@Neonix 😂 I don’t know man. They evidently do not care because they like other stuff: sorry, people like different things and I’m just giving you the evidence as it is.
lol and as I already said: free to play (excluded from PS plus) does exist on PS5 (war zone, Fortnite, genshin, apex all allow it). Like it’s all quite similar when you get down to it. But yeah, just chill. Bigger things in the world.
Wow, hang on there. Before you start…with the wall of text and lack of full stops. 8gb VRAM is a problem for the steam machine in that it limits what it can do out of the box. Leaning into upscaling incurs costs in performance elsewhere. It has got modern architecture - and it will be fine. But being a little slower than the £350 PS5 (out in 2020) does limit its potential a little. DF are saying the following:
‘The decision to opt for 8GB of GDDR6 memory has been proven to be a limiting factor on many modern mainstream triple-A games and falls short of the maximum VRAM pools and memory bandwidth available on both Xbox Series X and base PS5. To accommodate 8GB on affected games, paring back settings (particularly texture quality) and steering clear of ray tracing is frequently required’
This was done for affordability - I’m sure Valve would have preferred more VRAM if they could have got away with it. And it represents an issue when future technology moves past it (up scaling will help a bit but all kit is going to have that soon). The lack of upgrade-ability is an issue too.
they have got better but still far from the consoles in terms of pickup and play. The steamdeck absolutely requires some messing about (it’s a constant question about what it can run sometimes) than my Switch or PS5 - not a bad thing: a lot of PC players love that freedom. Again, please understand there are preferences in consumer choice. Not a right or wrong or one the better than the other.
There is a real difference with verification and what happens on console. You do not get as many messy ports as you do on PC because the hardware being consistent allows devs to make games suited to the platform. It has got better on PC, but I wouldn’t say it is comparable at all.
lol I don’t know where to start with this one. Isn’t that up to the player? Like if they like physical games: evidently, consoles may be a better choice for them. It’s also about blu-rays, and the multimedia functionality of the PS5/Series X. And if players want cheaper prices on Steam: this may be a good option - but it’s not the only cheap option going in gaming. Physical/PS plus are good options too. Remember Free to play can also be excluded from PS Plus too.
And like: how is gamepass going to work on the steam machine for third parties (such a weird argument: gamepass evidently is about Microsoft first party). The Steam machine will be run on Steam OS, not windows, sorry, but what are you on about? You would have to install windows to get it running - which undermines what the Steam Machine is all about. Also, good luck trying to get casual audiences to do that…remember consoles work out the box. The prices overall are pretty comparable - PS plus gives players tons, and the PS store isn’t miles away from Steam really. And remember, the PS5 is currently £350 in Black Friday deals at the moment and the Switch 2 is £395. If this thing comes in above £700, it won’t be taken seriously by those audiences. — But just to say: But I really like the sound of the Steam Machine in some aspects; it’s got interesting things to offer and many will be happy with it. My problem here is how this guy is proclaiming other forms of gaming as insignificant / somehow lesser. PC master race weirdness narratives are similar to previous console war nonsense. We have just started to move away from that, it would be great if the fans could too.
@neonix But many do not use PS Plus - those features are an extra dependent on the player choices. And again: cloud saves etc again may not matter for that market as it does for others. You can state all sorts about base features in a comparison (eg physical discs represent a super cheap way to game so does that make Steam Machine less valuable because it does not have that as a feature?), but the broader context of what is actually happening in terms of the numbers tell us more, especially if you want to make a meaningful comparison in terms of cost. Also, Don’t forget Ps plus actually gives you games - it’s not just about cloud saves etc. The base tier can give extremely high quality games for small cost such as Alan Wake 2 recently. People dip in and out. If anything, it makes the argument why console gaming works better for that market. In the PC space, they value other stuff eg free online etc.
@Neonix you don’t have to be part of psn? Like ps plus numbers are like 45-50 million or so out of 130millon users overall. Most players aren’t on it: so it’s a strange comparison to make in terms of value. The PS store is also cheap as chips too - and the ability to grab discs, PS plus etc - like it’s all quite comparable really. And there are free to play games available on console ecosystems as well.
As for the other points: that just different markets. Of course you get more freedom to change settings, mods with this thing (and PC gaming) but there are evidently a ton of gamers out there that value other things such as convenience and workability. And in the living room space - those things may carry more of a premium. And the slightly lacking specs here will mean people are going to have to play around with settings game to game with the steam machine too. It’s odd really I’m not sure who they are aiming this at yet, but it may do better with PC gamers in offices/second bedroom: I suspect that is the real audience - and it will be great for that. But it’s probably not what console players want or value, in the living room.
I think at £600, it will have an audience. There will be PC players out there that want a nice option for the TV (and that is who this is aimed at). People forget how much PC players are willing to spend on hardware. It’s not quite got the GPU specs right - and it’s not particularly future proof. If rumours are true: Microsoft may launch their new hardware 2026, and then PS6 in 2027 - and the PS5 just shades it, right now. So we’ll be seeing a lot of comparisons. Who is this for, I guess? PC players like the option to upgrade and buy hardware for the future.
Does Sony or Nintendo have to worry? I’m not sure but I suspect not as it won’t impact the console side of it - they are different markets, after all. And competing with the consoles for the living room is tough - ask Microsoft. It’s their technical knowledge in getting costs of hardware down over the generation, their marketing, and deep relationships with key players throughout the industry. When Steam deck was priced £350, Valve admitted they were losing money on it - I cant see them doing that again. Also the Steamdeck has sold what, 4million? It has done okay for the market it is in: but the Switch 2 did that in its first two weeks. Different products/markets but if Valve are moving into console spaces, people will start making the comparisons. And the real killer: Black Friday deals with the PS5 right now are around £350 - whatever this thing is priced at: it won’t be as cheap as that. And will the steam machine even be in stores? Again this is what the console market does so well.
I can’t help but think: in the living room, the expectations are about convenience - it is why PC doesn’t really engage with that traditionally? It’s family oriented market as well: like I don’t want my kids going through Steam forums/reviews. Nintendo and Sony know what that audience want: I’m not sure Valve does.
@Striker21 wow, that’s a lot of words and honestly, just a lot of guesswork on your end about how Microsoft Xbox finances work (and none us know that really…), and what the Rogg Ally is there to do…like none of us know that. I would say the Rogg Ally is an attempt to see if they test out the concept of pc/console hybrid, with Windows (although I’m not sure if it’s quite successful at that: I think the next gen system needs to support Xbox games to some extent too). The PC handheld market is tiny - they may sell a few but considering the Steamdeck has only sold 4 million - I can’t see it being much more than that.
And you miss the central point: the Xbox store probably does have a lot of sales in it as well - even now. I don’t quite understand your points but to explain: Microsoft will not get money from third party if those games are not bought on their storefront (so Valve will benefit from those sales and microtransactions as well). They do want games bought on whatever Xbox storefront have next gen. Looking roughly at the Xbox numbers (24b in revenue…). I would hazard a guess they make more money from their stores than GPU or hardware. Also, a lot of third party is not on gamepass (nor will it ever be - as they have big audiences already). So no, gamepass is its own thing but it just is not big enough for third party triple AAA to put their games on it (which is why they don’t until later - they want to sell games first). And the most successful companies in this industry: guess what they all have - massive storefronts (Valve, Nintendo and Sony). Microsoft would be mad to do what you suggest (which is why they never would) - gamepass has 5b in revenue (although god knows what the margin is), but that is very small fry to what Sony make from selling games in terms of revenue (game sales, microtransactions and add ons etc too - 17/18b. Likely a similar story with Valve too, but as a private company, I don’t know their figures).
Look, my friend, you have spent all day on here and you could played some brilliant games instead. Accept others see it differently, it’s cool. I am not going to respond so just save it please and spend some of that energy on something else, for your own good buddy! Life is far too short. Have a good one.
