Weird how the majority of those games are releasing on all major platforms, but PlayStation still refuses to show all platforms in their trailers. All it takes is to check those trailers on the publisher/developer channels, so it's a minor inconvenience for the viewers and no benefit for PlayStation.
@TrollOfWar Anthem is a game that absolutely SHOULD always have been playable offline in my view. I was actually thinking of picking it up for £1 at CEX and giving it a whirl before this date... because FOMO! But who's got the time!
Anthem ain't a terrible game. The combat and level design are quite decent, the flying mechanics are a big highlight. But the story and the mission objectives are generic and forgettable. I spent around 50 hours to unlock 90% of the trophies.
@themightyant @Ainu20 Just wanted to add, that both of your sides are valid.
Taking Anthem as an example (since I played through the game a few months ago). If you bought the Anthem, you literally won't be able to play the game anymore after January 12, 2026. Everyone who paid money for Anthem will be left with nothing (or a non-working physical disc) after the servers are shut down. Despite Anthem being designed as an online live-service game, I can tell from my experience that it's perfectly playable as a single-player game, where you don't need to interact with other players. After January 2026, all I will have are the memories playing the game. And in case of Warzone, maybe there is someone who would like to play alone on a big empty map, role-playing some apocalypse scenario and driving around the deserted town.
But the problem with all these live-service games is that the player accounts with their progress and transactions/spendings are stored online on the servers of the games, not on your local drive. They would have to reengineer the games to store player progress offline including bought micro-transactions, which is probably a big challenge
Also there are games like Sea of Thieves or Microsoft Flight Simulator, where game logic (wave, weather calculations and world events in Sea of Thieves) and game data (locations in MS Flight Sim) are loaded from the servers. Could community members be able to get their own server instances running and what would be the impact of that? Companies would need to expose their proprietary server technologies to the public. Some people running a game server in the community might have bad intentions and could inject malicious code into the servers which then run on the client/player side.
Games are more complex than ever before to develop and maintain, with the largest exceeding the budget of a modern Hollywood blockbuster. That can make it extremely challenging to implement plans for video games after formal support for them has ended ...
I think the point of the "Stop Killing Games" movement is to have an "end of life" plan for online games from the beginning. When a company like Amazon wants to create the next MMO, they should already have a plan of making a part of the game available for offline play once they choose to shut down the servers for the game. Or at least allow the game's community to run their own servers. I wonder what I will be able to see or do, if Microsoft would decide to shut down Sea of Thieves, a game where I invested 2000+ hours.
This topic is similar to "data privacy", where it's in the consumer's benefit that companies handle user data with care and only collect data for the intended purpose, but it's an inconvenience for the companies. It would be a lot easier for companies to collect all the user data they want and not have to invest in consent managment platforms and not having to dealing with data privacy requests from users.
... and risks creating harmful unintended consequences for gamers, as well as for video game companies.
I'd love them to give at least one example of a harmful unintended consequence for gamers. Who will complain that an online game, which they paid for, is left playable in some form rather than not being able to play at all?
Halo Infinite is a pretty good game: The campaign is decent and the multiplayer is fun. Microsoft should have ported ar least the multiplayer part to PS5, it would have given the game a 2nd life.
I don’t believe Kojima is capable of developing both versions simultaneously, they will finish one and hopefully depending on other projects convert to PS.
As far as I know "OD" is built on Unreal Engine 5, so technically a multi-platform release for both Xbox and PlayStation would be possible. Of course it's additional effort to translate to PS5-specific systems (input icons, trophies, stat tracking, etc.), test and have the game licensed on PS5, but it's all doable in time for the launch. So a multi-platform release (including PC) is reasonable to consider, unless Xbox has signed a timed-exclusive deal.
Some games didn't release for PS like Bravely Default remaster, DQ Monsters: The Dark Prince, DQ Treasures, etc. I'm not surprised if SE will released less games on PS but more exclusives for Switch.
Square Enix has released Nintendo and mobile exclusive games for decades. Didn't seem to bother anyone until now that they decided to go multi-platform with their big titles. Personally I would welcome it if they release those games on additional platforms. Games like Octopath Traveler were received well on PlayStation and Xbox. Not sure why they would port a Switch game to PC but not to PlayStation and Xbox.
I don't know. Did recent Sony ads showed Final Fantasy or any words that say "Playstation as the best place to play Final Fantasy"?
An electronics shop in my town had a bunch of Sony TVs at the entrance with the Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth trailer on an endless loop for a few months
Just like Sony/PlayStation profits from having a marketing deal with GTA or like they had with Call of Duty in the past, so can they have an effective marketing with Final Fantasy where the idea is to attract as many people to buy the PlayStation version.
I never say they are war alliances. But that's why i said Sony should stop throwing a lot of money and support for SE. All PS exclusives from SE including big ones like FF XVI and Rebirth didn't give significant impact for PS5 sales. Meanwhile games like Black Myth Wukong not just sold a lot better than all PS exclusives from SE, but it managed to significantly boost PS5 sales. https://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2024/08/21/black-myth-wukong-boosts-ps5-sales/#:~:text=Alibaba Tmall sees %27unusual%27 PS5,with the site since 2014.
It's all business right? Which is more reason for Sony to find better partnership who will give them more $$$$$. Cause right now, SE just doesn't worth the investment anymore.
I don't think Sony is throwing money at Square Enix. There were definitely some terrible exclusivity deals which didn't work out at all in Sony's favor like Foamstars and Babylon's Fall. But in general Sony got the benefits for which they paid for.
When it comes to Final Fantasy and possibly even Forspoken, I think they fulfilled their purpose to get everyone who was undecided to choose a PS5 over an Xbox Series console if they wanted to play Square Enix' next games. Forspoken, Final Fantasy 7 Remake Integrade and Final Fantasy 16 were some of the very first PS5 games shown in 2020 before the launch. I don't think anyone can tell what impact those reveals had on people choosing PS5 but I'm confident that it was pretty significant.
Going forward I see this Square Enix' multi-platform move benefit Sony more, as they now have the "Square Enix fanbase" on the PlayStation platform without the need of paying for exclusivity.
