snakemake

@Wazeddie22 Nemesis can be an easy asset flip, with CV they need a lot more work.

Code Veronica certainly needs more love.

@Pete_Stooge For Nintendo it's their own IPs that create like 85% of revenue, while for Microsoft and Sony it's the other way around, because they mostly profit of third party sales margins. They need to convince people to come to their platform with exclusives, because they are basically living from someone else's works and those third party sales can easly move elsewhere.

@Flaming_Kaiser Some people here in the comments above would love for them not having any anymore. And well, timed exclusivity won't build your brand awareness as people will learn to wait and not invest into your ecosystem, which is the main stream of revenue for platform holder.

@ellsworth004 It was confirmed it won't. I suppose the game won't have real time multiplayer and you would not be able to meet any other players.

@Neolit Well, Nintendo surely as hell isn't paying Bandai Namco for all the peiceived losses of Super Smash Bros Ultimate potential sales on PS4, Xbox and PC, because they (Nintendo) own the game and all those IPs and this is enough for it. Same with Astral Chain or Kirby games, which were all developed by third party entities and are only owned by Nintendo as an intelectual property. Truth is this is a common practice used in this industry (and similar others) for decades and that Sony owns Death Stranding in the same vein as Nintendo owns those games mentioned above.

So in conclusion - it DOES matter, because it builds the brand awareness and further lets unique things to be done, which normally wouldn't happen with third party publishers, not because of technical but business issues.

@Nintyfan THIS, exactly this. If Sony releases their systemsellers (which today are first parties) on concurrent platforms they will shrink their installbase and thus have smaller budged and won't fund risky and unique projects like Death Stranding or Dreams anymore. Why would you push those while being third party, when you can gain much more using the same amount time and money with appealing to the lowest common denominator? Look at EA or Ubisoft.

@Flaming_Kaiser Because Minecraft started as multiplatform game in the first place and were already released on concurrent platforms before their buyout anyway. Forcingly making it xbox/microsoft store exclusive would made a gigantic backlash that could damage already gained brand. And there were still millions of physical copies on the market.

@Neolit Gamefreak is a third party studio too and I don't see advocating of Pokémon going multiplatform at all...

@Darth_Stofi Not only trademark, but copyright (the IP) in the first place is owned by Sony.

No exclusives - no PS5 buy and no recommendations to do so for friends and family. You can hear it right now Sony.

@SoulsBourne128 It won't. PC will always have stronger hardware thus pushing the thermometer to the roof and leaving console behind.

"Sony’s new media-centric PlayStation Productions division make its debut during State of Play"

Better not. Thet would get eaten alive for pushing movies and tv at the gaming presentation. The best thing for those are panels at Comic Cons and other fan conventions.

@sajoey Even remaster would be a good thing. Why wasn't it the PS4 launch title in the first place?? I can't understand.

@Porco MIA for now.

@Porco They had and have contracts with other companies. As of right now they are working with Square Enix on Babylon's Fall.

It's Kamiya's and similar PR idiots fault these people are asking. Just look at his aswer - complicated, long, ironic, sarcastic etc. Should have answered that the game and IP are (co-)owned by nintendo and close the case. Period. Similar with other titles.

@WanderingBullet It's totally random. I know people who didn't receive any of those codes for their main accounts with hundreds of purchases and then got some for their dummy accounts.

Also it's probably for the clueless casual customers just to tell them "PLAYSTATION VR MODE INCLUDED" on the cover.

@Areus So why we, they loyal comsumers who are buying their hardware, have to pay for playing online while pc people who didn't support their platform won't have to? This is wrong.

@KnightWolf Seem like a classic Embrace, Extend and Extinguish Microsoft's play. Very sad the current Sony execs are so stupid to get baited with it.

@crimsontadpoles Playstation cannot exist without exclusive library, especially in the era of streaming. That's a matter of fact, because unlike Nintendo they are THE third party middleman and on pc third parties won't pay them a dime of their sales. Same with ps plus online tax.

So what? Releasing multiplayer first party games on pc, when people there don't even have to pay for online play and have the other advantages?? This is like spitting your fanbase in the face, someone needs to fire this freaking idiot.

EDIT. sorry @Tasuki

@get2sammyb Yeah it is SIE Presents, but it's different. It's more like with ps1 Crash I think. And Predator game (code) is owned by Sony this time (I know the whole IP is not of course).

@get2sammyb This isn't Sony's game and Sony doesn't own it, they are just the publisher in Asia. It isn't first party like Death Stranding or Detroit, not the same case because it's fully third party game.

