kcarnes9051

I’ve never attempted to convince you that a PS5 Pro is a must buy so there was never a suggestion that I’d want you to agree to that, lol.

There would be no condition under which a PS5 Pro would ever be a must buy because it’s not a necessity. It is a want. So that is also a false premise.

I didn’t ignore your previous post. I incorporated another quote by you to clarify the point I was trying to make. You’ve made statements that amount to saying or imply that there is no reason to buy the PS5 Pro and/or there’s no reason for it to exist. You dragged everyone else into your opinion by saying we don’t know of any new Sony games coming therefore there’s no reason to get the Pro. You’re using “We” to bolster your opinion. But it’s based on a false premise that new Sony games are the reason to buy a PS5. Third party games, 2nd party games, exclusives, and old games will all benefit to certain degrees. So, no, there is no obligation to list new Sony games to justify the existence of a Pro model.

There are indeed reasons to buy a PS5 Pro, as I’ve stated. You just personally do not value those reasons.

Let me put this to you another way. Just because you personally don’t want something does that mean it shouldn’t exist? For example, if you don’t like celery and don’t value its attributes, should nobody buy celery and should celery not be offered in stores despite other people liking celery?

Is there no reason for celery?

Is there no reason for a PS5 Pro?

Yes, there are reasons. You just don’t value those reasons.

@Nexozi We're getting tangled in the weeds here in rhetoric so let me back up and retry.

You said in a different comment: "I'm saying that currently there is no reason that I know of for a PS5 Pro."

Yes, there are reasons, which I listed. You know these reasons, and you must know that other people want these reasons. You just don't care about them enough to warrant buying one yourself. But those reasons do in fact exist in this reality.

Do you understand how your "We" statement is an extension of an attitude that you're framing your opinion as determining whether a PS5 Pro should exist?

Because limiting the reasons for buying a Pro to needing new Sony games is a false premise.

@Nexozi I want it for any game Sony puts out and for all past games Sony has put out and for any past or future game put out from 3rd parties for the best performance possible within the Playstation ecosystem. Other people want it for the same reason. I don't need to tell you any specific game. You keep asking for reasons. The reason have been given. If you don't like those reasons then the system isn't for you. You don't need to be convinced, and you don't need to convince other people that there is no reason for the PS5 Pro. And you certainly shouldn't be speaking for other people when saying, "I said there's no games coming that WE know of that make it a must buy". You are not WE.

@Nexozi No, there's no game that YOU know of that will make it worth it for YOU. You're speaking for other people.

@Nexozi Don’t replace your PS5 then. I’ve simply listed the likely improvements and that some people want these improvements. Going from 30 fps to 60 fps with 4K via PSSR and raytracing is significant enough for some folks. That’s why the PS5 will exist. For those players that want those things. Not you. And that’s fine.

@Nexozi Faster frame rates in quality mode, even faster load times, better ray-tracing support, better draw distance, brute forcing some of these aspects for games that don't receive specific updates. All of these things could be improved on with a pro model. You may not need or want these things but some people do.

If Astrobot is the new evolution I’m not so sure about it. The gameplay and production value seem great. But the presentation just feels like one big advertisement. Sure you can call it a celebration. But it feels self-congratulatory and shallow. Mario and Zelda inhabit their own worlds. Astro literally flies a PS5 around and collects PlayStation memorabilia. I don’t play PS games or get excited about them because they’re part of a brand. I play them because PS makes great games that feel organic. Making the branding THE GAME feels off putting and artificial. The world of Astrobot, like I said, feels like a world in an advertisement even if it’s a celebration. It feels like a reflection of the corporate world that games come from and the hubris of Sony since dominating the previous generation.

@Quintumply Thanks for the insight!

@Quintumply playroom was a fun little demo for the PS5 but I found it ridiculously easy. Does this game up the challenge much?

Even though I've never played the game, I kind of like this detail. Will heighten the dread anticipation.

That said, while the movie looks good, I'm not loving that they've shown so much, especially what appear to be pretty obvious kills. Unless the previews are pulling some heavy misdirections, like the Asian woman somehow surviving the chest buster.