@Questionable_Duck If really that many PC players bought a PS5 just to play Final Fantasy, then I guess we will truly see a "dramatically decline" in the PS5's share of sales.
@TrollOfWar All correct points but nobody is holding a gun to these devs heads and making UE5 compulsory. Death Stranding 2 is a prime example of a studio developing their own engine, doubling down on a single ecosystem and then technically knocking it out of the park. It's too convenient to default to using UE5 this gen; let's see more artistry and individuality in the industry again. Make a profit yes, but prioritise quality first and foremost.
Death Stranding 2 uses the Decima Engine from Guerrilla Games, which was used for the Horizon games. It's an amazing engine, well optimized for consoles. But it also has it's limitations. Not sure if it's an engine which Sony would license to 3rd party studios, from what I can tell it's mostly designed around outdoor open-world games. Unreal Engine 5 is much more versatile for many different genres and it's easier to find developers and designers who are familiar with it.
Death Stranding Director's Cut looks amazing on Xbox and PC, so I expect Death Stranding 2 to play just as well.
@TrollOfWar Maybe SE still release FF or any of their games for PS. But their actions looks clear that they are done with Sony.
To me it's still not clear how Square Enix are "done with Sony". They'll continue releasing games on PlayStation, right? Final Fantasy will continue selling best on PlayStation, correct? Sony might be allowed to advertise the game with "PlayStation being the best place to play Final Fantasy".
And that's why i said Sony should stop treating SE like a special partner and allocate their support / money for other 3rd party devs especially the ones who want to work closely with Sony. SE isn't an important partner for PS anymore.
What is an example of an "important partner* dor Sony? Epic Games (Sony owns 5.4%) despite them releasing their games multiplatform? Fromsoft/Kadokawa (Sony owns 14. 09%) despite Fromsoft releasing most their games multiplatform? Take-Two, despite GTA releasing on PS5 and Xbox?
AMD has a close partnership with Sony and Microsoft. Should Sony stop their partnership with AMD, because Xbox also has AMD components?
These are business partnerships, where these companies hope to benefit financially from each other. This aren't "war alliances". Square Enix and Sony will remain partners, it's just that Square Enix intends to rely less on exclusivity contracts from platform owners.
@TrollOfWar it could result in that for sure, my only worry are the devs continuing to hold back the PS5 even more after finally beginning to release from the shackles of the PS4. Always great to have a game run 60fps but you want it looking half decent too, especially if you just shelled out for a PS5 Pro.
I think what is holding back PS5 and in general this generation are the cost of game development, and the usage of Unreal Engine and image upscaling. Many developers were able to create incredibly looking games on PS4, getting that level of graphics with a steady 60fps would be enough for many players. But having fancy 4K graphics, high quality assets and motion-captured animations is super expensive. And Unreal Engine offers a great middleware for multiplatform games, but it's too performance taxing and many developers don't know how to optimize it.
To some it is just a shallow response - the 'its only on my console / that make me feel special' point of view, which may be wrong but it does affect a lot of people.
I don't want to tell people how they should feel about gaming and their favorite brand, but basically there are 80+ million PS5 owners, so I don't feel like I am anything special. Plus if I enjoy a game, I think that more people should play and enjoy it as well, and the added success will hopefully result in better sequels. It doesn't make me feel better because others cannot play a game.
Xbox players aren't all that different from PlayStation players, I see them all as one console gaming community. So I think everyone should enjoy good games and not be excluded because they bought a different device.
To me 'exclusive' means its likely to be better optimised for the hardware - though given SE's recent track record that really does not apply these days any more sadly.
That might have been the case for PS3 and maybe PS4, but I think ever since the PS5's launch there are definitely more 3rd party games where the optimizations for PS5 weren't the best, despite launching "console exclusive" for a limited time on PS5. Forspoken, FF16, Lost Soul Aside, Silent Hill 2 Remake, Black Myth Wukong, Baldur's Gate 3 (funnily the optimizations for Series S improved the performance for PS5 on this) Quantum Error. Even Helldivers 2, a first party game, has performance issues on PS5.
As long as they don't allow the Switch 2 and Series S releases to botch the PS5 edition in any way I don't see a problem with it, go and make your money Square Enix!
Makes you wonder, if optimizing for Switch 2 and Series S will result in a smoother performance on PS5?
SE already showed their stand that they don't want to work exclusively with Sony anymore. They're done with Sony. So there's no need for Sony to treat SE like they're a special partner. That era already done.
I don't see how stopping console exclusivity means that they are done with Sony. They will continue releasing Final Fantasy on PlayStation in the future, PS5 probably is still the lead development platform. Sony can continue having a marketing deal like they did for Call of Duty before the ABK acquisition or how they do the marketing for GTA. They can continue showing off their new line of TVs with fancy Final Fantasy 7 Remake trailers.
Square Enix will probably continue being a special partner for Sony, but just as Square Enix isn't Sony's only partner (who would have thought that Microsoft is now one of Sony's partners), so can Square Enix have multiple partners.
Our guess is that the PS5’s share of sales will dramatically decline, but the overall numbers will stay roughly similar, although we’re open to being proven wrong.
Why would that be the case? Are there that many people who own a PS5 and other platforms, who would rather play Final Fantasy on anything other than PlayStation? Or what's the reasoning behind this statement?
Personally I think if the sales of FF7 Remake Part 3 decline on PS5, it will be because some people didn't enjoy Final Fantasy 7 Remake and/or Rebirth. But in general the sales numbers could be higher compared to the first 2 parts if it launches on all major platforms including PC and Switch 2. Games usually sell the best during the launch period when there is hype around them.
@themightyant There have been reports that booking sites displayed different prices for hotel bookings based on the devices (laptop, vs. mobile). As you say, these dynamic prices can be abused by corporations, like for example having higher prices on a PS5 Pro as those users are more invested in the ecosystem and are willing to pay more.
I do not believe this is legal in europe so i don't expect it to be on here, ...
There have been some "just for you" discounts on the Xbox store also in Europe. So either Microsoft is breaking the EU law or it's actually legal. In case of the Xbox store such discounts are clearly labeled with a "just for you" tag.