"It sounds like big things are ahead of the publisher, but what do you make of this? Let us know in the comments below."

A bankruptcy, like with Anapurna Games.

@Flaming_Kaiser The thing is journalists don't know anything about intelectual property rights and as so often (unconciously) mislead people. Activision lost the core rights to Tenchu, but it was years before 2015 and we can't tell exactly when, because private agreements are confidential.

@Flaming_Kaiser Trade mark doesn't mean an ownership of IP or a game. It's a temporary thing for selling products - even You can 'own' a trade mark for Tenchu if you licence if from it' IP holder.

@Porco Nope, it was very complicated with Tenchu IP. First two games were (still are??) owned by Sony... Music Japan, then IP was sold to Activision (but don't know if it contained first two games) with third game and From Software was only publisher (not owner) in Japan. And then something has happened and From owned the franchise in 2007 and started developing it themselves. Good material for a story I think.

No exclusives on PS5, no buy. Period.

Actually it does have limited physical version, but good luck with that - it's gonna skyrocket.

Can we expect a Push Square review?

@get2sammyb I meant that game is literally owned by Oasis Games + Oct Animation Studio and not by Sony.

"It makes sense for PlayStation to license it out"

The thing is Sony doesn't own this game at all, they just pay and promote it for China, Japan and other Asia theritories.

@AdamNovice Exactly, it's an embarrassment it costs the same price despite lacking not only games from previous generation but also many from PS4 generation too.

@AdamNovice Rockstar did make like 90% of the assets for this potential remake already, I don't think it's the BluePoint's new job.

Nothing is free.

@JoeBlogs I think it's more about publicly lying and false marketing than timed exclusivity per se, which is cancerous as hell.

Agreed with most of the ideas. But the most basic thing needed for this game are dedicated servers. Most of these online glitches and bugs occurs because of laggy P2P connection between 8 different players. Dedicated servers would drastically improve collisions, thus allowing us to have 12-player or no weapon matches. About ranking system - I agree it is much needed and should be very complex for efficient matchmaking. But I wouldn't like it to be public and thus allowing for perma whining about each other's "power-level". Should just work in the background, seasonal Grand Prixes are for strut.

Fistful of additional improvements:
1. Custom cups
2. Custom weapon setting in private lobbies (allowing for private no weapon matches)
3. Custom leagues
4. Team racing in the sense of every place getting specific number of points contributting to team score like it is in real life F1 etc.; customisable size of team - 2, 3, 4 and 5 or 6 players in the team if 12-player races added
5. Ability to disable specific skin's miniature on local display - seriously, it's really confusing when you don't know or remember how every skin looks like and thus can't easly tell the class of your opponent. This is especially true with trophy girls looking very similar to each others.

@gimmi_c @Stocksy @crimsontadpoles @Deadlyblack Everything, even that car, will be put into the Pit Stop in not specified future.

@Agramonte @themcnoisy Most of switch owners are adults indeed. They are those people you would call "manchildren" or other commited fanatics

@nhSnork That's not true. Just look at sales https://www.businessinsider.com/nintendo-reliance-on-first-party-games-huge-risk-to-business-2019-2?IR=T

@leucocyte "multiple games in production at the same time"

Lol, no. It was proven a thousand times that sony's management is incapable of running two projects with single studio at the same time. No matter how big you grow a single studio, they are gonna always work on a single game. You need separate studios for separate games.

Maybe they should port VIII first and stop artificially handicap this beautiful game with being 3ds 240p exclusive? And they coukd always port those 3D remakes like Dragon Quest VII from 3ds and Dragon Quest V from PS2.

@FalconIX Mario Kart Tour is a smarphone game with castrated gameplay and microtransactions out the a**.

@get2sammyb How is it not pulling resources away from what they're already doing? Wouldn't those movies be financed from PlayStation division budget and not from Sony Pictures one? That would be very wrong for "the players", because many actual games could be developed with this money. Not to speak about limiting potential new IPs by creating them only with TV and movies in mind. You already have some of that kind of artistic butchery with "first, best or must" ridiculousness.

Velo is confirmed with the latest trailer.

And what does 'more advanced' even mean? That they are farther ahead with R&D than Sony??

I don't think it was the stroke of genius kind of reveal. I would say it was more the modest one and from the marketing point of view they could have easly done better.
As about the gimmick buzzwords like '3D Audio' - is it even possible on the current standard of consumer TVs, headphones, speakers etc.?? I don't think so. It's like with 8K - nobody has the necessary hardware (and won't have for a long time), so it will be completely meaningless for more than 95% of consumers.