truerbluer

I'm very curious to see if this is how they'll sneak in PS+ requirements for their live service games on PC. They must surely see how bad it would look if it's only the console players that have to pay for PS+ online play while PC players get a free ride.

@SerJosh97 You missed my point entirely, it's not the game itself that's the issue, it's the fact that a current gen game has been revealed for PC at the same time as PS5. This will undoubtably cannibalise sales on console (of which Sony would have stood to receive 100% of the money) which could have easily been avoided by not mentioning PC until much later after the PS5 release. The announcement only helps to assure PC gamers that it will be a short gap from console release, so no need to bother getting a PS5 for this game, which many will also extrapolate to other first party releases.

@JJ2 I agree, the PS5 release is clearly a smokescreen for the actual goal to get the game on PC without upsetting PlayStation owners. And they're doing this by throwing this remake to them first as a form of appeasement so that Part II can quickly sneak its way onto PC not soon after.

The latest game Sony revealed explicitly states it's coming to both PS5 and PC (The Last of Us Part I). So now even current gen games are being announced for PC not just old PS4 games. There's no way fanboys can spin this anymore, first it was coping with old PS4 games but now we have confirmation that games built from the ground up for PS5 are also PC bound. This alongside the very credible Nvidia leak pretty much confirms every current PlayStation game will go to PC, not just old PS4 games.

To me this doesn't make PS5 a worthwhile purchase anymore and its hardware will never meet its true potential when every game has to be dumbed down to work on mid and low spec PCs.

The consensus seems to be the release gap will be about 2 years but I suspect it'll continually shrink until eventual day and date. The excuse of Sony wanting to hold back PC releases to sell consoles went out the window as soon as they revealed their plans to release PC ports. Now people have all the ammo they need to wait for the superior PC release and skip the PS5, its £70 games and PS+ subscription fees altogether.

@MasterVGuides I believe the stipulation was the game must release on multiple platforms simultaneously, there was nothing stating it had to release on a subscription service from day one.

I find it unbelievable that Sony, who developed the game internally have no leverage to block their own game going to a rival service from day one when they seemingly have the power to block other third parties. This was a moment Microsoft completely clowned Sony and PlayStation owners and have yet to recover from this blunder.

Ironic how Sony can prevent third parties from going to Game Pass but suddenly become helpless when it comes to MLB the Show.

@OrtadragoonX You say the current average PC specs don't stand up to a PS5 but don't you see how this will negatively impact console owners? This means their first party games will intentionally be held back to accommodate porting to mid and low-end PCs, so yet again PS5 owners will be getting screwed over with a system that never reaches its full potential and the features like the DualSense and SSD speeds will never be essential to a game's core design.

If Sony's goal is to reach more customers on PC they'll have to ensure these games are built and designed from the ground up to work on these lower-end PCs, screwing over PS5 owners still waiting for games that actually use the system's full capabilities. We're approaching the 3rd year of the PS5 and as it stands currently it's nothing but a glorified PS4 Pro 2 with early access to first party.

The PS5 is now a system you choose to settle for not the system you really desire, as you've illustrated already. This wouldn't be the case if it had actual high quality exclusives not playable anywhere else.

How pathetic is it that the best place to play your first party games is on a competing platform and not your own.

I can't think of any other business that provides the best version of its products on a competing platform, let alone for a reduced price.

For example, Microsoft and Apple have the foresight to not provide app parity across each of their platforms. Microsoft Office on Mac is a stripped down version with less features compared to Windows. iTunes on Windows is slow, bloated and outdated but still required for iPhone users to manage files. There's nothing stopping them from providing parity between their apps but they deliberately don't in order to lure customers to their own platform for a better experience.

Meanwhile Sony is doing the complete opposite and pushing console players away from PlayStation to PC by offering unlocked framerates, ultrawide resolutions, proper raytracing, Xbox and DualSense controller support, DLSS, freedom to mod and no PS+ online requirements. They're doing a good job propping up PC as the best place to play their games while completely undermining their own PS5 consoles. The only remaining advantage PS5 has is its relatively cheap price, that's it, which is only attractive to casual gamers.

I'll never get those who put story above everything else in a video game, it's like listening to music only for the lyrics and dismissing the actual music which is just as incomprehensible to me.