I will never understand how Eli Roth keeps getting work. His movies are absolute trash every time. When I heard he was director, the terrible trailers made sense.

Fine but flashy action game. Terrible FF game. Nothing outside visual references felt like FF. If you’re going to go real-time action you’ve got to find ways to bring forward meaningful gameplay elements from previous installments to capture the spirit of the series. The worst, most mundane fetch quests imaginable hampered the game further.

This is pretty much what I assumed he meant in the original statement, anyway. People latch onto one sentence and make controversy out of rambling stream of consciousness statements. It’s silly.

@PuppetMaster You not mentioning me isn't a problem. There is a reply button under your comment and I'm free to click on it. You tagging me isn't a requirement for me to reply to you. People acting in bad faith are always the first to start complaining about others pushing back on their statements. I like this site and I appreciate this article. I'm not going to let console war ridiculousness drown out the actual intent of this article or allow it to dissuade future articles like this. That is why I'm replying to you. If you're going to come in with an accusatory hot take disparaging content that others appreciate and want to see—expect a reply.

@PuppetMaster if you post to a public forum, especially making accusations about someone’s intentions negatively, you are fair game for replies and should expect pushback. If you’re questioning why you’re getting replies and don’t want them then don’t engage in online comments. But by all means, keep banging the console war drum and believing that this author is just trying to rage-bait readers.

@AverageGamer Fair enough. You’re correct, full development started after Ninja Theory was bought out. Are we really going to debate the likelihood that it would have come to PS had Microsoft not absorbed the developer? Whether or not it was ever a possibility, which I argue it would have been since the original was a PS timed exclusive, the point here is that many PS players have wanted to play it on PS since it was announced, since, you know, they played the original on PS. That’s the reason why this is relevant to a portion of the PS community. That’s my point.

@PuppetMaster This game has cutting edge graphics. This has been known about this title literally years. It’s no surprise that it would be leading the pack in graphical fidelity and realism. If that is true, which it likely is, then the author’s statement is 100% accurate. And, again, it sucks we don’t get the visual feast here on PS. That’s true. I’m bummed. The author is bummed. The author wrote this article to express that sentiment. That’s all.

You’re weirdly reactionary about a PS site claiming that an XBox game has better graphics than any PS game. The only ones making this about console wars are the ones telling, “look rage bait console war headline.” Maybe it’s just simply true that this game that happens to be on Xbox has the best console graphics. It’s really nothing to get up in arms about. But it is a bummer we were supposed to get it.

"Soapbox: Once a PS4 Console Exclusive, PS5 Players Are Missing a Visual Stunner in Hellblade 2"

Truths:

1) It once was a PS4 exclusive.

2) PS5 players are missing out on a visual stunner.

We can argue over what visual stunner means here, but otherwise this is objectively a pretty straightforward truthful headline without spin or inflammatory rhetoric.

The headline doesn't even mention Xbox.

But sure. Console war. Lol.

As someone who played the first game, I read this as a lament from another player who also played the first game who is bummed that this game, which was supposed to be on PS5, isn't playable on PS. That's all this is. And it's nutty ya'll read it any other way.

@MFTWrecks Because the first game was on Playstation and it has a fanbase within the PS community. That is why it's being talked about here. Were you not aware that this is a sequel to a game that was on Playstation, and that this sequel was originally supposed to be on Playstation? This is no way shape or form out of the realm of topics to be talked about here.

@PuppetMaster There's nothing rage baiting about this article, lol. If you had played the first on PS and are a fan then you'd understand where this article is coming from, as many of us were anticipating it before it became Xbox only. It's got cutting edge visuals. From a gaming technology standpoint, and for a game that was once going to be on PS and has a fanbase here, this article is entirely relevant to that part of the PS community for which this site serves. It indeed sucks that this game isn't on PS. That's all this article says. Nothing rage bait about it.

@PsBoxSwitchOwner This was a title anticipated by many who played the first on PS4. I don't read Xbox sites, so I'm glad to hear word of it now here so I can gauge if I might want to check it out elsewhere or wait for it to hopefully one day come to Playstation. This may not be relevant news to you, but it is to those who played the first on Playstation. There is no console war going on in this article. The first game was on PS. The sequel was going to be, too, until it wasn't. That's a shame because it's a visual stunner. That's all true and that's all this article says.