@LogicStrikesAgain yeah, it’s also ridiculous when we consider how important third party’s see PlayStation - even Microsoft themselves now rely on PlayStation to sell/prop up their own games. I was just watching TV - Battlefield 6 is being advertised on PlayStation - the only way such a hypothetical could come true is Sony somehow becoming an entirely different company to what they have been in the past 30 odd years. Looking at how much Sony made from game sales, microtransactions, DLC etc last year (think it was 17 or 18billion in revenue), I imagine it may be the most lucrative storefront in gaming - and probably the biggest reason why Sony’s gaming revenue sits at 31.9 billion (substantially more than Tencent or Microsoft or Nintendo respective gaming revenue streams). So yeah lol it’s more that third party’s will be desperate to be work with Sony (and Valve and Nintendo), rather than not. Notwithstanding, also console gaming will remains popular, giving Sony and Nintendo substantial market share as it is.
The larger issue for Xbox as they merge into the PC space is that their own consumers are now going to have the choice to game with Xbox/MS or with Steam - like if they go down this route, the Xbox storefront (which still recoups good money) is going to be in direct competition with Steam…So that extra 30% cut on the gaming side may not be going to Microsoft at all - Valve will get it (even if bought on a MS device). They are not going to win that one…Valve are too embedded. You can see the mistakes happening all over again. Xbox try stuff without really considering the implications of it.
@LogicStrikesAgain this is completely spot on, it’s about the third party relationships that Sony have cultivated, making the PlayStation the place to be for everyone - the exclusives are there to market and sell hardware. It’s literally been the same way since the 90’s. It is handy to have great selling exclusives but most of all - Sony want to be the place where all the gaming happens. So they aim to be global, expansive, building new relationships with new dev communities (China and South Korea, right now) - and that’s why the market so much (Microsoft have never seemed to get that). So in that context, the exclusives are not just about sales for Sony.
And I can’t see it changing - if Microsoft come out with a boutique, high end product - it will price out the casual market who will look to game on PlayStation and Nintendo. And 80% of people bought Call of Duty on PlayStation last year - it feels we are locked in - which is probably why Microsoft are looking to do something different with PC.
@Lowdefal yes, but compared to Nintendo - Sony didn't have a lot - they relied a lot more on Bandi Namco, Konami etc. They published a lot for others but were very different to modern day Sony. And Psygnosis had some independence too e.g. Wipeout 64.
@SMJ not to jump in - but I think tis the general point that Xbox have had a continuous struggles for profit (whereas Sony have had one generation where things went bad), and being part of Microsoft has always saved them in the end (they have not had one flawless generation really - maybe the 360 era but ring of death/low profit).
This has always been the problem, Microsoft position Xbox to take risks with emerging technologies (so they can make big profit/massive market share), only to find they misunderstood what was actually happening (e.g. Xbox/360 - got it very right with online play; Xbox One, didn't get it right with multimedia tech/Kinect at all - tried to do what Nintendo do but couldn't; gamepass: jumped on the netflix model without fully understanding that Netflix have a very different model that doesn't translate to gaming as easily. Netflix don't go buy the TV equivalent of Call of Duty...). Now its the PC/console hybrid - all starts again...
Sony can't afford to take those type of risks at all, they are risk averse because profit it a significant part of their objectives (which is why they would never do GPU, or anything like that_. which is probably the point here: Microsoft have allowed Xbox to be more relaxed about profit as they try new things, until now., that is.
...and Sony have always made profit from gaming historically - like they are not equivalent to Xbox in that sense at all...
@TrollOfWar yeah this is my point, the exclusives don't matter as much as people think they do. 80/20 split I think to third party over first party in terms of PSN sales. They will literally move their games out of the way for GTA6.
Man, people who here in the 90s, we understand that because Sony didn't own any studios - it was all third party. Microsoft learnt the wrong lessons when they bought everything - Sony don't want to own 50+ studios, too much risk and development money. They want others to take on that risk but be the place where the games are sold so they can take a 30% cut.
@TrollOfWar I don't buy the notion that innovation lies in any one part of the industry, to be honest. Like the whole modern Nintendo catalogue is arguably as creative/innovative as many of the games you mentioned there - and you would count many of those as triple AAA. Also Astro Bot/Returnal are super creative games too - as much as/if not more than the games you mention here - and they are uniquely creative because of the hardware they were created for. Like I say: games (whether indie or triple AAA) that are designed for specific platforms and hardware can open up new possibilities because of that exclusivity. Its not just about innovation/creativity either, Naughty Dog's ability to rinse the power out of the PS3/PS4, really helped make their games look so good back in the day.
And you make an interesting point about indies - but more than anything, I think it slightly backs up my argument. Audiences are not the same across platforms - its not just one homogenous group. The Switch/Steam is now the place for indie titles - and I would argue that is because of the hardware/audiences preferences there. Indies suit a smaller form factor (e.g. Hades 2 gets an exclusive deal on the S2 because the publisher understands this is a core audience for this type of game); on the steam side, audiences/players are open to more experimental titles and there is a higher discoverability than on console (also, many of those indies don't even make it too console).
And historically, exclusivity - literally which platform could get the best arcade game - is how this industry developed. I think there is some fragmentation there but we need to be a little careful what we wish for too.
@MrStark oh god, what are you on about? I am talking about models in gaming where Sony (when it comes to gaming), have a model of revenue growth far larger than anyone else - based on the exclusive strategy you are saying will be or is now insignificant, based on no evidence - and you seem to losing it when someone presents you with some. I could not care less about which is bigger - I am making the point that there are different approaches in gaming to make money - exclusivity is evidently one such way.
As for what will happen in the future - I don't know, its beyond the scope of this discussion. But, please, for your own good, do some research Xbox and finances - they've always struggled to make money from gaming - (Xbox literally lost 4billion, and the 360 just got into profit at the end. Sony and Nintendo nearly always make profit from gaming - they have to otherwise they wouldnt have made it - they are not big tech companies. (PS1:3 billion and PS2: 2 billion. PS3 -1billion: PS4: 9 billion and PS5: over 10 billion already). Xbox has lived a charmed life in many ways, and Microsoft have evidently decided that needs to end, which is good because it might finally force more sensible planning over at Xbox.
@MrStark haha just look at the money mate...if you can't do that - I think it is you who refuse to see the reality of it. They are raising prices for profit and tariffs (as they all are) - but like you do realise Sony make more money than everyone else, right? i don't know the future (nor do you). We'll see - but we can say at the moment, their model is working, they will likely stick with it whilst it makes them more money than anyone else. 2023-24 revenue:
Sony: 32b Tencent: 27b Microsoft: 24b (and that includes surface laptops etc)
@TrollOfWar It is an interesting one - some exclusives do exist because they are made for particular systems with propriety technology as well. Yes, we are living in era now where most things can just be played on anything else but when a game is made for a particular device: there can be some amazing results. Think BOTW for the Switch (gameplay that made to suit a handheld and console play), games that exploited the emotion chip in the PS2 era, the memory provided by switching to CDs back in the PS1 (e.g. FF7), in the modern context: games take advantage of the Dual Sense or SSD such as Returnal or Astro Bot (with specific gameplay features that are inspired by unique hardware features). And remember, there are differences between consoles (even if it doesn't seem like it), Balders Gate 3 just couldn't work with the Series S initially.
Not withstanding that exclusives can exist to to fill gaps in markets that third parties would not take the risk on (e.g. PS1 era games like Pappa the Rapper, Viz Ribbon etc). A lot of Nintendo's innovation is arguably a result of their focus on exclusivity too: they are prepared to take risks because that makes their games stand out.
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.
@MrStark Playstation are doing lots of things - it is not just as simple as you are making out. In the real world, where Sony took 32 billion in revenue last year from their existing strategy of exclusive software and focusing on hardware, exclusivity is evidently a huge part of the model. Some PlayStation exclusives (by no means all) are going to PC one/two/three years or afterwards, and that's fine - it is a nice balance in terms of production capacity, long-term franchise engagement and protecting hardware sales. They are not following Microsoft into day and date PC releases at all, for the reasons I've already said. Hardware and the eco-system is where their money is made - that gets to its numbers through exclusive software - 18billion in revenue from gamesales last year; and most of that is from the PS store (and even the PC releases are dropping off in terms of sales bar Helldivers 2). It is a fine balance and the challenge will be retaining it all in future - but in the here and now, it is evidently working.