If they stop selling games on Steam and only having them on their launcher it would be an a-hole move for PC players but I can totally see it coming, because that way they’ll be able to keep 100% of the sale (same as the PS Store), collect all the data they want and most importantly, restrict the devices that can install that launcher as a move to keep PS games off the next Xbox.
But why would they want to restrict the PC launcher on the next Xbox, if it will be a Windows PC with an Xbox branding? Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of a having a PC launcher if you restrict on which PCs it runs? Should Sony restrict the launcher on all Windows-based PC gaming handhelds like the Asus ROG Ally, Lenovo Legion Go and MSI claw when they run Windows in the full-screen Xbox mode? They would earn 100% for all 1st party and 30% for all 3rd party games, content and micro-transactions via that store/launcher.
Just an observation here, but it's funny that some users on here always complaning "why do PS keep making articles about Xbox?" obviously for the people who read understand why, but here we have an article purely about Playstation and yet xbox is getting mentioned more often then not...... like I said it's just a funny observation.
It's because people are still stuck in the "PlayStation vs. Xbox console wars" mentality. Whatever the hell Microsoft/Xbox are doing and however the rest of the industry is adapting is at odds with the traditional console business strategies of the past 30 years. Some people don't want to accept any changes. 🙂
Surely this is a response to the next Xbox being able to play steam games, and therefore Sony games? If Sony launch their own PC launcher, and make that the only way to play PS games on PC (no longer releasing on steam) then the next Xbox 'console' players will no longer be able to access PS games via PC stores?
I don't see how Sony could launch a PC store/launcher which they would block on Windows PC's with an Xbox branding, unless they would restrict their PC launcher to Linux OS.
Also, if Sony releases a PC launcher, why should they block it on an Xbox-branded gaming PC? It's a PC, so blocking the access to the launcher would defeat the point of releasing it on PC. Would they block it also on other devices like the Asus Xbox Rog Ally, Lenovo Legion Go and MSI Claw handhelds if they run Windows in the new "Xbox full screen mode"?
Hypothetical question: If Sony could release a storefront on Xbox Series consoles, where they earn 100% from all transactions via that storefront, do you think they would do it or not?
I think it could be used to indicate games which can be cross-bought for PS5 and PS6
. Was there anything like that between PS4 and PS5? As far as I remember all PS4 games worked fine on PS5, but some had an optional $10 upgrade path. If the "cross-buy" label is only for PS5 & PS6, then it seems that the next cross-generation phase will be longer than the last one.
Is PlayStation going multiplatform? A PC store/launcher might be good if Sony doesn't want Steam and Epic Games Store to get 12-30% per sold game, and PC players who buy their games on the PlayStation store would require a PSN account. Such a store might also be available on whatever Microsoft Xbox is creating next.
But of course it would reduce the appeal for PlayStation consoles, as PlayStation games would be available on other devices.
I bet Sony has several business and data analysts who crunched the numbers, to get to a decision.
If the next "Xbox" is a PC and you can buy games from Steam, Epic Games and GOG, then there won't be a point in charging for online play.
Hmm... Going with rumors from previous days about the expected price difference between PS6 and Xbox Next, if you don't have to pay for online then you would even that price difference in 4-5 years.
Maybe Sony could take a lesson from Microsoft and re-release some of those old games like Killzone or Resistance remastered as multi-platfom releases including PC, Switch 2 and Xbox. It worked well for Gears of War: Reloaded. 😏
@daveofduncan Microsoft Gaming CEO Phil Spencer already admitted that they lost the console wars 2 years ago. I am not sure what more you want them to say about it? 😄
It's a predictably unconvincing, empty, nothing answer. This is surely profit/cost motivated - why add more if it de-incentivises further purchases down the road.
The thing is, Halo Infinite's multiplayer was free-to-play, so if a new multiplayer release follows the same approach, it won't be about "incentivising further purchases down the road". The problem Infinite's multiplayer had was the lack of new content after the release. Halo Studios only recently shifted to Unreal Engine 5, they need to create a new multiplayer framework and probably Forge Mode which allows for community created maps and modes. This Halo 1 remake is a quick sure-bet financial profit for the studio.
Back when they did MCC, I was amazed that every single game had it's multiplayer in tact.
For the Halo MCC the developers only had to update the visuals of Halo 2, all the other games basically had the same visual assets. Unfortunately on launch that ambitions multiplayer offer was a disaster and it took several months for the developers to fix all the issues. I guess that's one of the reasons why Halo Studios is now more cautious with their multiplayer releases.
@Rich33 Unfortunately these large corporations make decisions based on data. ABK was very profitable at the time, plus Microsoft/Xbox were looking for live-service games (COD, World of Warcraft, Overwatch, Diablo, Candy Crush Saga) and success in mobile gaming.
It's not much different from Sony/PlayStation's way of thinking that they cand release 12 live service games over the span of 5-6 years with the help of Bungie.
Im referencing the recent info about how much COD, day1 on GP has cost them
That big headline of "COD losing $300m as a result of being on GamePass" isn't quite that simple. Circana analyst Matt Piscatella shared some aspects that last year's COD sold "extremely well" and "the network effect of it on Game Pass resulted in stronger engagement, and perhaps even better sales, on PS5 and PC because of it". So yes, it sold less on Xbox but the game being on GamePass resulted in more engagement (and probably revenue) via all platforms.
@Rich33 That is a good question. It's worth noting, the acquisition started on the tail-end of the COVID pandemic and the gaming industry was still making decisions based on the rapid growth seen during that period. Xbox consoles were sold out everywhere and people were buying games and subscribing to GamePass. At that point a 30% profit margin might have looked reasonable based on the growth seen in 2020 - 2022.
@themightyant I am aware of those facts. My comment was more of sarcastic remark, as this ABK acquisition evovled differently than what most of us excepted.
@OldGamer999 It probably will affect the "quality" of their games. I think they will invest in more safe-bet genres and franchises rather than something new and creative.
Xbox as a division part of a trillionaire company called Microsoft made a really bad decision buying out huge studios and those studios have/had great IPs.