Just adding to the voices surrounding physical releases, I really wanted to buy physical at release but decided to wait for a sale since digital only. Still haven’t bought it yet.

@Kraven @danzoEX Probably inspired story-wise in complexity and thematically, as in post-apocalyptic. It's about a kind of average boy who gets whisked away on an adventure to strange lands, which is sort of like Chrono Trigger when you get whisked away through time to different time periods. I heard some audio effects that were also reminiscent of early RPG games, like the slashing of the sword and the sparkling stars. Seems the characters will be traveling to different planets, so it'll be a grand adventure much like CT and FF7 that'll get more expansive as you play. There will likely be other nods, like what looks to be a hover bike mini game of sorts, and you'll be able to navigate the stars in a sort of over-world map in a ship like you'd navigate in the airship in FF7 or the time machine in CT to get around. It's also turn-based, which is kind of a JRPG calling card. They're obviously putting their own spin on things with the side scrolling, but there's definite inspiration there from the games mentioned.

@JalapenoSpiceLife Go play older final fantasy games and tell me that grinding hasn’t always been a part of gaming. It’s not just a modern thing.

@GuttyYZ probably to be implemented in older RPGs that are super grindy. So they’re already designed. Also some people like the grind. Other people don’t. So for modern games that are grindy, they have a certain audience. Auto-grind could bring in new players and increase sales.

This generation I cared most about loading times and they knocked that out of the park. Wish we could get consistent 60 fps, as well, but that was secondary to having my time wasted by slow loading.

@morogan112 It's releasing simultaneously on all platforms. So clues over on Xbox are also clues for Playstation. So it is Playstation news.

They'll eventually learn that gaming subscription services just do not operate the same as streaming television services. The average gamer does not have the time to consume the numerous games on a service in the same way consumers consume television shows because each game takes at least 10 hours if not 30, 40, 50. That's like 1-5+ seasons of television per game. And that's not even taking into account games you can sink 100s of hours into. The average gamer is going to play maybe 2 or 3 games to completion realistically in a year on a service. After you've used these services for a year or two, you soon start to realize that despite the nearly endless value available, it's not very realistic to take advantage of even a fraction of it. And it's very possible to outright own the games you play for about the same price if you're savvy and patient and work through your backlog. Except you own them which has more value than temporary access. And if you buy physical you can resell them. The math just works differently compared to other online subscription-based media. I have both PS+ Extra and Game Pass that I stream on my Samsung Tv via an app. Both work great and have lots of games, obviously. But I'm currently working through like 5 other great games I bought for bargain bin prices physically for cheaper than those yearly subscriptions. So those subscriptions aren't really getting used. That's fine because I have the money, but I'm less inclined to renew because I don't really need to. All of this goes without mentioning the development side issues that arise when games become devalued to fit the subscription model, as illustrated in this article. It gives the sense that not only is the subscription model built on a shaky foundation financially, but the true value proposition to gamers starts to melt away the longer you have the service.

There are MacBook Airs and MacBook Pros that exist at the same time. And, yet, everything that can run on a pro can likewise run on an Air. This is no different. If there's a performance boost in the PS5 Pro a certain segment of the market will purchase it just as a certain market buys MacBook Pros, and they'll be happy about it. If Sony produces the right amount at the right price they'll make money. Good for them. If you personally don't see a need for it, that is completely irrelevant.

@Weez “That naively forcing demographics into studios catering to these preferences based on a myopic interpretation of equality is negative sum”

Again, another strawman! Where in my 50 messages have I suggested FORCING game studios toward catering to certain preferences?

I think you’ve made some MASSIVE assumptions.

Pointing out a problem does not equal suggesting solutions to a problem.

@Weez “You understand that individual contentedness drops off a cliff when cultural forces steer people away from the proximate baseline, right?”

Yes, individual contentedness also dropped off a cliff when black kids were let into white schools. I guess, if you only take (edit: racist) white people’s contentedness into account.