@MrStark not just about the sales though - Playstation and Nintendo are aiming to sell consoles/ecosystems too - the exclusives are also about that too. There is a lot more value in having a 100million console owners who all buys their games on your ecosystem than a few big selling games.
People don't really understand that how sophisticated Sony's model is: the exclusives are there to draw people into the eco-system, so people buy all their games there (and they take a 30% cut on everything). The exclusives become ways to show off the hardware. Returnal is an example, it didn't sell a lot (but did well enough for a small team) but it helped sell a lot of PS5's at launch, due to marketing specific features of the hardware.
The problem with Sarah Bond's narrative here is that - multiplatform releases have always sold more (barring Nintendo's largest franchises such as Zelda and Mario etc who really focus on first party releases). You could make the antiquated argument 15 years ago, if you wanted.
Sony's strategy is about third party releases, a gaint eco-system to sell everyone else's games on, first party releases that fill gaps and market/brand and ultimately sell the hardware (and of course, grow the eco-system as a result). Sony's model has never just been about first party games at all - most of their money is made from being there for third party, and selling games for others. This is why they are where they are historically. Microsoft have got way too insular. That is the reason Sony took £32billion in revenue from gaming last year - and no one else got near that amount.
Awesome. I already own these so have been able to claim straight away.
And like: I do not need trophies to enjoy the original Resi games - some of the most important games ever made. Still brilliant examples of survival horror even now. The rewind/save features are much more important in that it just makes the whole experience of visiting these old games way more enjoyable.
I think the first party thing…I don’t know how many of you have been playing games on PlayStation since the 90s but as someone who has…
They don’t always emphasise first party historically. That’s not a constant. PS4 era, they really went for that but before…it’s very much about third party releases. Their aim is to be the platform for everything in gaming so that is why first party is not always the emphasis in SoP. If you are expecting Sony to match Microsoft or Nintendo in that way, it’s not going to work like that. First party is there to sell the consoles and ecosystem, as much as games.
And guess what, it has totally worked, hence PS5 sales increasing the way they have.
@Nowings I’ve not played DD2 so I can’t really say. But as always - like if user scores are consistently not mentioning an issue with a game, and rewarding high scores in terms of their overall experience, I’d like to think gaming journalists would have some indication on the reception of a given game? But subjectivity is always a thing sadly. It’s getting harder to find journalism that does it like it used to in the magazine days.
It’s going to be at least top five if you asked the site generally (if not top 3). A bit saddened by how this game has been treated/written up about in recent months. A lot of the small justifiable criticisms have been built up to be much larger than they are, if I’m honest.
It may have too much going on at times and there are some minor issues in performance (that is quite honestly fine - metacritic user scores hardly mention it and it currently sits on 8.9). I don’t think any other game this year comes close variety and quality in terms of gameplay, combat, art direction and music. It’s a miraculous release in many ways. Shame, it hasn’t been celebrated the way it perhaps should have.
I think - and I'm sure others will disagree here - I do wonder if Rebirth may have done better if it had been released on the PS4 in particular. I'm not sure if Rebirth could even work on that format - I imagine it would require a lot of re-working and compromise. However, as Remake was already on PS4, I suspect they missed out on many, many sales from people who would have enjoyed continuing the story on a platform that remains very popular to this day. Other platforms would have helped too, of course, but that was the one I think they really missed out on.
I think a multiplatform strategy is a good call for Square Enix in future - it will help (and FF7 is a classic, should be enjoyed by all). Yet, I also think the real problem is the episodic nature of the FF7 remake series - it is an odd approach, if I'm honest. Like who is going to jump into the second game if they had not picked up the first? In a game exclusively on the PS5? You can just see the potential market getting smaller and smaller. Two games across PS4 and PS5 would have been fine.
Rebirth remains a delight - truly something special and still GOTY in my view (although I have not played Astro yet). It is amazing and games this size and technical excellence don't come along all that often (and may not in the future the way costs are rising). Yet, even as good as it is - it is a classic example of development 'creep' too - there are things that could probably be cut that would have saved money (and helped pacing in the game itself).
Rebirth is some game, and I can’t see much topping it. Astro, perhaps? Still can’t believe Push gave it an 8 - it seemed GOTY material from the first 5 hours of playing it…
“I want to give you the choice on how you play your games, and who you play with, and not try to do slimy platform things to force you to do what I want you to do,”
…how does that remotely square up with spending the best part of a £100 billion, and making a lot of those games exclusive to Xbox platforms? Things are changing now but mainly because Xbox have done so poorly - forcing multiplatform releases.
Not excusing nonsense from Sony in the past - but when whole publishers have been bought, I’m not sure Phil should be making such comments.
I don’t think Showcases matter as much people assume, if I’m honest. Casual audiences, for starters, (who are like the ones everyone wants) aren’t really paying attention to this stuff. And also, I’d say Xbox have had better lshowcases than Sony for the past 3 or 4 years (mainly because they show games as far as two years away and Sony have a clear year out at least policy - even 3 or 6 months for some games). And what difference has it made? The net result is that expectations and delivery is managed better on PlayStation - whereas for all the decent Xbox showcase showings - their games get delayed or are years away too often. Redfall and Forza motorsport all once looked great.
Execution is where Xbox fall down, and that is where Sony excel.
@UnlimitedSevens yeah man. Great points, and agree to some extent. Completely see why you may think like that.
I think for me: financial stuff does matter a bit (like the profit from both the PS1 and PS2 was wiped out by the PS3 losses). It’s quite odd, but Sony didn’t really start make decent profit until the PS4 - so, as much as I would love a return to an older industry (I’m a PS1 player mainly today as well - currently playing GT2 😊), I can see why Sony have shifted a bit. My frustration is about lay offs (considering Sony have made 2.5b in profit each year since 2020). But, the ultimate point is: the financials dictate what is possible for Sony to do (whether we like it or not).
I think that lists is interesting - because Factions should be there too. You are absolute right: it is weaker than maybe we would expect but we also have to concede that the early years were also far stronger than normal - just think about the early years this gen: we had Demon Souls, Returnal, Ratchet, HFW, GT7, SM2, God of War: R FF16 and FF7 Rebirth - like for the first 3 years, that is ridiculous. So practically, there is going to be a lull as those big games, just take years now (and people should not crunch, we know better now). Maybe they could have remastered Killzone or something? Farm an IP to a second party dev - I like the idea but I suspect it won’t make too much money. And the simple issue is exactly what you describe, the market is already providing so much (there are so many great games), this means that Sony does not need to push it - they can just be the platform it all gets put on, where people buy it (see Valve too).
And it’s weird, but that’s how Sony did play it PS1 and PS2, they did publish great games but so much of their success is about building a platform for third party etc. live service communities in the modern context as well.
I’m optimistic too about all of it - and the communication issues of Sony is probably a result of febrile media environment that creates mountains out of molehills and silliness. Sadly, era we are in.
To be honest, best of luck to them. Some of the negativity Sony are getting is a little over the top on here if I’m honest. And my advice, would be ignore the noise a little. We have 8 first party exclusives* in 2024 (or partner exclusives and others released on Steam):
Helldivers 2
FF7 Rebirth
Rise of the Ronin
Stellar Blade
Concorde
Until Dawn (remaster)
Astro Bot
Silent Hill 2 (remake)
For a ‘quiet’ year, that’s super impressive and I am excited about many of these. Both Rebirth and Astrobot could be GOTY contenders (and a lot of these feel very spiritually at home on PlayStation as well - SH and FF7 have super strong association with the brand; Astro Bot is a celebration of PlayStation and feels like a modern day Ape Escape; Steller Blade has mad PS2 energy and Rise of the Ronin feels very at home too - big open world, third person action game. Helldivers 2 honestly feels inspired by SOCOM in a strange way to me).
A lot of these are also from smaller, double AA teams as well. PlayStation are making some healthy profit (which has not historically always been the case) and the larger games are coming - dev cycles can be 5-10 years now (Helldivers 2 - double AA dev etc. 8 years to make). Hardware is excellent as well - Portal and the consoles are selling well. It’s all fine really - they are doing what they always do.