I play games for the gameplay first and foremost, story would never sway my opinion on how good a game is otherwise Nintendo games would be considered garbage if we all used those standards to determine the quality of a game.

£70 is an absurd asking price for this when it has less content than the PS4 remaster. It should be the same price as Part II was on launch - £50.

I'm very curious to see how fast it comes to PC and at what price it will release because I'm betting it won't be £70. The way it was showcased indicated it'll come to PC very soon i.e. a few months after PS5. Because when the superior version comes to PC and is cheaper than the PS5 version, it's a complete wrap for PS5. Jim Ryan is just gouging his core customers at this point and feeding them scraps while treating the PC players like royalty.

@Marquez We already have the Nvidia leak that's been proven completely accurate as well as Returnal and Sackboy PC screenshots.

Sony's own investor report stated it wants half of its games on PC by 2025. It's time to face reality that Sony's conditioning its console owners into accepting future multiplatform releases.

@get2sammyb It won't be much later, probably 2 years tops, not long enough to buy a whole console for it.

I think we can now definitively say that first party exclusives are over and PS5 will have none during the course of the generation.

Bold of them to reveal the PC version already, they really must not care that it dissuades people from getting PS5s anymore. Interested to see how this plays out for them because I for one have no desire to get a PS5 at all now.

@Quadalog The saddest thing is the both id@Xbox and Major Nelson tweeted about the release and not one peep from Shuhei Yoshida or anyone who works at Sony. It's so obvious Colin's been blacklisted by Sony at this point.

The Callisto Protocol, despite being cross-gen was way more impressive than Resident Evil 4, a supposed current-gen only game.

The biggest thing about this is Spider-Man and Miles Morales weren't even in the Nvidia leak, and if games as prolific as those can go to PC so soon, you can be sure practically every major first party game will too including Spider-Man 2 and Wolverine.

The PS blog also mentions this includes Miles Morales.

Now PC users can mod the original Peter Parker model into the game and get the ultimate version, in effect making both PS4 and PS5 versions obsolete.

This was underwhelming, nothing about it screams only possible on current gen hardware.

@RevGaming https://www.eurogamer.net/konami-just-had-its-most-profitable-year-ever

The point is as a business they've never been more successful than they are today and that has no bearing on the quality or quantity of the games they produce.

I don't get how people honestly think making more money will automatically lead to better single player games.

We can use Konami as a direct case study. Konami reported its most profitable year ever just last year and they've long abandoned high quality single player games. None of their money is being reinvested into single player games let alone good quality games. It's all going to the pockets of execs and shareholders and we can expect the same to happen to Sony. When they get a taste of how much money they can make from live service, why would they go back to costly single player games?

I have no confidence that the current leadership is serving in the best interest of PlayStation owners when the current focus seems to be live service games, PC ports, mobile games and tv shows; none of these things are what make hardcore gamers choose PlayStation above everything else.

When business takes precedence over art, we (the players) all suffer.

A bunch of multiplatform games that can be played elsewhere.

Glad they came to their senses and course corrected in the end.

@Bismarck The DualSense is only supported as a generic controller, only a small number of games actually use the adaptive triggers and haptic feedback on PC and isn't standard yet, and can't be played wirelessly.

https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/Controller:DualSense#Games_with_adaptive_triggers_and_haptic_feedback

@Juanalf For me it's become hard to defend remaining on PlayStation when all its advantages are slowly being eroded away (exclusives, controller, online playerbase etc). I've held off on getting a PS5 because I knew something was iffy about the way they revealed their games. With the Nvidia leaks proving to be entirely accurate, I'll probably get an RTX 4080 at this point and leave PlayStation behind altogether; they need to provide some real reassurance of why I need a PS5 to win me back at this point.

@Bismarck Then explain why PS5 versions of cross-gen games have handily outsold their PS4 counterparts this gen.

"It's only old games being used to hype up the sequel which will definitely only be on consoles, it's a smart strategy!" (HZD)

"It's only games that flopped critically and commercially, more sales will absolutely lead to a sequel!" (Days Gone)

"Even though it's the highest rated PS4 exclusive, it's still just a PS4 game, relax your shiny new PS5 is still definitely worth it!" (God of War)

Now we're getting bonafide made-just-for-PS5 games coming to PC in less than 2 years. This is honestly quite insulting to PS5 owners and those who felt mislead into believing these games were designed to fully utilise the bespoke features of the PS5 and DualSense. A PC port immediately invalidates the claim that these games were fully designed for PS5 because there's no way Sony would waste time and money on a port that only a tiny fraction of PC players with comparable PS5 specs and DualSense controllers would be able to play, it simply makes no business sense.