@Weez “I really don't understand this obsession with ignoring evolutionary and biological factors,”

Again, another straw man. I’ve never ignored biological factors. I absolutely 100% understand that there are biological reasons why the sexes might have preference toward different interests.

My point is the culture skews what the sexes have access to and can discourage participation in what otherwise could be interests.

If culture doesn’t affect interest and statistical representation than why has participation in women’s sports increased by 850% since the 1970s? Could it have anything to do with cultural shifts in giving women greater access to sports, normalizing women playing sports, advocating female role models in sports, etc. No, none of these cultural changes had any effect on the 850% percent increase in women in sports? Should we actually rely on the 1970s statistics because that’s actually the real level of interest women have in sports?

@SgtTruth As a huge Soulsborne fan, I also love the idea of accessibility while keeping the brutal option. I would love a slightly easier Soulslike game option that has crazy, cool fantasy lore that’s not a complete riddle with killer boss fights and eerie, majestic gothic or medieval atmosphere. Combat should still require intentionality, just not so punishing. As much as I love a challenge, sometimes you want a similar experiences that feels breezier as a palette cleanser. It does feel like that’s the general idea for this game, but open-world and realism is not as appealing, at least for me. Linearity with some branching options is fine. Not interested in filler side quests and boring NPCs giving me menial tasks. Hopefully the boss fights are dope.

@Weez Here's an interesting way to frame this:

In 2019 women made up 5% of the esport scene.

And yet women make up roughly 20% of the US military.

Even the US Marine Corp is 10% women.

Women would much rather risk dying than play esports.

So either biologically women just prefer the option of possible death over esports.

OR

Call me crazy! There are cultural issues at play.

EDIT: Let's also note, that the percentage of women in the US military would likely be higher if they could compete with men physically at the same level.

Research shows that women can be just as skill at video games and progress just as fast. There's no reason why women can't be just as good at esports.

So there is no physical barrier for women as there is in the military, which makes the comparison even more striking.

@Weez Gender is a cultural issue. Sex is a biological one. You’re trying to minimize this just to sex, and that is, again, a straw man. If you’re trying to say culture does not have an effect on gender we’re gonna have to wade into an even thornier issue.

All you have to do is look at cultures across the world and across time to see that gender norms around clothing changes. Culture affects gender.

Bravo, for game studios catering to women in AAA games successfully. Could it be there’s a larger market there? Time will tell.

Here’s an interesting question for you. Do you think that women have more encouragement to play sports than they do to play esports.

I would argue there is a greater degree of cultural encouragement for women to play sports. Especially with school programs that target men and women fairly equally.

And, yet, there was a time when people thought women didn’t like sports or couldn’t even play sports.

Women in engagement has only grown over time.

But there is very little encouragement to play esports. And there is an awful lot of hostility to those to join in the male dominated sphere of esports.

The statistics show that women don’t play esports very much.

If you took statistics of women playing sports in the 60s you’d get a pretty low percentage, too. Just different cultural barriers in the way.

But to say that women wouldn’t play esports much just because the current statistics say they aren’t would be a fallacy.

Could just be the environment isn’t ripe for women to feel comfortable playing esports.

I recall a time when men actively used to chase women and tear their numbers off when attempting to run in marathons.

Kind of reminds me of harassment in esports.

@Weez When the industry isn’t catering to female interests in AAA gaming you simply can’t know if they’d show up or not. When female gamers face tidal waves of harassment from men in FPS and esports communities you can’t know if they’d show up. When women are not as targeted for advertisements for gaming, you can’t know if they wouldn’t show up. If women are not as cultured toward gaming as boys are, you can’t know if they’d show up.

There are all kinds of barriers that dissuade women from playing video games besides just “girls don’t like big AAA games as much by nature”.

You are not taking these factors into account.

Just because a business decided to target women and failed before other cultural elements had time to catch to make women feel comfortable within that market does not mean that women inherently are adverse to engaging in that space.

You don’t open a door to someone, call them a ***** and expect them to walk through it.

I have no straw man. You’re just throwing your straw man in the air and catching it.