*Edit: not to mention Pacific Drive (not an exclusive, also on Steam or Epic) but actually one of the most original games I have ever played on my PS5 this gen.
lol built the brand - those here in 1994 and the early 2000s say hi
But actually: that was a decent state of play - I liked Astro, Behemoth, Where Winds Meet, Dynasty Warriors and SH 2 are genuinely old school PlayStation games in spirit and looked decent. Concords gameplay looked good - and there are audiences out there who love that stuff.
Yes, I want more but it was decent all things considered.
@DaniPooo think the point is this article is cynically going for the console war types though? Engagement and clicks, in it? If PureXbox reviewed (fake) reviewed PlayStation stuff and lamented it wasn’t available - you would get the same reaction. A better piece might have asked: what are the chances this comes to PS5, or explored how Sony can learn from it? Or added context: 81 on metacritic, only 3k players on steam at the moment (it’s like 200 in the steam charts). Or how it is also evidently inspired by PlayStation exclusives and their technical impact, but kinda misses what makes those games solid: gameplay.
But there is a sad truth here like many Xbox games, HB2 would find a stronger audience if released on PlayStation and it would maybe give the devs a chance to survive.
I am sure the game is decent but 81 on metacritic doesn’t scream people are missing out too much - I think angle for an article like this should be about the sadness in that Microsoft haven’t allowed games like HB2 go multi-platform - considering the original game out on PS4 - that would make sense editorially. But to do a kinda review of a game this audience cannot play (and to say it’s great) is kinda odd? lol do xbox or Nintendo sites review Last of Us? Of course not, it is just not relevant to that audience.
Weird - and I think I’ll be looking elsewhere for gaming news if this the direction pushsquare is going.
@idiotthechef defo - that's quite amazing if you got 65+ hours of brilliant gameplay before you feel it is time to give it a break. I I'm looking forward to those parts of the game actually!
You know, I think that this is an issue with modern games in many ways. The original FF7 is brilliantly paced but most modern games aren't? They are filled and filled - so I'm just used to it now. In practice, it means I play games slowly and take breaks with them otherwise, it burns me out. Even Witcher 3 (as ace as it is) just had so much content that it took me months. I still have not got through BOTW (lol it has been 4 years). I'll complete Rebirth over the year.
@Nepp67 I think if Ubisoft side content was an issue with Rebirth, it would be reflected in user scores (which as I say, are as high as they can be on 9/10 on metacritic). lol I’m not complaining, like who cares? Point I’m making is that 8/10 seems miles away the commentary is at.
Also, glad you are enjoying DD2, different strokes etc.
Still a little surprised it got an 8/10 from Push Square. 25 hours in and I think it is the best game I've played on the PS5. I wonder, as the game is so large, reviewers just had to rinse it to get write-ups out - and burnt themselves out on it? There is a lot here (but I think pacing is always an issue with massive open world games. The overall high quality of gameplay is ridiculous in Rebirth). Metacritic user scores are solidly 9 (should always be cynical about user-scores but that is actually higher/on par with Balders Gate 3 - on 8.9).
The Gondola region is perhaps the most incredible setting I've seen in an open world game.
In any user review site at the moment: DD2 is getting hammered. 51% metacritic, 48% like it on google and it is 5.8 on metacritic - all slowly moving upwards but still a long way from where things should be for a game as good as this is. However, the metacritic scores 86 (PS5 and Xbox) and 89 (PC) don’t scream game of the year and or up there with Balders Gate 3 or anything like that anyway.
When you read the user scores though; people are also saying the game is quite archaic. People are not just talking about mtx or performance alone, it is that it feels clunky to play (and pawns can be frustrating, movement is not great, people losing massive saves etc). I think DD2 is probably an amazing game for enthusiasts who like the idea of an uncompromising, old school fantasy experience (and who loved the original), but maybe not a game that everyone will like? I wish there was a demo so I could see myself what I think of it.
@ShogunRok I can imagine how challenging it can be - because we all love games We want to celebrate them. I'm loving FF7 Rebirth, think it is incredible - and like: if it was 1.99 to fast travel...There would be uproar, I think.
@DennisReynolds you can re-create character as much as you want in AC or fast travel without paying any cash - you spend 1.99 to do so in DD2 every time (I mean, you can find items to do so but its besides the point).
Also, frankly, who cares about the specifics (as it becomes a case of re-contextualising/comparing what different people see as worse MTX in different games) - I'm making the point that we've never seen this type of MTX in an open world game - like this. It should be called out - unless you are happy to see all these things continue?
People are not overreacting - they are pointing out $70 is enough to spend without optional extras the game (and many reviewers) have not told people about.
@ShogunRok Thing is: I agree: it looks a really good game and I think you make a good case for why it is so good. But the problem here is that Capcom have got away with it a little - because if review scores stay around 9 or 10, it kinda lets them. This game has egregious MTX - even Farcry/AC don't go as far as this - and they have got away with it.
Don't get me wrong - evidently, there is a difficulty for reviewers here because you want to celebrate something great (so I can see why 9/10 or 10/10 are given out). But I just wish (and this is more of a general point, not aimed at your review, which is great) - reviewers were prepared to mark harsher over it. Simply, I don't think this practice changes unless reviewers and buyers make it clearer they won't support it.
@ShogunRok respect for adding in the microtransactions so people can go in fully informed.
Not sure it deserves 9 though - you have four negatives there that all seem quite significant? I don’t know, maybe these things don’t matter but I think I am holding off for now now.
@Darylb88 more like 21 million units, and console sales have been very flat this year in particular in key markets such as Europe. It will improve for Xbox though, just need the games and a more coherent hardware strategy.
@XboxTheBestBox I hope they are great games. I’m sure they will do well but obviously Sony have great games coming too (and a track record, and don’t really have delays etc). Microsoft need to deliver, whereas Sony have been delivering for the two gens.
For Microsoft to catch up, better decisions needs to happen but they will need to leverage bigger games than Hellblade 2 - and maybe even Starfield, it will be ABK / next Elder Scroll games more long term, and even then: so many of those games may well get put on PS5 anyway..(especially if Microsoft cannot grow the Xbox platform enough). Sony will be delighted to have kept CoD.
@PixelDragon 😂😂 it’s fine, and we all can be biased. I feel a little sorry Microsoft fans actually, hasn’t been the funnest gen for them, sure it will get better.
Comments 104
Re: Valve's Steam Machine May Not Be As Affordable As a PS5
@Neonix 😂 I don’t know man. They evidently do not care because they like other stuff: sorry, people like different things and I’m just giving you the evidence as it is.
lol and as I already said: free to play (excluded from PS plus) does exist on PS5 (war zone, Fortnite, genshin, apex all allow it). Like it’s all quite similar when you get down to it. But yeah, just chill. Bigger things in the world.
Re: Valve's Steam Machine May Not Be As Affordable As a PS5
@Striker21
‘The decision to opt for 8GB of GDDR6 memory has been proven to be a limiting factor on many modern mainstream triple-A games and falls short of the maximum VRAM pools and memory bandwidth available on both Xbox Series X and base PS5. To accommodate 8GB on affected games, paring back settings (particularly texture quality) and steering clear of ray tracing is frequently required’
This was done for affordability - I’m sure Valve would have preferred more VRAM if they could have got away with it. And it represents an issue when future technology moves past it (up scaling will help a bit but all kit is going to have that soon). The lack of upgrade-ability is an issue too.
And like: how is gamepass going to work on the steam machine for third parties (such a weird argument: gamepass evidently is about Microsoft first party). The Steam machine will be run on Steam OS, not windows, sorry, but what are you on about? You would have to install windows to get it running - which undermines what the Steam Machine is all about. Also, good luck trying to get casual audiences to do that…remember consoles work out the box. The prices overall are pretty comparable - PS plus gives players tons, and the PS store isn’t miles away from Steam really. And remember, the PS5 is currently £350 in Black Friday deals at the moment and the Switch 2 is £395. If this thing comes in above £700, it won’t be taken seriously by those audiences.
—
But just to say: But I really like the sound of the Steam Machine in some aspects; it’s got interesting things to offer and many will be happy with it. My problem here is how this guy is proclaiming other forms of gaming as insignificant / somehow lesser. PC master race weirdness narratives are similar to previous console war nonsense. We have just started to move away from that, it would be great if the fans could too.