The funny thing is, Xbox wasn't the one who decided to buy Activision-Blizzard-King, it was actually Microsoft. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella and Activision CEO Bobby Kotick were in contact about TikTok, when Satya Nadella proposed the acquisition to Bobby Kotick.
@Lowdefal You are right, it is a long running series. But personally I think the technological innovations of how the 2 recent games are streaming content from the internet are very exciting. It's basically, that marketing slogan "the power of the cloud" now made true for these games.
Without exclusivity (which of course does have its problems too, as you rightly point out), the risk is that gaming becomes bland - with a lot less innovation and creativity as a result.
I would say that AAA exclusives by 1st party studios are often some of the least innovative games, as they are often (with a few exceptions) just safe-bet sequels. In that sense I believe Xbox has actually done a better job with more creative, innovative games (like Sea of Thieves, Flight Simulator, Hi-Fi Rush, Pentiment, Grounded, Minecraft Legends, As Dusk Falls), but the problem is innovation is risky and it doesn't always land well with the audience. I trust indie developers to offer more meaningdul innovation.
They have been saying it for a while, but they it didn't stop them releasing exclusives during that time which makes their words a bit hollow. Not to mention those exclusives where from studios they own, so they could have easily backed up their beliefs if they really felt that way.
I think the reason we've been seeing some exclusivity on Xbox is because they're still in the process of shifting from platform exclusivity to multi-platform releases.
Microsoft (the corporate) doesn't like exclusivity anymore. Ever since Satya Nadella took over the CEO role at Microsoft in 2014, he has emphasized working together with companies and technologies which Microsoft competes with, like Apple, Salesforce, IBM, and even Sony. They embraced Linux and made Microsoft products like Office, Teams, Edge, Azure available for platforms.
Xbox (sub-division of Microsoft) is still stuck in the video game console business and exclusivity used to be what got people into the console ecosystem. So some projects or even 3rd party contracts might be active based on that business strategy.
But after the ABK acquisition, Microsoft took over the control of Xbox and now they are dictating the business strategy for Xbox. It just takes years to shift.
Personally I see no issue with the exclusives, Whilst it would be nice to play everything everywhere, I don't think it would be great for business. Exclusives are a tool to seperate your product from the competition. Would Switch have been as popular if they had released all their titles to the more powerful PS / Xbox day 1? Something tells me it would have hurt sales.
My point of view comes from a consumer's perspective, so I appreciate what is best for the consumer, not the corporations. Exclusive games might help companies to hold their market position, but it also prevents other hardware manufacturers to enter the console market, as they don't have the means to develop their own exclusive games nor the connection and supply by 3rd party publishers. Having more hardware choice would actually be great, especially if that would result in more competitive console prices and innovative hardware, do you agree?
Nintendo Switch was a big success, because it's a portable home console at a reasonable price. Same as the Wii was successful thanks to it's innovative motion controls. The Wii U had many of those highly praised "Nintendo exclusives" which were later ported to the Switch, yet it sold less then the Xbox Series consoles.
I think exclusive hardware or platform features should be driving the gaming hardware business, not exclusive games and content.
Technically console exclusive games aren't needed since PS4 and XB One, as they have basically the same hardware architecture. And with the rising costs of game development, it makes sense to release games on as many platforms as possible.
But I guess some people need their exclusives to justify the viability of buying a certain console or because they like one brand more than the other.
My guess is the PS6 will cost more like $ 700 - $ 900 (without a disc drive). If the PS5 Pro is still $ 700+ and there is no sign of the price going down then I don't see a PS6, with a much more capable hardware, being sold for less, unless Sony is willing to eat up a loss if they go with a lower price (which would only make sense if Xbox were still competing in the console race).
@UltimateOtaku91 Well, it's a portable gaming PC, which isn't locked into an ecosystem, isn't subsidized, can play games from multiple storefronts from the past 40+ years of PC gaming, most of the games being sold for less than what they cost on console digital storefronts and doesn't require a subscription to play online.
I also think the entry price is quite high for a gaming device, but it's technically a fair price given the tech inside.
@Futureshark I believe physical media in general will have a more difficult time if game sizes are growing beyond 150 GB in the future.
The Oblivion Remastered's install size is between 119 and 125 GB on all platforms, so you would require at least 2 ultra HD blu ray discs with a 100 GB capacity. Ultra HD blu ray discs are way more expensive than regular blu ray discs and they also require special covers to accommodate the 2 discs. The game would need 5 standard 25GB blu ray discs or 3 double-layer 50GB blu-ray discs.
The only 2 games released on 2 ultra HD blu ray discs are Horizon Forbidden West: Complete Edition and Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth. I assume in both cases Sony was involved, as they are part of the Blu Ray Disc Association and they are manufacturers of the discs, so they might get different conditions/prices than a third party like Microsoft. Not to mention games, which still need a day 1 patch to work as intended.
The only point for physical media in those cases is for collectors to have "something physical" and the ability to share or trade the games.
No-one can trust a word they say, and the bare minimum to even making people think Xbox is trustworthy as a brand again is immediate firing of Spencer, Booty and Bond as a team, issuing an apology and hiring someone with the respect level of a Shawn Layden who can actually fix the problems, and quickly.
Do you believe it will become better if/when Phil Spencer, Sarah Bond and Matt Booty are removed from Xbox? I expected their removal to result in less communication from the Xbox team in general (though that might end the confusing and contradicting messages).
Ever since Microsoft acquired Activision-Blizzard-King, the corporate executives (Satya Nadella and Amy Hood) took control over the gaming division. Whatever Spencer, Bond and Booty say doesn't matter, when the higher level has different plans.
Comments 465
Re: Round Up: What Was Announced in Sony's State of Play Livestream for November 2025?
Weird how the majority of those games are releasing on all major platforms, but PlayStation still refuses to show all platforms in their trailers. All it takes is to check those trailers on the publisher/developer channels, so it's a minor inconvenience for the viewers and no benefit for PlayStation.
Re: The UK Government Shoots Down 'Stop Killing Games' Campaign in Official Debate
@themightyant
Anthem ain't a terrible game. The combat and level design are quite decent, the flying mechanics are a big highlight. But the story and the mission objectives are generic and forgettable. I spent around 50 hours to unlock 90% of the trophies.