@Weez You lot seem to be confused about the point I’m making. I’m not attacking this game or this genre of game with sexy women. I like these games. I’m talking about the broader industry. And while, yes, I have no problem with this game or the contained depictions, it does fit within broader industry trends. These trends have improved for women’s participation, but I contend that there are still issues in the industry.

It’s like eating candy bars. Eating one is fine every now and then. Eating 5 every day for 50 years might kill you. Scaling it back to just 1 candy bar a day and eating veggies, while an improvement, still might not be good for you health.

Do you understand the difference between individual examples and broad trends?

@Northern_munkey I didn't say all women. That was not my intent, but thank you for clarifying. I should have been clearer and rather said a lot or some women entirely avoid or hide themselves because of harassment. Regardless, this is a pretty widely held sentiment among women I've read on the web. It's actually shocking how often it's repeated.

That's great your wife and your female friends hold their own, but let's not pretend that gender-based harassment wouldn't drive a certain number of women away.

I believe I read that while harassment in general is fairly equally directed at men and women in gaming, but women are like 11 times more likely to be the subject of gendered-based harassment, I.e. saying they suck because they're a girl, making sexual statements about them that are entirely unrelated to the gameplay.

Also, I didn't say they just like puzzle games. I said they PREFER puzzle games, ETC. Meaning they prefer over the genres that men are the majority in. Match 3 mobile games, are heavily puzzle-oriented games, of which, women make up a majority of the player base.

The first point you made I'll give you partial credit on only because you pointed out a mistaken exaggeration I made, but you sidestepped the larger point of harassment being a very real thing, despite the women you know getting on well online.

The second point, you just completely misconstrued what I said.

@Weez I know women make up less of the console demographic. And I know they prefer puzzle games, etc. So I'm not exactly sure what your point is here. Are you arguing that FarmVille and puzzle games are not video games? Is Tetris not a video game?

I think it's important to note that the study you just pulled is from the beginning of 2017, so a 7-year-old study. Now, that's not terribly old, but I contend that games trends have shifted since then, not so much as to make up the difference so as to make things equal for console gaming by any means. In any case, it's important to notice that in your study, women made up a substantial portion of Dragon Age Inquisition, and a far higher than normal percentage for AC Syndicate. I dug into reddit forums for opinions of why these are outliers, and it was overly expressed that women loved these games because of player choice in character customization or the ability to play as a non-male character. It would be interesting to know what gender ratios are in games currently, seeing as how character customization and notable females headlining games has seemed to be something developers are being more conscious of. It may very well be that developers looked at stats like the ones I mentioned as a way to draw women in. Which begs the questions, how are women not being catered to in console gaming?

Furthermore, think of things this way. Women basically entirely avoid or hide themselves when playing multiplayer games due to harassment. This is a HUGE reason why women don't play these games, and in just about any conversation you see online regarding these types of games, harassment is quote as a reason.

Now what are the most popular multiplayer games: FPS. Call Of Duty. Sports games. FIFA. Now, I'm not saying that if harassment were to go away that suddenly the demographics would even out, but there are environmental factors perpetuated by men that skew these statistics and keep women away from participating.

@MrMagic Guess what, if you look back, several of the comments I made, I've quite literally acknowledged that the industry has changed a lot in regards to sexualization. I even went so far as to quote a female friend of mine who also said the times have changed and I concurred with her assessment.

So saying I'm stuck in the 90s is just categorically false.

I am in no way shape or form concerned this game will undo anything. In fact, again, further up in the comments, I predicted that in some ways the pendulum of societal norms as depicted in games overcorrected as a natural process of swinging. And now it's swinging back toward the center, hence reintroducing more sexualized characters into the more diversified character set we're now getting across gaming.

EDIT: And I do not think this is inherently a bad thing.

That said, do I still have concerns about the depiction of women in gaming as a whole, as a broad trend, and the relationship that has with the lopsided male/female ratio in game development? Yes I do. Please understand the nuance.

Again, I don't know how many times I have to say this, but I do not care about isolated examples of sexualization. Do I need to put it in caps for you?