Re: Valve's Steam Machine May Not Be As Affordable As a PS5
@truerbluer great points. I agree with all this, just not sure who it is aimed at.
Re: Valve's Steam Machine May Not Be As Affordable As a PS5
@Neonix again most, PS users similarly are not paying any monthly fees either.
Re: Valve's Steam Machine May Not Be As Affordable As a PS5
@neonix But many do not use PS Plus - those features are an extra dependent on the player choices. And again: cloud saves etc again may not matter for that market as it does for others. You can state all sorts about base features in a comparison (eg physical discs represent a super cheap way to game so does that make Steam Machine less valuable because it does not have that as a feature?), but the broader context of what is actually happening in terms of the numbers tell us more, especially if you want to make a meaningful comparison in terms of cost. Also, Don’t forget Ps plus actually gives you games - it’s not just about cloud saves etc. The base tier can give extremely high quality games for small cost such as Alan Wake 2 recently. People dip in and out. If anything, it makes the argument why console gaming works better for that market. In the PC space, they value other stuff eg free online etc.
Re: Valve's Steam Machine May Not Be As Affordable As a PS5
@Neonix you don’t have to be part of psn? Like ps plus numbers are like 45-50 million or so out of 130millon users overall. Most players aren’t on it: so it’s a strange comparison to make in terms of value. The PS store is also cheap as chips too - and the ability to grab discs, PS plus etc - like it’s all quite comparable really. And there are free to play games available on console ecosystems as well.
As for the other points: that just different markets. Of course you get more freedom to change settings, mods with this thing (and PC gaming) but there are evidently a ton of gamers out there that value other things such as convenience and workability. And in the living room space - those things may carry more of a premium. And the slightly lacking specs here will mean people are going to have to play around with settings game to game with the steam machine too. It’s odd really I’m not sure who they are aiming this at yet, but it may do better with PC gamers in offices/second bedroom: I suspect that is the real audience - and it will be great for that. But it’s probably not what console players want or value, in the living room.
Re: Valve's Steam Machine May Not Be As Affordable As a PS5
I think at £600, it will have an audience. There will be PC players out there that want a nice option for the TV (and that is who this is aimed at). People forget how much PC players are willing to spend on hardware. It’s not quite got the GPU specs right - and it’s not particularly future proof. If rumours are true: Microsoft may launch their new hardware 2026, and then PS6 in 2027 - and the PS5 just shades it, right now. So we’ll be seeing a lot of comparisons. Who is this for, I guess? PC players like the option to upgrade and buy hardware for the future.
Does Sony or Nintendo have to worry? I’m not sure but I suspect not as it won’t impact the console side of it - they are different markets, after all. And competing with the consoles for the living room is tough - ask Microsoft. It’s their technical knowledge in getting costs of hardware down over the generation, their marketing, and deep relationships with key players throughout the industry. When Steam deck was priced £350, Valve admitted they were losing money on it - I cant see them doing that again. Also the Steamdeck has sold what, 4million? It has done okay for the market it is in: but the Switch 2 did that in its first two weeks. Different products/markets but if Valve are moving into console spaces, people will start making the comparisons. And the real killer: Black Friday deals with the PS5 right now are around £350 - whatever this thing is priced at: it won’t be as cheap as that. And will the steam machine even be in stores? Again this is what the console market does so well.
I can’t help but think: in the living room, the expectations are about convenience - it is why PC doesn’t really engage with that traditionally? It’s family oriented market as well: like I don’t want my kids going through Steam forums/reviews. Nintendo and Sony know what that audience want: I’m not sure Valve does.
Re: 'Our Biggest Competition Isn't Another Console': Xbox Doubles Down on Multiformat After Halo PS5 Shock
@Striker21 wow, that’s a lot of words and honestly, just a lot of guesswork on your end about how Microsoft Xbox finances work (and none us know that really…), and what the Rogg Ally is there to do…like none of us know that. I would say the Rogg Ally is an attempt to see if they test out the concept of pc/console hybrid, with Windows (although I’m not sure if it’s quite successful at that: I think the next gen system needs to support Xbox games to some extent too). The PC handheld market is tiny - they may sell a few but considering the Steamdeck has only sold 4 million - I can’t see it being much more than that.
And you miss the central point: the Xbox store probably does have a lot of sales in it as well - even now. I don’t quite understand your points but to explain: Microsoft will not get money from third party if those games are not bought on their storefront (so Valve will benefit from those sales and microtransactions as well). They do want games bought on whatever Xbox storefront have next gen. Looking roughly at the Xbox numbers (24b in revenue…). I would hazard a guess they make more money from their stores than GPU or hardware. Also, a lot of third party is not on gamepass (nor will it ever be - as they have big audiences already). So no, gamepass is its own thing but it just is not big enough for third party triple AAA to put their games on it (which is why they don’t until later - they want to sell games first). And the most successful companies in this industry: guess what they all have - massive storefronts (Valve, Nintendo and Sony). Microsoft would be mad to do what you suggest (which is why they never would) - gamepass has 5b in revenue (although god knows what the margin is), but that is very small fry to what Sony make from selling games in terms of revenue (game sales, microtransactions and add ons etc too - 17/18b. Likely a similar story with Valve too, but as a private company, I don’t know their figures).
Look, my friend, you have spent all day on here and you could played some brilliant games instead. Accept others see it differently, it’s cool. I am not going to respond so just save it please and spend some of that energy on something else, for your own good buddy! Life is far too short. Have a good one.
Re: 'Our Biggest Competition Isn't Another Console': Xbox Doubles Down on Multiformat After Halo PS5 Shock
@LogicStrikesAgain yeah, it’s also ridiculous when we consider how important third party’s see PlayStation - even Microsoft themselves now rely on PlayStation to sell/prop up their own games. I was just watching TV - Battlefield 6 is being advertised on PlayStation - the only way such a hypothetical could come true is Sony somehow becoming an entirely different company to what they have been in the past 30 odd years. Looking at how much Sony made from game sales, microtransactions, DLC etc last year (think it was 17 or 18billion in revenue), I imagine it may be the most lucrative storefront in gaming - and probably the biggest reason why Sony’s gaming revenue sits at 31.9 billion (substantially more than Tencent or Microsoft or Nintendo respective gaming revenue streams). So yeah lol it’s more that third party’s will be desperate to be work with Sony (and Valve and Nintendo), rather than not. Notwithstanding, also console gaming will remains popular, giving Sony and Nintendo substantial market share as it is.
The larger issue for Xbox as they merge into the PC space is that their own consumers are now going to have the choice to game with Xbox/MS or with Steam - like if they go down this route, the Xbox storefront (which still recoups good money) is going to be in direct competition with Steam…So that extra 30% cut on the gaming side may not be going to Microsoft at all - Valve will get it (even if bought on a MS device). They are not going to win that one…Valve are too embedded. You can see the mistakes happening all over again. Xbox try stuff without really considering the implications of it.
Re: 'Our Biggest Competition Isn't Another Console': Xbox Doubles Down on Multiformat After Halo PS5 Shock
@LogicStrikesAgain this is completely spot on, it’s about the third party relationships that Sony have cultivated, making the PlayStation the place to be for everyone - the exclusives are there to market and sell hardware. It’s literally been the same way since the 90’s. It is handy to have great selling exclusives but most of all - Sony want to be the place where all the gaming happens. So they aim to be global, expansive, building new relationships with new dev communities (China and South Korea, right now) - and that’s why the market so much (Microsoft have never seemed to get that). So in that context, the exclusives are not just about sales for Sony.
And I can’t see it changing - if Microsoft come out with a boutique, high end product - it will price out the casual market who will look to game on PlayStation and Nintendo. And 80% of people bought Call of Duty on PlayStation last year - it feels we are locked in - which is probably why Microsoft are looking to do something different with PC.
Re: Xbox Boss Believes Sony's Strategy of Console Exclusives Is 'Antiquated'
@Lowdefal yes, but compared to Nintendo - Sony didn't have a lot - they relied a lot more on Bandi Namco, Konami etc. They published a lot for others but were very different to modern day Sony. And Psygnosis had some independence too e.g. Wipeout 64.