Re: The UK Government Shoots Down 'Stop Killing Games' Campaign in Official Debate
@themightyant @Ainu20
Just wanted to add, that both of your sides are valid.
Taking Anthem as an example (since I played through the game a few months ago). If you bought the Anthem, you literally won't be able to play the game anymore after January 12, 2026. Everyone who paid money for Anthem will be left with nothing (or a non-working physical disc) after the servers are shut down. Despite Anthem being designed as an online live-service game, I can tell from my experience that it's perfectly playable as a single-player game, where you don't need to interact with other players. After January 2026, all I will have are the memories playing the game. And in case of Warzone, maybe there is someone who would like to play alone on a big empty map, role-playing some apocalypse scenario and driving around the deserted town.
But the problem with all these live-service games is that the player accounts with their progress and transactions/spendings are stored online on the servers of the games, not on your local drive. They would have to reengineer the games to store player progress offline including bought micro-transactions, which is probably a big challenge
Also there are games like Sea of Thieves or Microsoft Flight Simulator, where game logic (wave, weather calculations and world events in Sea of Thieves) and game data (locations in MS Flight Sim) are loaded from the servers. Could community members be able to get their own server instances running and what would be the impact of that? Companies would need to expose their proprietary server technologies to the public. Some people running a game server in the community might have bad intentions and could inject malicious code into the servers which then run on the client/player side.
Re: The UK Government Shoots Down 'Stop Killing Games' Campaign in Official Debate
I think the point of the "Stop Killing Games" movement is to have an "end of life" plan for online games from the beginning. When a company like Amazon wants to create the next MMO, they should already have a plan of making a part of the game available for offline play once they choose to shut down the servers for the game. Or at least allow the game's community to run their own servers. I wonder what I will be able to see or do, if Microsoft would decide to shut down Sea of Thieves, a game where I invested 2000+ hours.
This topic is similar to "data privacy", where it's in the consumer's benefit that companies handle user data with care and only collect data for the intended purpose, but it's an inconvenience for the companies. It would be a lot easier for companies to collect all the user data they want and not have to invest in consent managment platforms and not having to dealing with data privacy requests from users.
I'd love them to give at least one example of a harmful unintended consequence for gamers. Who will complain that an online game, which they paid for, is left playable in some form rather than not being able to play at all?
Re: Halo Infinite Is in Fact Finite, Dev Focusing on Campaign Evolved for PS5
Halo Infinite is a pretty good game: The campaign is decent and the multiplayer is fun. Microsoft should have ported ar least the multiplayer part to PS5, it would have given the game a 2nd life.
Re: Talking Point: What Are You Playing This Weekend? - Issue 606
Boogerman: A Pick and Flick Adventure on Evercade
Re: Physint, OD Teams Are Staffing Up for Development of Anticipated Games
@Leinad7
As far as I know "OD" is built on Unreal Engine 5, so technically a multi-platform release for both Xbox and PlayStation would be possible. Of course it's additional effort to translate to PS5-specific systems (input icons, trophies, stat tracking, etc.), test and have the game licensed on PS5, but it's all doable in time for the launch. So a multi-platform release (including PC) is reasonable to consider, unless Xbox has signed a timed-exclusive deal.
Re: Don't Expect Any PS5 Exclusives from Square Enix in the Future
@PuppetMaster
Square Enix has released Nintendo and mobile exclusive games for decades. Didn't seem to bother anyone until now that they decided to go multi-platform with their big titles. Personally I would welcome it if they release those games on additional platforms. Games like Octopath Traveler were received well on PlayStation and Xbox. Not sure why they would port a Switch game to PC but not to PlayStation and Xbox.
An electronics shop in my town had a bunch of Sony TVs at the entrance with the Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth trailer on an endless loop for a few months
Just like Sony/PlayStation profits from having a marketing deal with GTA or like they had with Call of Duty in the past, so can they have an effective marketing with Final Fantasy where the idea is to attract as many people to buy the PlayStation version.
I don't think Sony is throwing money at Square Enix. There were definitely some terrible exclusivity deals which didn't work out at all in Sony's favor like Foamstars and Babylon's Fall. But in general Sony got the benefits for which they paid for.
When it comes to Final Fantasy and possibly even Forspoken, I think they fulfilled their purpose to get everyone who was undecided to choose a PS5 over an Xbox Series console if they wanted to play Square Enix' next games. Forspoken, Final Fantasy 7 Remake Integrade and Final Fantasy 16 were some of the very first PS5 games shown in 2020 before the launch. I don't think anyone can tell what impact those reveals had on people choosing PS5 but I'm confident that it was pretty significant.
Going forward I see this Square Enix' multi-platform move benefit Sony more, as they now have the "Square Enix fanbase" on the PlayStation platform without the need of paying for exclusivity.
Re: Don't Expect Any PS5 Exclusives from Square Enix in the Future
@Questionable_Duck If really that many PC players bought a PS5 just to play Final Fantasy, then I guess we will truly see a "dramatically decline" in the PS5's share of sales.
Re: Physint, OD Teams Are Staffing Up for Development of Anticipated Games
@Czar_Khastik Fingers crossed that it works out for you. 🤞🏼
Re: Don't Expect Any PS5 Exclusives from Square Enix in the Future
@omadeli
Death Stranding 2 uses the Decima Engine from Guerrilla Games, which was used for the Horizon games. It's an amazing engine, well optimized for consoles. But it also has it's limitations. Not sure if it's an engine which Sony would license to 3rd party studios, from what I can tell it's mostly designed around outdoor open-world games. Unreal Engine 5 is much more versatile for many different genres and it's easier to find developers and designers who are familiar with it.
Death Stranding Director's Cut looks amazing on Xbox and PC, so I expect Death Stranding 2 to play just as well.
Re: Don't Expect Any PS5 Exclusives from Square Enix in the Future
@PuppetMaster
To me it's still not clear how Square Enix are "done with Sony". They'll continue releasing games on PlayStation, right? Final Fantasy will continue selling best on PlayStation, correct? Sony might be allowed to advertise the game with "PlayStation being the best place to play Final Fantasy".