The PS5 continues to become less desirable

Maybe they'll put the single player campaign on the disc this time.

I was interested in trying MW2019 but discovered the disc doesn't even have the campaign on it and you're forced to connect online to download over 100GB of mostly Warzone data to even give you access to the single player campaign. This is what actual unchecked anti-consumer behaviour looks like.

The Xbox playerbase are only into Shooters, Western RPGs and online multiplayer. There's no way Spider-Man would have been the juggernaut it became if it was Xbox exclusive.

@Rafie This is why I can't get excited by any studios Sony decides to acquire anymore. PlayStation owners get nothing from the Bungie deal, there's literally zero incentive to play their games on PlayStation over any other platform. No exclusive content, no price discounts, nothing! With cross-play being more prominent now there's even less reason to remain on PlayStation when other platforms get the entire playerbase too and PC players don't even have to pay for online access.

@Bismarck Where's the source that they're creating their own launcher because I've not heard about this anywhere. Even if it were to happen it's another extra cost to maintain.

You're missing the point, the exclusives are the unique things about consoles. It's the main thing that draws people to decide which platform they want.

PCs will always be more powerful, that's why the only way to lure people to consoles is the exclusives that can't be played on PC. Without exclusives it's just a redundant system that has no appeal to hardcore gamers.

@Bismarck Games going multiplatform would raise development costs and selling on other storefronts would yield a smaller percentage of revenue over their own store. Not to mention being on an open platform like PC leaves them highly susceptible to piracy.

I'm not interested in a console because it's cheap, I'm interested in the unique games it can provide.

Can anyone explain why Nintendo doesn't take this approach? Wouldn't they stand to make a killing selling Mario and Zelda on other platforms? Same with Microsoft, why did they specifically remove Starfield from PlayStation when we know there was a PS version in development. Why does Sony always have to be the benevolent one to offer their exclusives on other platforms?

And what benefit does this bring to current PlayStation owners who are left wondering why they invested in a console that no longer has anything unique to offer except premium prices for early access to worse versions of 1st party games.

I have no faith that Bloober Team (who've yet to put out a single good game) have the capability to give this classic the treatment it deserves.

It's Bluepoint or bust for me.

Curious to see how this will stack up against The Callisto Protocol (from the actual creator of Dead Space), which is still scheduled for 2022.

@shgamer For me Alan Wake was just an okay game with a lot of annoying mechanics.

• I hate how he gets exhausted after just a few seconds of running
• The flashlight constantly runs out of power from even single enemy encounters
• There's no depth to the combat, you can't strategically shoot different body parts or take a stealth approach, it's the same rinse and repeat encounters throughout the game with no enemy variety
• The "possessed" objects that hurl towards you are incredibly annoying
• Shamelessly rips off Twin Peaks with super lame stand-ins, especially the George Costanza-like agent of his
• The overall story just felt very nonsensical to me and not very engaging

Remedy is a dev I really want to like because they come up with great concepts but for me their execution has always been lacking.

At the very least I hope in this sequel Alan Wake can move at a brisk speed without constantly getting winded.

This sure looks like a cross-gen game, cross-gen between PS3 and PS4 that is.

Now it makes sense why WB are desperate to sell their studios if this is the kind of progress we get from 9 years of development time.

Graphics and frame rate look terrible for what is now supposedly a current gen only game.

It's pure naivety to believe this GaaS initiative won't impact Sony's single player releases. We're either going to see a drop in quality or quantity of their single player games, so pick your poison.

There's at least 10 GaaS games in development from 1st party studios, that's resources already being divided between GaaS and single player games and we already know that GaaS is seen as the priority now. This means the single player releases will either continue to be short experiences (Miles Morales, Rift Apart) or cross-gen compromised (Forbidden West, GT7), neither of which have justified the £70 asking price to me. I've yet to see a truly outstanding release; Demon's Souls comes close but it's just a new coat of paint on an old PS3 game.

This is not good news, even for those that have a PS5.