Re: Xbox Boss Believes Sony's Strategy of Console Exclusives Is 'Antiquated'
@SMJ not to jump in - but I think tis the general point that Xbox have had a continuous struggles for profit (whereas Sony have had one generation where things went bad), and being part of Microsoft has always saved them in the end (they have not had one flawless generation really - maybe the 360 era but ring of death/low profit).
This has always been the problem, Microsoft position Xbox to take risks with emerging technologies (so they can make big profit/massive market share), only to find they misunderstood what was actually happening (e.g. Xbox/360 - got it very right with online play; Xbox One, didn't get it right with multimedia tech/Kinect at all - tried to do what Nintendo do but couldn't; gamepass: jumped on the netflix model without fully understanding that Netflix have a very different model that doesn't translate to gaming as easily. Netflix don't go buy the TV equivalent of Call of Duty...). Now its the PC/console hybrid - all starts again...
Sony can't afford to take those type of risks at all, they are risk averse because profit it a significant part of their objectives (which is why they would never do GPU, or anything like that_. which is probably the point here: Microsoft have allowed Xbox to be more relaxed about profit as they try new things, until now., that is.
...and Sony have always made profit from gaming historically - like they are not equivalent to Xbox in that sense at all...
Re: Xbox Boss Believes Sony's Strategy of Console Exclusives Is 'Antiquated'
@TrollOfWar yeah this is my point, the exclusives don't matter as much as people think they do. 80/20 split I think to third party over first party in terms of PSN sales. They will literally move their games out of the way for GTA6.
Man, people who here in the 90s, we understand that because Sony didn't own any studios - it was all third party. Microsoft learnt the wrong lessons when they bought everything - Sony don't want to own 50+ studios, too much risk and development money. They want others to take on that risk but be the place where the games are sold so they can take a 30% cut.
Re: Xbox Boss Believes Sony's Strategy of Console Exclusives Is 'Antiquated'
@TrollOfWar I don't buy the notion that innovation lies in any one part of the industry, to be honest. Like the whole modern Nintendo catalogue is arguably as creative/innovative as many of the games you mentioned there - and you would count many of those as triple AAA. Also Astro Bot/Returnal are super creative games too - as much as/if not more than the games you mention here - and they are uniquely creative because of the hardware they were created for. Like I say: games (whether indie or triple AAA) that are designed for specific platforms and hardware can open up new possibilities because of that exclusivity. Its not just about innovation/creativity either, Naughty Dog's ability to rinse the power out of the PS3/PS4, really helped make their games look so good back in the day.
And you make an interesting point about indies - but more than anything, I think it slightly backs up my argument. Audiences are not the same across platforms - its not just one homogenous group. The Switch/Steam is now the place for indie titles - and I would argue that is because of the hardware/audiences preferences there. Indies suit a smaller form factor (e.g. Hades 2 gets an exclusive deal on the S2 because the publisher understands this is a core audience for this type of game); on the steam side, audiences/players are open to more experimental titles and there is a higher discoverability than on console (also, many of those indies don't even make it too console).
And historically, exclusivity - literally which platform could get the best arcade game - is how this industry developed. I think there is some fragmentation there but we need to be a little careful what we wish for too.
Re: Xbox Boss Believes Sony's Strategy of Console Exclusives Is 'Antiquated'
@MrStark oh god, what are you on about? I am talking about models in gaming where Sony (when it comes to gaming), have a model of revenue growth far larger than anyone else - based on the exclusive strategy you are saying will be or is now insignificant, based on no evidence - and you seem to losing it when someone presents you with some. I could not care less about which is bigger - I am making the point that there are different approaches in gaming to make money - exclusivity is evidently one such way.
As for what will happen in the future - I don't know, its beyond the scope of this discussion. But, please, for your own good, do some research Xbox and finances - they've always struggled to make money from gaming - (Xbox literally lost 4billion, and the 360 just got into profit at the end. Sony and Nintendo nearly always make profit from gaming - they have to otherwise they wouldnt have made it - they are not big tech companies. (PS1:3 billion and PS2: 2 billion. PS3 -1billion: PS4: 9 billion and PS5: over 10 billion already). Xbox has lived a charmed life in many ways, and Microsoft have evidently decided that needs to end, which is good because it might finally force more sensible planning over at Xbox.
Re: Xbox Boss Believes Sony's Strategy of Console Exclusives Is 'Antiquated'
@MrStark haha just look at the money mate...if you can't do that - I think it is you who refuse to see the reality of it. They are raising prices for profit and tariffs (as they all are) - but like you do realise Sony make more money than everyone else, right? i don't know the future (nor do you). We'll see - but we can say at the moment, their model is working, they will likely stick with it whilst it makes them more money than anyone else. 2023-24 revenue:
Sony: 32b
Tencent: 27b
Microsoft: 24b (and that includes surface laptops etc)
Re: Xbox Boss Believes Sony's Strategy of Console Exclusives Is 'Antiquated'
@TrollOfWar It is an interesting one - some exclusives do exist because they are made for particular systems with propriety technology as well. Yes, we are living in era now where most things can just be played on anything else but when a game is made for a particular device: there can be some amazing results. Think BOTW for the Switch (gameplay that made to suit a handheld and console play), games that exploited the emotion chip in the PS2 era, the memory provided by switching to CDs back in the PS1 (e.g. FF7), in the modern context: games take advantage of the Dual Sense or SSD such as Returnal or Astro Bot (with specific gameplay features that are inspired by unique hardware features). And remember, there are differences between consoles (even if it doesn't seem like it), Balders Gate 3 just couldn't work with the Series S initially.
Not withstanding that exclusives can exist to to fill gaps in markets that third parties would not take the risk on (e.g. PS1 era games like Pappa the Rapper, Viz Ribbon etc). A lot of Nintendo's innovation is arguably a result of their focus on exclusivity too: they are prepared to take risks because that makes their games stand out.
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.
Re: Xbox Boss Believes Sony's Strategy of Console Exclusives Is 'Antiquated'
@MrStark Playstation are doing lots of things - it is not just as simple as you are making out. In the real world, where Sony took 32 billion in revenue last year from their existing strategy of exclusive software and focusing on hardware, exclusivity is evidently a huge part of the model. Some PlayStation exclusives (by no means all) are going to PC one/two/three years or afterwards, and that's fine - it is a nice balance in terms of production capacity, long-term franchise engagement and protecting hardware sales. They are not following Microsoft into day and date PC releases at all, for the reasons I've already said. Hardware and the eco-system is where their money is made - that gets to its numbers through exclusive software - 18billion in revenue from gamesales last year; and most of that is from the PS store (and even the PC releases are dropping off in terms of sales bar Helldivers 2). It is a fine balance and the challenge will be retaining it all in future - but in the here and now, it is evidently working.
Re: Xbox Boss Believes Sony's Strategy of Console Exclusives Is 'Antiquated'
@MrStark not just about the sales though - Playstation and Nintendo are aiming to sell consoles/ecosystems too - the exclusives are also about that too. There is a lot more value in having a 100million console owners who all buys their games on your ecosystem than a few big selling games.
People don't really understand that how sophisticated Sony's model is: the exclusives are there to draw people into the eco-system, so people buy all their games there (and they take a 30% cut on everything). The exclusives become ways to show off the hardware. Returnal is an example, it didn't sell a lot (but did well enough for a small team) but it helped sell a lot of PS5's at launch, due to marketing specific features of the hardware.
Re: Xbox Boss Believes Sony's Strategy of Console Exclusives Is 'Antiquated'
The problem with Sarah Bond's narrative here is that - multiplatform releases have always sold more (barring Nintendo's largest franchises such as Zelda and Mario etc who really focus on first party releases). You could make the antiquated argument 15 years ago, if you wanted.
Sony's strategy is about third party releases, a gaint eco-system to sell everyone else's games on, first party releases that fill gaps and market/brand and ultimately sell the hardware (and of course, grow the eco-system as a result). Sony's model has never just been about first party games at all - most of their money is made from being there for third party, and selling games for others. This is why they are where they are historically. Microsoft have got way too insular. That is the reason Sony took £32billion in revenue from gaming last year - and no one else got near that amount.