What is an example of an "important partner* dor Sony? Epic Games (Sony owns 5.4%) despite them releasing their games multiplatform? Fromsoft/Kadokawa (Sony owns 14. 09%) despite Fromsoft releasing most their games multiplatform? Take-Two, despite GTA releasing on PS5 and Xbox?
AMD has a close partnership with Sony and Microsoft. Should Sony stop their partnership with AMD, because Xbox also has AMD components?
These are business partnerships, where these companies hope to benefit financially from each other. This aren't "war alliances". Square Enix and Sony will remain partners, it's just that Square Enix intends to rely less on exclusivity contracts from platform owners.
Re: Don't Expect Any PS5 Exclusives from Square Enix in the Future
@omadeli
I think what is holding back PS5 and in general this generation are the cost of game development, and the usage of Unreal Engine and image upscaling. Many developers were able to create incredibly looking games on PS4, getting that level of graphics with a steady 60fps would be enough for many players. But having fancy 4K graphics, high quality assets and motion-captured animations is super expensive. And Unreal Engine offers a great middleware for multiplatform games, but it's too performance taxing and many developers don't know how to optimize it.
Re: Don't Expect Any PS5 Exclusives from Square Enix in the Future
@Rich33
I don't want to tell people how they should feel about gaming and their favorite brand, but basically there are 80+ million PS5 owners, so I don't feel like I am anything special. Plus if I enjoy a game, I think that more people should play and enjoy it as well, and the added success will hopefully result in better sequels. It doesn't make me feel better because others cannot play a game.
Xbox players aren't all that different from PlayStation players, I see them all as one console gaming community. So I think everyone should enjoy good games and not be excluded because they bought a different device.
That might have been the case for PS3 and maybe PS4, but I think ever since the PS5's launch there are definitely more 3rd party games where the optimizations for PS5 weren't the best, despite launching "console exclusive" for a limited time on PS5. Forspoken, FF16, Lost Soul Aside, Silent Hill 2 Remake, Black Myth Wukong, Baldur's Gate 3 (funnily the optimizations for Series S improved the performance for PS5 on this) Quantum Error. Even Helldivers 2, a first party game, has performance issues on PS5.
Re: Don't Expect Any PS5 Exclusives from Square Enix in the Future
@omadeli
Makes you wonder, if optimizing for Switch 2 and Series S will result in a smoother performance on PS5?
Re: Don't Expect Any PS5 Exclusives from Square Enix in the Future
@PuppetMaster
I don't see how stopping console exclusivity means that they are done with Sony. They will continue releasing Final Fantasy on PlayStation in the future, PS5 probably is still the lead development platform. Sony can continue having a marketing deal like they did for Call of Duty before the ABK acquisition or how they do the marketing for GTA. They can continue showing off their new line of TVs with fancy Final Fantasy 7 Remake trailers.
Square Enix will probably continue being a special partner for Sony, but just as Square Enix isn't Sony's only partner (who would have thought that Microsoft is now one of Sony's partners), so can Square Enix have multiple partners.
Re: Don't Expect Any PS5 Exclusives from Square Enix in the Future
Why would that be the case? Are there that many people who own a PS5 and other platforms, who would rather play Final Fantasy on anything other than PlayStation? Or what's the reasoning behind this statement?
Personally I think if the sales of FF7 Remake Part 3 decline on PS5, it will be because some people didn't enjoy Final Fantasy 7 Remake and/or Rebirth. But in general the sales numbers could be higher compared to the first 2 parts if it launches on all major platforms including PC and Switch 2. Games usually sell the best during the launch period when there is hype around them.
Re: Some PS5 Owners Might Be Paying More Than Others on PS Store
@themightyant There have been reports that booking sites displayed different prices for hotel bookings based on the devices (laptop, vs. mobile). As you say, these dynamic prices can be abused by corporations, like for example having higher prices on a PS5 Pro as those users are more invested in the ecosystem and are willing to pay more.
Re: Some PS5 Owners Might Be Paying More Than Others on PS Store
@Nem
There have been some "just for you" discounts on the Xbox store also in Europe. So either Microsoft is breaking the EU law or it's actually legal. In case of the Xbox store such discounts are clearly labeled with a "just for you" tag.
Re: Some PS5 Owners Might Be Paying More Than Others on PS Store
"All PlayStation fans are equal, but some fans are more equal than others."
/joking, this is a reference to Animal Farm 😄
Re: Leaked Cross-Buy Icon on PS5 Hints at Mysterious Pro-Consumer Move from Sony
@IOI
But why would they want to restrict the PC launcher on the next Xbox, if it will be a Windows PC with an Xbox branding? Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of a having a PC launcher if you restrict on which PCs it runs? Should Sony restrict the launcher on all Windows-based PC gaming handhelds like the Asus ROG Ally, Lenovo Legion Go and MSI claw when they run Windows in the full-screen Xbox mode? They would earn 100% for all 1st party and 30% for all 3rd party games, content and micro-transactions via that store/launcher.
Re: Leaked Cross-Buy Icon on PS5 Hints at Mysterious Pro-Consumer Move from Sony
@HonestHick It was a rhetorical question. 😉
Re: Leaked Cross-Buy Icon on PS5 Hints at Mysterious Pro-Consumer Move from Sony
@Oram77
It's because people are still stuck in the "PlayStation vs. Xbox console wars" mentality. Whatever the hell Microsoft/Xbox are doing and however the rest of the industry is adapting is at odds with the traditional console business strategies of the past 30 years. Some people don't want to accept any changes. 🙂
Re: Leaked Cross-Buy Icon on PS5 Hints at Mysterious Pro-Consumer Move from Sony
@Dimey
I don't see how Sony could launch a PC store/launcher which they would block on Windows PC's with an Xbox branding, unless they would restrict their PC launcher to Linux OS.
Also, if Sony releases a PC launcher, why should they block it on an Xbox-branded gaming PC? It's a PC, so blocking the access to the launcher would defeat the point of releasing it on PC. Would they block it also on other devices like the Asus Xbox Rog Ally, Lenovo Legion Go and MSI Claw handhelds if they run Windows in the new "Xbox full screen mode"?
