn't have a user data platform with unique IDs, so cross-play would have been a huge problem.

Great to see more people being able to play the game. Kudos to GSC Game World for developing and releasing a game in a warzone.

@pyrrhic_victory

What should've happened to begin with, considering how well the first game sold on PS4 and likely contributed to Ninja Theory being acquired. But still, better late than never.

I guess the reason why it took this long, might be because Sony probably didn't want to provide PS5 developer kits to Microsoft owned studios just like it happened with Minecraft. I guess the situation changed.

Not a big surprise given that the PS5 and Xbox Series X hardware are nearly identical and Unreal Engine 5 is built for multi-platform.

Probably porting games from PS5 to Xbox Series X is just as simple.

Is it not concerning that old games like GTA5, Minecraft and Forza Horizon 5 are selling more than Death Stranding 2 which just released 1 month ago? 🤔

@mvhess I wouldn't downplay the 1.2 million sold units of Death Stranding on Xbox. Kojima Productions announced 19 million players (not total sales) just as they released the Xbox version last November. In March this year they announced 20 million players. It's fair to assume that the majority of that player increase came via sold units on Xbox, as over the 5 years since release the game was available on nearly every platform and subscription, including PS Plus Extra, free Epic Games Store giveaway, PC GamePass, Steam, Apple App Store and Amazon Luna. 1.2 m units at $20, minus 30% platform fees and $ 1 million porting costs, you get around $ 15 millions in pure profit.

Death Stranding sold around 5 million units in it's first 2 years on PS4 and PC combined. 1 million unit on Xbox 5 years later is actually quite impressive.

@mvhess

Nobody is making money off Xbox game sales since they don't sell games. How many times does it have to be said?

I don't understand why people keep saying that games don't sell on Xbox. For example, according to estimates Elden Ring has sold 7.4 million copies on Xbox (compared to 13.2 m on PlayStation). Death Stranding Director's Cut sold somewhere between 500k and 1.2 m despite releasing 5 years later on Xbox.

All publishers would stop releasing games on Xbox, if they weren't able to sell any. In reality more publishers are releasing games on Xbox, including PlayStation and Atlus.

Yes, the Xbox console has less than half of the user base of PlayStation and games on GamePass (especially indie games) will sell much less, but usually popular games sell well on Xbox. 😉

@Spedfrom

Meanwhile they'll keep the heavy single player hits exclusive, because that's their PlayStation premium crop that fans want

I wonder what will happen if PlayStation releases their "heavy single player hits", which were once exclusive to their console, on other platforms like Nintendo and Xbox? Will it anger the PlayStation fans? Where would they go? The Xbox console isn't really relevant, as most people choose a PlayStation over Xbox. PC or Nintendo, Sony doesn't see them as competitors to PlayStation.

PlayStation fans are already so invested in the PlayStation platform, if Sony releases their big single-player games on Nintendo and Xbox, they would have no other choice but to accept it. It's already working for Sony in case of PC releases, no risk of losing their user base. 😄

Executives say all kinds of funny things to keep shareholders satisfied.

Sooner or later we will see what that quote meant, what we all know though is that Sony is changing their business strategy and are adapting to market conditions.

Anthem

And Toaplan Arcade Collection 3 on Evercade.

@rjejr In case of yearly sports games sold at $70, most of them are live service games, especially if they have time-limited events where you get a certain bonus for participating. The practice of yearly games in general is questionable, as it's basically a live service where the yearly updates are sold at full price and your progress is reset to null.

@ZeroSum By definition a live service game is a game where a development team is actively working on adding content and updates after the release.

While additional monetization is the most common goal of the majority of live service games, it doesn't apply to all, especially if the base product is released at full price.

GT7 is still getting constant updates with new cars and tracks 3 years after it's launch. Stardew Valley launched in 2016, its most recent update was in December 2024 and with all the updates over the years it sold 41 million copies. In both cases the developers decided to support the games with new content updates rather than work on a new project. In both cases the updates keep the players engaged over a long period and the games "alive".

Of course the concept of a live service is easier to apply to online multiplayer games, where cosmetic items have a bigger social impact (you can show off your skins, cars, liveries, weapons, hats, football players, etc.) and the developers can steadily add new ones over several months.

@ZeroSum @rjejr

but are MLB the Show and Gran Turismo really considered to be live service games?