Re: Resident Evil 2, 3 PS1 Ports Disappoint with No Trophy Support on PS5, PS4
Awesome. I already own these so have been able to claim straight away.
And like: I do not need trophies to enjoy the original Resi games - some of the most important games ever made. Still brilliant examples of survival horror even now. The rewind/save features are much more important in that it just makes the whole experience of visiting these old games way more enjoyable.
Re: Poll: What Did You Think of Sony's State of Play for February 2025?
@Titntin absolutely, and if you have been from the early days, it all seems ridiculous.
Re: Poll: What Did You Think of Sony's State of Play for February 2025?
@Oz_Who_Dat_Dare they have always been a third party platform. Their success is rooted in that.
Re: Poll: What Did You Think of Sony's State of Play for February 2025?
I think the first party thing…I don’t know how many of you have been playing games on PlayStation since the 90s but as someone who has…
They don’t always emphasise first party historically. That’s not a constant. PS4 era, they really went for that but before…it’s very much about third party releases. Their aim is to be the platform for everything in gaming so that is why first party is not always the emphasis in SoP. If you are expecting Sony to match Microsoft or Nintendo in that way, it’s not going to work like that. First party is there to sell the consoles and ecosystem, as much as games.
And guess what, it has totally worked, hence PS5 sales increasing the way they have.
Re: Game of the Year: #7 - Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth
@Nowings I’ve not played DD2 so I can’t really say. But as always - like if user scores are consistently not mentioning an issue with a game, and rewarding high scores in terms of their overall experience, I’d like to think gaming journalists would have some indication on the reception of a given game? But subjectivity is always a thing sadly. It’s getting harder to find journalism that does it like it used to in the magazine days.
Re: Game of the Year: #7 - Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth
It’s going to be at least top five if you asked the site generally (if not top 3). A bit saddened by how this game has been treated/written up about in recent months. A lot of the small justifiable criticisms have been built up to be much larger than they are, if I’m honest.
It may have too much going on at times and there are some minor issues in performance (that is quite honestly fine - metacritic user scores hardly mention it and it currently sits on 8.9). I don’t think any other game this year comes close variety and quality in terms of gameplay, combat, art direction and music. It’s a miraculous release in many ways. Shame, it hasn’t been celebrated the way it perhaps should have.
Re: PS5 Exclusives Final Fantasy 16, Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth Failed to Meet Expectations
I think - and I'm sure others will disagree here - I do wonder if Rebirth may have done better if it had been released on the PS4 in particular. I'm not sure if Rebirth could even work on that format - I imagine it would require a lot of re-working and compromise. However, as Remake was already on PS4, I suspect they missed out on many, many sales from people who would have enjoyed continuing the story on a platform that remains very popular to this day. Other platforms would have helped too, of course, but that was the one I think they really missed out on.
I think a multiplatform strategy is a good call for Square Enix in future - it will help (and FF7 is a classic, should be enjoyed by all). Yet, I also think the real problem is the episodic nature of the FF7 remake series - it is an odd approach, if I'm honest. Like who is going to jump into the second game if they had not picked up the first? In a game exclusively on the PS5? You can just see the potential market getting smaller and smaller. Two games across PS4 and PS5 would have been fine.
Rebirth remains a delight - truly something special and still GOTY in my view (although I have not played Astro yet). It is amazing and games this size and technical excellence don't come along all that often (and may not in the future the way costs are rising). Yet, even as good as it is - it is a classic example of development 'creep' too - there are things that could probably be cut that would have saved money (and helped pacing in the game itself).
Re: Feature: The 10 Best PS5 Games of 2024 So Far
Rebirth is some game, and I can’t see much topping it. Astro, perhaps? Still can’t believe Push gave it an 8 - it seemed GOTY material from the first 5 hours of playing it…
Re: Talking Point: What's Your PS5 Game of the Year for 2024 So Far?
Rebirth. I think it may end up being one of the best games of the generation. The case for it is getting stronger throughout the year as well.
Its secret weapon is that it has some serious Mario energy to it.
Re: Xbox Really Wasn't Happy with PlayStation's Call of Duty Marketing Deal
“I want to give you the choice on how you play your games, and who you play with, and not try to do slimy platform things to force you to do what I want you to do,”
…how does that remotely square up with spending the best part of a £100 billion, and making a lot of those games exclusive to Xbox platforms? Things are changing now but mainly because Xbox have done so poorly - forcing multiplatform releases.
Not excusing nonsense from Sony in the past - but when whole publishers have been bought, I’m not sure Phil should be making such comments.
Re: PS5 Fans Beg Sony for a More Fulfilling Livestream in the Aftermath of Xbox Show
I don’t think Showcases matter as much people assume, if I’m honest. Casual audiences, for starters, (who are like the ones everyone wants) aren’t really paying attention to this stuff. And also, I’d say Xbox have had better lshowcases than Sony for the past 3 or 4 years (mainly because they show games as far as two years away and Sony have a clear year out at least policy - even 3 or 6 months for some games). And what difference has it made? The net result is that expectations and delivery is managed better on PlayStation - whereas for all the decent Xbox showcase showings - their games get delayed or are years away too often. Redfall and Forza motorsport all once looked great.
Execution is where Xbox fall down, and that is where Sony excel.
Re: It's 'A Truly Exciting Time' for PlayStation as New Sony CEOs Take Control
@UnlimitedSevens yeah man. Great points, and agree to some extent. Completely see why you may think like that.
I think for me: financial stuff does matter a bit (like the profit from both the PS1 and PS2 was wiped out by the PS3 losses). It’s quite odd, but Sony didn’t really start make decent profit until the PS4 - so, as much as I would love a return to an older industry (I’m a PS1 player mainly today as well - currently playing GT2 😊), I can see why Sony have shifted a bit. My frustration is about lay offs (considering Sony have made 2.5b in profit each year since 2020). But, the ultimate point is: the financials dictate what is possible for Sony to do (whether we like it or not).
I think that lists is interesting - because Factions should be there too. You are absolute right: it is weaker than maybe we would expect but we also have to concede that the early years were also far stronger than normal - just think about the early years this gen: we had Demon Souls, Returnal, Ratchet, HFW, GT7, SM2, God of War: R FF16 and FF7 Rebirth - like for the first 3 years, that is ridiculous. So practically, there is going to be a lull as those big games, just take years now (and people should not crunch, we know better now). Maybe they could have remastered Killzone or something? Farm an IP to a second party dev - I like the idea but I suspect it won’t make too much money. And the simple issue is exactly what you describe, the market is already providing so much (there are so many great games), this means that Sony does not need to push it - they can just be the platform it all gets put on, where people buy it (see Valve too).
And it’s weird, but that’s how Sony did play it PS1 and PS2, they did publish great games but so much of their success is about building a platform for third party etc. live service communities in the modern context as well.
I’m optimistic too about all of it - and the communication issues of Sony is probably a result of febrile media environment that creates mountains out of molehills and silliness. Sadly, era we are in.
Re: It's 'A Truly Exciting Time' for PlayStation as New Sony CEOs Take Control
To be honest, best of luck to them. Some of the negativity Sony are getting is a little over the top on here if I’m honest. And my advice, would be ignore the noise a little. We have 8 first party exclusives* in 2024 (or partner exclusives and others released on Steam):
Helldivers 2
FF7 Rebirth
Rise of the Ronin
Stellar Blade
Concorde
Until Dawn (remaster)
Astro Bot
Silent Hill 2 (remake)
For a ‘quiet’ year, that’s super impressive and I am excited about many of these. Both Rebirth and Astrobot could be GOTY contenders (and a lot of these feel very spiritually at home on PlayStation as well - SH and FF7 have super strong association with the brand; Astro Bot is a celebration of PlayStation and feels like a modern day Ape Escape; Steller Blade has mad PS2 energy and Rise of the Ronin feels very at home too - big open world, third person action game. Helldivers 2 honestly feels inspired by SOCOM in a strange way to me).
A lot of these are also from smaller, double AA teams as well. PlayStation are making some healthy profit (which has not historically always been the case) and the larger games are coming - dev cycles can be 5-10 years now (Helldivers 2 - double AA dev etc. 8 years to make). Hardware is excellent as well - Portal and the consoles are selling well. It’s all fine really - they are doing what they always do.