Hypothetical question: If Sony could release a storefront on Xbox Series consoles, where they earn 100% from all transactions via that storefront, do you think they would do it or not?
Re: Leaked Cross-Buy Icon on PS5 Hints at Mysterious Pro-Consumer Move from Sony
@Max_the_German
.
Was there anything like that between PS4 and PS5? As far as I remember all PS4 games worked fine on PS5, but some had an optional $10 upgrade path. If the "cross-buy" label is only for PS5 & PS6, then it seems that the next cross-generation phase will be longer than the last one.
Re: Leaked Cross-Buy Icon on PS5 Hints at Mysterious Pro-Consumer Move from Sony
Is PlayStation going multiplatform? A PC store/launcher might be good if Sony doesn't want Steam and Epic Games Store to get 12-30% per sold game, and PC players who buy their games on the PlayStation store would require a PSN account. Such a store might also be available on whatever Microsoft Xbox is creating next.
But of course it would reduce the appeal for PlayStation consoles, as PlayStation games would be available on other devices.
I bet Sony has several business and data analysts who crunched the numbers, to get to a decision.
Re: As PHYSINT Begins Early Development, Hideo Kojima Visits Long-Time Ally Guerrilla Games
Maybe they were discussing how to port further Decima Engine games to Xbox? /joking 😉
Re: PS6 Could Be the Only Next-Gen Console Charging for Online Multiplayer
If the next "Xbox" is a PC and you can buy games from Steam, Epic Games and GOG, then there won't be a point in charging for online play.
Hmm... Going with rumors from previous days about the expected price difference between PS6 and Xbox Next, if you don't have to pay for online then you would even that price difference in 4-5 years.
Re: Random: Fans Can't Believe Halo Is Coming to PS5 Before Killzone
Maybe Sony could take a lesson from Microsoft and re-release some of those old games like Killzone or Resistance remastered as multi-platfom releases including PC, Switch 2 and Xbox. It worked well for Gears of War: Reloaded. 😏
Re: 'Our Biggest Competition Isn't Another Console': Xbox Doubles Down on Multiformat After Halo PS5 Shock
@daveofduncan Microsoft Gaming CEO Phil Spencer already admitted that they lost the console wars 2 years ago. I am not sure what more you want them to say about it? 😄
Link: https://fortune.com/2023/05/05/microsoft-exec-phil-spencer-admits-the-console-war-lost-sony-playstation-nintendo-switch/
Re: Halo PS5 Is Great, But Why Doesn't It Have Competitive Multiplayer?
@AK4tywill
The thing is, Halo Infinite's multiplayer was free-to-play, so if a new multiplayer release follows the same approach, it won't be about "incentivising further purchases down the road". The problem Infinite's multiplayer had was the lack of new content after the release. Halo Studios only recently shifted to Unreal Engine 5, they need to create a new multiplayer framework and probably Forge Mode which allows for community created maps and modes. This Halo 1 remake is a quick sure-bet financial profit for the studio.
For the Halo MCC the developers only had to update the visuals of Halo 2, all the other games basically had the same visual assets. Unfortunately on launch that ambitions multiplayer offer was a disaster and it took several months for the developers to fix all the issues. I guess that's one of the reasons why Halo Studios is now more cautious with their multiplayer releases.
Re: Halo PS5 Is Great, But Why Doesn't It Have Competitive Multiplayer?
Maybe Halo Studios finally releases the Halo Infinite multiplayer mode on PS5. That would be easier than creating a new one.
Re: 'Our Biggest Competition Isn't Another Console': Xbox Doubles Down on Multiformat After Halo PS5 Shock
Microsoft and Activision actually considered buying TikTok together, before they starting thinking about the ABK acquisition.
Re: This Is Why Xbox Is Bringing All of Its Games to PS5 Now
@Rich33 Unfortunately these large corporations make decisions based on data. ABK was very profitable at the time, plus Microsoft/Xbox were looking for live-service games (COD, World of Warcraft, Overwatch, Diablo, Candy Crush Saga) and success in mobile gaming.
It's not much different from Sony/PlayStation's way of thinking that they cand release 12 live service games over the span of 5-6 years with the help of Bungie.
That big headline of "COD losing $300m as a result of being on GamePass" isn't quite that simple. Circana analyst Matt Piscatella shared some aspects that last year's COD sold "extremely well" and "the network effect of it on Game Pass resulted in stronger engagement, and perhaps even better sales, on PS5 and PC because of it". So yes, it sold less on Xbox but the game being on GamePass resulted in more engagement (and probably revenue) via all platforms.
Link: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:bhqrrxt7yyfpwguioa7rwa7x/post/3m2elnk7eak26
Re: This Is Why Xbox Is Bringing All of Its Games to PS5 Now
@Rich33 That is a good question. It's worth noting, the acquisition started on the tail-end of the COVID pandemic and the gaming industry was still making decisions based on the rapid growth seen during that period. Xbox consoles were sold out everywhere and people were buying games and subscribing to GamePass. At that point a 30% profit margin might have looked reasonable based on the growth seen in 2020 - 2022.
Re: This Is Why Xbox Is Bringing All of Its Games to PS5 Now
@themightyant I am aware of those facts. My comment was more of sarcastic remark, as this ABK acquisition evovled differently than what most of us excepted.
Re: This Is Why Xbox Is Bringing All of Its Games to PS5 Now
@OldGamer999 It probably will affect the "quality" of their games. I think they will invest in more safe-bet genres and franchises rather than something new and creative.
Re: This Is Why Xbox Is Bringing All of Its Games to PS5 Now
@HaveTheSauce
The funny thing is, Xbox wasn't the one who decided to buy Activision-Blizzard-King, it was actually Microsoft. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella and Activision CEO Bobby Kotick were in contact about TikTok, when Satya Nadella proposed the acquisition to Bobby Kotick.