Heck, the combat in this game looks kind of slick and I'm thinking about picking it up if reviews are good.

Like, you're impossible to have a conversation with let alone have a debate because you've misconstrued my main point and made numerous fallacious statements about things I've said or implied.

You continually pull out straw men.

And by the way, I have no ***** clue what ResetEra is, but thanks for telling me about it because now I'm going to seek it out. For goodness sake. It's like you're pulling from an endless drawer of filed away generalizations in your brain.

@RoomWithaMoose Yes, yes, he is. Admittedly I'm really long-winded in my writing, so I can't exactly blame him for losing the point, lol.

@RoomWithaMoose @MrMagic, I believe these comments should be directed at me, lol. Stop picking on the other guy.

And I've already stated this multiple times throughout this comment section that I have no issue with the individual depictions in games.

I have no issue with Stellar Blade. No issue with Eve's design.

I do have concern with INDUSTRY WIDE TRENDS based on historical context, known sexism in the industry workplace, and, yes, anecdotal evidence that shapes my opinion.

I am happy that you like these designs and I'm happy that strippers you spoke to do, as well, and even if I didn't take you at your word, I would wholeheartedly conclude that many women, including OnlyFans models, as you mentioned, like them, too.

But, again, as repeated, I'm talking about broad industry trends. Not individual cases. These are separate issues and have different implications.

@SweetChaos thanks for contributing your perspective on the conversation as a woman.

I'm interested to know what your individual perspective is on the sexualization of women in gaming in general, not just on the matter of Stellar Blade.

Do you see the gaming scene as a whole as having no problematic aspects in depictions of sexualizing the feminine form currently or in the past? Is it a non-issue in your mind?

I'm not speaking in a puritanical sense that sexualization is wrong, especially not in individual depictions. I'm more coming from the viewpoint of questioning whether industry wide hyper sexualization can have negative real world impact on body image and on participation of women in certain areas of gaming. And if a male dominated industry inhibits a more well-rounded depiction of what women want to see in games.

Do you see any issues with game development in the hands of a workforce comprised of 75% men when the gamers are nearly 50% women?

If so, in your opinion, does this skew the depiction of feminine characters toward one catering more to the male gaze? By that I mean not just the design of the characters, but the framing of shots on the bodies of feminine characters.

Or has the male dominated industry pretty much got it right with how you'd like women to overall be depicted in gaming?

Do you see any differences broadly speaking in the sexualization of women versus the sexualization of men? Do you see both as being equally sexualized? If one is more sexualized than the other do you see this as being problematic in any way?

Do you have any thoughts about the depiction of women in gaming and how that might contribute to effects on body image, especially for young girls?

Thank you for any thoughts! I admit that's a lot of questions so no need to address every question or any at all if you don't feel like entertaining my interest in this topic.

@thefourfoldroot1 "Nope. Because you just jumped from more women like videogames (agreed) to women aren’t being “represented” because we have the very rare occasions, as here, where a particular body type is, for once, allowed to be shown without being shouted down. You also presume what feminists think, whereas there are many waves of feminism that have different opinions on these things."

Point to any comment that I've made where I've objected to the depiction of sexualization in Stellar Blade.

I've in fact stated, that sexualization has its place in all media, and that the issue of sexualization isn't individual instances but rather overarching trends.

Please point to any comment that I've made attempt to speak for all feminists. These views are my own and a reflection of my lived experiences and supported, admittedly poorly at times, by facts about the gaming industry.

I would say that if a workforce of 75% men in the game developing industry make games for an audience comprised of 50% women—that this would not be a good example of women being well represented in the creation of games. Seems self-evident. But it appears I'm the crazy one around here.

@MrMagic Please indicate where I've stated that I think I'm of a higher authority on this topic? You said I claimed this. I did not. I presented my anecdotal experience along with factual numbers relating to the gaming industry composition and disposition that seem to align with my anecdotal experience. I welcomed input from you to add your own anecdotal experience with women and you did even make an effort. Again, I ask you, have you engaged with women who game and asked them their honest opinions about the sexualization of women in video gaming? Like, have you had these conversations? Just curious.