*Edit: not to mention Pacific Drive (not an exclusive, also on Steam or Epic) but actually one of the most original games I have ever played on my PS5 this gen.
Re: Reaction: PS5 Livestreams Are No Longer Speaking to the Fans Who Built the Brand
lol built the brand - those here in 1994 and the early 2000s say hi
But actually: that was a decent state of play - I liked Astro, Behemoth, Where Winds Meet, Dynasty Warriors and SH 2 are genuinely old school PlayStation games in spirit and looked decent. Concords gameplay looked good - and there are audiences out there who love that stuff.
Yes, I want more but it was decent all things considered.
Re: Soapbox: Once a PS4 Console Exclusive, PS5 Players Are Missing a Visual Stunner in Hellblade 2
@DaniPooo think the point is this article is cynically going for the console war types though? Engagement and clicks, in it? If PureXbox reviewed (fake) reviewed PlayStation stuff and lamented it wasn’t available - you would get the same reaction. A better piece might have asked: what are the chances this comes to PS5, or explored how Sony can learn from it? Or added context: 81 on metacritic, only 3k players on steam at the moment (it’s like 200 in the steam charts). Or how it is also evidently inspired by PlayStation exclusives and their technical impact, but kinda misses what makes those games solid: gameplay.
But there is a sad truth here like many Xbox games, HB2 would find a stronger audience if released on PlayStation and it would maybe give the devs a chance to survive.
Re: Soapbox: Once a PS4 Console Exclusive, PS5 Players Are Missing a Visual Stunner in Hellblade 2
I am sure the game is decent but 81 on metacritic doesn’t scream people are missing out too much - I think angle for an article like this should be about the sadness in that Microsoft haven’t allowed games like HB2 go multi-platform - considering the original game out on PS4 - that would make sense editorially. But to do a kinda review of a game this audience cannot play (and to say it’s great) is kinda odd? lol do xbox or Nintendo sites review Last of Us? Of course not, it is just not relevant to that audience.
Weird - and I think I’ll be looking elsewhere for gaming news if this the direction pushsquare is going.
Re: Talking Point: What's Your Favourite PS5 Game of 2024 So Far?
FF7 Rebirth - just over half way through and this quite easily my favourite game this generation so far. It might end up being an all-timer.
Re: Documentary Details the Creation of PS5's Critically Acclaimed Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth
@idiotthechef defo - that's quite amazing if you got 65+ hours of brilliant gameplay before you feel it is time to give it a break. I I'm looking forward to those parts of the game actually!
You know, I think that this is an issue with modern games in many ways. The original FF7 is brilliantly paced but most modern games aren't? They are filled and filled - so I'm just used to it now. In practice, it means I play games slowly and take breaks with them otherwise, it burns me out. Even Witcher 3 (as ace as it is) just had so much content that it took me months. I still have not got through BOTW (lol it has been 4 years). I'll complete Rebirth over the year.
Re: Documentary Details the Creation of PS5's Critically Acclaimed Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth
@Nepp67 I think if Ubisoft side content was an issue with Rebirth, it would be reflected in user scores (which as I say, are as high as they can be on 9/10 on metacritic). lol I’m not complaining, like who cares? Point I’m making is that 8/10 seems miles away the commentary is at.
Also, glad you are enjoying DD2, different strokes etc.
Re: Documentary Details the Creation of PS5's Critically Acclaimed Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth
@Shepherd_Tallon absolutely - I just loved exploring it (same with all the regions if I'm honest). And the music (whole game): just incredible.
Re: Documentary Details the Creation of PS5's Critically Acclaimed Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth
Still a little surprised it got an 8/10 from Push Square. 25 hours in and I think it is the best game I've played on the PS5. I wonder, as the game is so large, reviewers just had to rinse it to get write-ups out - and burnt themselves out on it? There is a lot here (but I think pacing is always an issue with massive open world games. The overall high quality of gameplay is ridiculous in Rebirth). Metacritic user scores are solidly 9 (should always be cynical about user-scores but that is actually higher/on par with Balders Gate 3 - on 8.9).
The Gondola region is perhaps the most incredible setting I've seen in an open world game.
Re: Capcom Responds to Dragon's Dogma 2 Microtransaction, Performance Backlash
In any user review site at the moment: DD2 is getting hammered. 51% metacritic, 48% like it on google and it is 5.8 on metacritic - all slowly moving upwards but still a long way from where things should be for a game as good as this is. However, the metacritic scores 86 (PS5 and Xbox) and 89 (PC) don’t scream game of the year and or up there with Balders Gate 3 or anything like that anyway.
When you read the user scores though; people are also saying the game is quite archaic. People are not just talking about mtx or performance alone, it is that it feels clunky to play (and pawns can be frustrating, movement is not great, people losing massive saves etc). I think DD2 is probably an amazing game for enthusiasts who like the idea of an uncompromising, old school fantasy experience (and who loved the original), but maybe not a game that everyone will like? I wish there was a demo so I could see myself what I think of it.
Re: Dragon's Dogma 2 (PS5) - The Apex of RPG Adventuring
@DennisReynolds I'm not interested in arguing with you Dennis - lets just leave it there.
Re: Dragon's Dogma 2 (PS5) - The Apex of RPG Adventuring
@ShogunRok I can imagine how challenging it can be - because we all love games We want to celebrate them. I'm loving FF7 Rebirth, think it is incredible - and like: if it was 1.99 to fast travel...There would be uproar, I think.
Re: Dragon's Dogma 2 (PS5) - The Apex of RPG Adventuring
@DennisReynolds you can re-create character as much as you want in AC or fast travel without paying any cash - you spend 1.99 to do so in DD2 every time (I mean, you can find items to do so but its besides the point).
Also, frankly, who cares about the specifics (as it becomes a case of re-contextualising/comparing what different people see as worse MTX in different games) - I'm making the point that we've never seen this type of MTX in an open world game - like this. It should be called out - unless you are happy to see all these things continue?
People are not overreacting - they are pointing out $70 is enough to spend without optional extras the game (and many reviewers) have not told people about.
Re: Dragon's Dogma 2 (PS5) - The Apex of RPG Adventuring
@ShogunRok Thing is: I agree: it looks a really good game and I think you make a good case for why it is so good. But the problem here is that Capcom have got away with it a little - because if review scores stay around 9 or 10, it kinda lets them. This game has egregious MTX - even Farcry/AC don't go as far as this - and they have got away with it.
Don't get me wrong - evidently, there is a difficulty for reviewers here because you want to celebrate something great (so I can see why 9/10 or 10/10 are given out). But I just wish (and this is more of a general point, not aimed at your review, which is great) - reviewers were prepared to mark harsher over it. Simply, I don't think this practice changes unless reviewers and buyers make it clearer they won't support it.
Re: Dragon's Dogma 2 (PS5) - The Apex of RPG Adventuring
@ShogunRok respect for adding in the microtransactions so people can go in fully informed.
Not sure it deserves 9 though - you have four negatives there that all seem quite significant? I don’t know, maybe these things don’t matter but I think I am holding off for now now.
Re: PS5 Sales Surge a Frankly Flabbergasting 244% in Europe
@Darylb88 more like 21 million units, and console sales have been very flat this year in particular in key markets such as Europe. It will improve for Xbox though, just need the games and a more coherent hardware strategy.
Re: PS5 Sales Surge a Frankly Flabbergasting 244% in Europe
@XboxTheBestBox I hope they are great games. I’m sure they will do well but obviously Sony have great games coming too (and a track record, and don’t really have delays etc). Microsoft need to deliver, whereas Sony have been delivering for the two gens.
For Microsoft to catch up, better decisions needs to happen but they will need to leverage bigger games than Hellblade 2 - and maybe even Starfield, it will be ABK / next Elder Scroll games more long term, and even then: so many of those games may well get put on PS5 anyway..(especially if Microsoft cannot grow the Xbox platform enough). Sony will be delighted to have kept CoD.
Re: PS5 Sales Surge a Frankly Flabbergasting 244% in Europe
@PixelDragon 😂😂 it’s fine, and we all can be biased. I feel a little sorry Microsoft fans actually, hasn’t been the funnest gen for them, sure it will get better.