Now we're bound to get even more compromised cross-gen releases some 3(!) whole years since the PS5 launch, which is unprecedented.

If I was a PS5 owner and I see that we're still getting what is essentially PS4 designed games only at higher resolution and frame rate 3 years in, I'd be having huge buyer's remorse with PS5.

If they can't fix this situation fairly soon I fear we're going to get even more diluted cross-gen games. Is Sony really going to put Spider-Man 2 and Wolverine on a platform that most people still can't get a hold of?

Initially fell into the hype and thought for sure it was a 10 but after some re-evaluating have to drop it to 9.

It turns out there were quite a few things that bothered me:

• Did not enjoy the Norse setting; brought very little enemy and environmental variety, especially compared to the far more diverse Greek setting
• The in-game map is shockingly poor for any practical use
• The repeated troll bosses
• Too much deliberate game padding travelling back and forth on boat
• Shoehorning of RPG elements; I don't want experience points, level gatekeeping enemies/areas and random loot in my action-adventure games

I did really enjoy the game overall, it certainly had the best story in the franchise's history and made the right evolution from a gameplay standpoint. However I must admit my interest in Ragnarok has waned quite a bit seeing as it's continuing with the Norse setting, bringing back the boat for traversal and possibly adding even more RPG elements with NPC filled towns.

I'd be down for this as long as it's action based horror where you can actually subdue enemies.

I'm sick of these modern horror games where you're chased by indestructible enemies with no means of fighting back while having to rely entirely on stealth to progress, I wish that trend would end already.

The UK game magazines really did a disservice to this game when it released and they can be fully blamed for the game flopping here in the UK. If you want to see a complete joke of a review go look up the Official UK PSM review of this game.

They basically completely trashed it for being a 2D game in a time when 3D was all the rage and suggested it would have been better suited for SNES instead of PlayStation. Meanwhile they happily handed out 10/10 scores to every PS1 Tomb Raider game.

They certainly ended up on the wrong side of history here.

Can't say I'm thrilled with this announcement; this studio has exactly zero games developed under their belt and now has to ensure they live up to being worthy of acquisition with their first release. The fact that they're headed by someone whose last projects were cancelled after 6 wasteful years (EA Motive) or didn't even get off the ground (Google) doesn't inspire much confidence.

That and coupled with the fact this team is only developing GaaS titles that aren't even PlayStation exclusive means I can't get excited about this at all.

@Nepp67 I understand why these consoles have paywalls within their ecosystems even if it's a flimsy excuse you can still rationalise it by saying it covers server costs and keeps cheaters out. However my issue is only when PC players get in the mix with console players. Why do console players still have to pay for online multiplayer when PC players get complete access to console players at no cost? Console players are basically paying for the PC players at this point and everyone seems perfectly fine with it.

Cool, then drop the PS+ requirement or explain why PlayStation players need to pay for online multiplayer while PC players don't when they're going to use the same servers.

I'm seeing some really dumb comments online from people who oppose JK Rowling's views but still feel entitled to pirate the game. And they justify it by saying it won't hurt the devs because they've already been paid for their work. If that's the case then what's morally stopping them from pirating literally anything else? They have no moral superiority here.

https://twitter.com/PlayStation/status/344283496514199553

The current PlayStation leadership is so out of touch with their consumers that they're now doing the exact opposite of what they were commended for last generation. It's quite hilarious to see how they have no self-awareness to the concerns that online-only DRM would bring despite having witnessed their rival desperately try to mitigate the damage that cost them the entire gen and lost favour among the gaming community as a whole. Now you can add this to the long pile of how Ryan/Hulst are undoing all the goodwill the PS4 built up.

This game was such an easy home-run yet Sony completely screwed it up, and the worst thing about it is that it's been self-inflicted and could have been completely avoided! I feel bad for Kazunori Yamauchi whose hands were probably tied when these decisions came down from his bosses.

There's been zero justification provided why the single player component requires a constant online connection but after this people have rightly sussed out it's because Sony wants to peddle microtransactions. I think it's totally unacceptable that they charge a full £70 for this cross-gen, online only experience and still decide they want to inconvenience the player further by lowering the rewards to increase the grind.

Honestly this really doesn't bode well for Sony's future line up. They've already outlined their intentions of making at least 10 new GaaS games and they'll most likely follow this exact model if they can get away with it.