Re: This Is Why Xbox Is Bringing All of Its Games to PS5 Now
So many people on this site were against the ABK acquisition. See? It turned out for the better for PlayStation players. 😁
Re: Xbox Boss Believes Sony's Strategy of Console Exclusives Is 'Antiquated'
@Lowdefal You are right, it is a long running series. But personally I think the technological innovations of how the 2 recent games are streaming content from the internet are very exciting. It's basically, that marketing slogan "the power of the cloud" now made true for these games.
Re: Xbox Boss Believes Sony's Strategy of Console Exclusives Is 'Antiquated'
@add286
The funny thing is, the PS5 generation has the lowest number of true PS5 exclusive games, yet financially it's one of the most successful ones.
Re: Xbox Boss Believes Sony's Strategy of Console Exclusives Is 'Antiquated'
@add286
I would say that AAA exclusives by 1st party studios are often some of the least innovative games, as they are often (with a few exceptions) just safe-bet sequels. In that sense I believe Xbox has actually done a better job with more creative, innovative games (like Sea of Thieves, Flight Simulator, Hi-Fi Rush, Pentiment, Grounded, Minecraft Legends, As Dusk Falls), but the problem is innovation is risky and it doesn't always land well with the audience. I trust indie developers to offer more meaningdul innovation.
Re: Xbox Boss Believes Sony's Strategy of Console Exclusives Is 'Antiquated'
@ilyn
I think the reason we've been seeing some exclusivity on Xbox is because they're still in the process of shifting from platform exclusivity to multi-platform releases.
Microsoft (the corporate) doesn't like exclusivity anymore. Ever since Satya Nadella took over the CEO role at Microsoft in 2014, he has emphasized working together with companies and technologies which Microsoft competes with, like Apple, Salesforce, IBM, and even Sony. They embraced Linux and made Microsoft products like Office, Teams, Edge, Azure available for platforms.
Xbox (sub-division of Microsoft) is still stuck in the video game console business and exclusivity used to be what got people into the console ecosystem. So some projects or even 3rd party contracts might be active based on that business strategy.
But after the ABK acquisition, Microsoft took over the control of Xbox and now they are dictating the business strategy for Xbox. It just takes years to shift.
My point of view comes from a consumer's perspective, so I appreciate what is best for the consumer, not the corporations. Exclusive games might help companies to hold their market position, but it also prevents other hardware manufacturers to enter the console market, as they don't have the means to develop their own exclusive games nor the connection and supply by 3rd party publishers. Having more hardware choice would actually be great, especially if that would result in more competitive console prices and innovative hardware, do you agree?
Nintendo Switch was a big success, because it's a portable home console at a reasonable price. Same as the Wii was successful thanks to it's innovative motion controls. The Wii U had many of those highly praised "Nintendo exclusives" which were later ported to the Switch, yet it sold less then the Xbox Series consoles.
I think exclusive hardware or platform features should be driving the gaming hardware business, not exclusive games and content.
Re: Xbox Boss Believes Sony's Strategy of Console Exclusives Is 'Antiquated'
Technically console exclusive games aren't needed since PS4 and XB One, as they have basically the same hardware architecture. And with the rising costs of game development, it makes sense to release games on as many platforms as possible.
But I guess some people need their exclusives to justify the viability of buying a certain console or because they like one brand more than the other.
Re: Xbox Boss Believes Sony's Strategy of Console Exclusives Is 'Antiquated'
@Northern_munkey
Microsoft has been saying for the past couple of years that they don't like platform exclusive games. Link: https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/28/23777585/microsoft-ceo-satya-nadella-console-exclusives-sony-xbox-competition
Re: PS6 Could Be Less Than Half the Price of Microsoft's 'Very Premium' Next-Gen Xbox
My guess is the PS6 will cost more like $ 700 - $ 900 (without a disc drive). If the PS5 Pro is still $ 700+ and there is no sign of the price going down then I don't see a PS6, with a much more capable hardware, being sold for less, unless Sony is willing to eat up a loss if they go with a lower price (which would only make sense if Xbox were still competing in the console race).
Re: Here's How Marvel's Spider-Man 2 Holds Up on the $1,000 ROG Xbox Ally X
@UltimateOtaku91 Well, it's a portable gaming PC, which isn't locked into an ecosystem, isn't subsidized, can play games from multiple storefronts from the past 40+ years of PC gaming, most of the games being sold for less than what they cost on console digital storefronts and doesn't require a subscription to play online.
I also think the entry price is quite high for a gaming device, but it's technically a fair price given the tech inside.
Re: Confirmed: Oblivion Remastered's PS5 Physical Edition Requires 'Additional Download' to Actually Play
@sanderson72 But you can also download delisted games on PlayStation if you bought them digitally on the PSN Store prior to them being delisted.
Re: Confirmed: Oblivion Remastered's PS5 Physical Edition Requires 'Additional Download' to Actually Play
@Futureshark I believe physical media in general will have a more difficult time if game sizes are growing beyond 150 GB in the future.
The Oblivion Remastered's install size is between 119 and 125 GB on all platforms, so you would require at least 2 ultra HD blu ray discs with a 100 GB capacity. Ultra HD blu ray discs are way more expensive than regular blu ray discs and they also require special covers to accommodate the 2 discs. The game would need 5 standard 25GB blu ray discs or 3 double-layer 50GB blu-ray discs.
The only 2 games released on 2 ultra HD blu ray discs are Horizon Forbidden West: Complete Edition and Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth. I assume in both cases Sony was involved, as they are part of the Blu Ray Disc Association and they are manufacturers of the discs, so they might get different conditions/prices than a third party like Microsoft. Not to mention games, which still need a day 1 patch to work as intended.
The only point for physical media in those cases is for collectors to have "something physical" and the ability to share or trade the games.
Re: PS6 May Go Uncontested as Rumours of Next-Gen Xbox Cancellation Force Microsoft to Comment
@zekepliskin
Do you believe it will become better if/when Phil Spencer, Sarah Bond and Matt Booty are removed from Xbox? I expected their removal to result in less communication from the Xbox team in general (though that might end the confusing and contradicting messages).
Ever since Microsoft acquired Activision-Blizzard-King, the corporate executives (Satya Nadella and Amy Hood) took control over the gaming division. Whatever Spencer, Bond and Booty say doesn't matter, when the higher level has different plans.