"Live service games" are games which receive steady updates from an active development team after thei initial release over a certain long period of time, in order to increase player engagement and sales of the game, micro-transactions, DLCs, season passes, cosmetics, etc. Many live service games often launch with a "roadmap" of future updates.

There's a famous graph from Ubisoft depicting how live services work: https://gdkeys.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/image-1400x789.png

Some fairly popular single-player live service games are Assassin's Creed, Dead Cells, Dying Light 2, Minecraft, Stardew Valley to a certain extent.

Here's the definition from Wikipedia:

In the video game industry, a live service game represents providing video games or game content on a continuing revenue model, similar to software as a service. Live service games are ways to monetize video games either after their initial sale, or to support a free-to-play model.

@11001100110zero Microsoft probably wouldn't offer any sales data, especially of other 3rd party publishers (EA, Capcom, Take Two, Ubisoft) who wouldn't want them to share. But Sony doesn't need Microsoft to provide any data. They already have several games on Xbox which give a good inisght. Plus they can buy the data from analytics companies like Circana, Alinea Analytics, GameAnalytics, Helika, ByteBrew or GRID.

@cragis0001 Additionally to Destiny 2 & MLB The Show, Sony has probably access to the sales numbers of Death Stranding Director's Cut (as it's running on the Sony proprietary Decima Engine and it probably has some analytics backend services) and the preorder number of Marathon.

Not really surprising Sony was the one to decide, given Helldivers 2 is a 1st party PlayStation game. Probably more will follow.

One of my most anticipated games for this year. Loved Ruiner as well.

@Enuo

Didn't Xbox fans spend the last decade swearing to the heavens that they don't want, like or care about Playstation games?

It's no different than the "PlayStation fans who spend the last decade swearing to the heavens that they don't want, like or care" about Xbox games. Yet Xbox published games are currently the best selling titles on the PlayStation store.

Every platform or community has their obnoxious, loud, enthusiastic fans who say such things, just to feel better about their favorite brand. Doesn't mean that everyone on PlayStation or Xbox feels that way. 😉

Days Gone is also a curious case, it was the 2nd big PlayStation game to release on Steam (after Horizon Zero Dawn) and it sold fairly well on PC. Porting it to other platforms should also be easier than other PlayStation games, as it's running on the Unreal Engine 4.

@naruball

My entire point was based on remarks that people have made on push square over the years. They claim that they're leaving ps for many reasons, the most important for them being that they can't justify spending 500+ USD for a console whose exclusives are no longer exclusive.

So, to return to your initial point. No, you can't use potential sales of ps games on xbx consoles as the only criterion when deciding an overall company strategy.

True, only the potential sales on Xbox is not enough to define PlayStation's multiplatform strategy. The number of sold consoles relative to previous generations, where PlayStation wasn't releasing games on PC and console prices were decreasing, though is a pretty strong criterion when shaping their business strategy.

Some unsatisfied vocal people on PushSquare claiming to leave PlayStation will have no impact on Sony PlayStation's business strategy. 😘

@naruball

that's not how you analyze data. There are so many factors that you don't take into account, including the lack of competition from xbx compared to previous generations. Also, the fact that ps5 was constantly out of stock (like Wii back in the day) and thus became the hot item that everyone wanted but couldn't get (too many comedy shows and people on social media made jokes about it). There are several other reasons, but these are just some of the many.

I'm happy to be corrected if I am wrong with my analysis.

So you are saying that the lack of Xbox competition resulted in people moving to PlayStation or PC (on PC they can play both XB and PS games)? Did PlayStation have less or more console exclusive games (1st and 3rd party) compared to the previous generation and how strong was the appeal of those games?

Are you implying that PS5 sales numbers would be higher without the stock issues? Or did it even out with the associated hype after the stock issues were resolved.

The price of the PS4 dropped from $ 399 to $ 299 three years after it's launch and the PS4 Pro launched at the same price as the original PS4 price. The PS5 in it's 5 years didn't have any permanent price drops in the US, had price hikes in many other regions and the PS5 Pro launched at $ 699. Does the PS5 lack of price reductions have an impact on the adoption rate of the console? How is the inflation impacting the sales numbers?

I guess in the end with all factors considered the PS5 is selling well compared to the PS4. 😉