• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Sony: Our Exclusives Are Too Special and Valuable to Giveaway Day One with PS Now

Jigsaah

Gold Member
There's no wavering confidence, there's smart business...…..It's like this gen Sony had PSNOW, but PSNOW would never make them the money quality first games at $60 would...…, so guess where there was heavier investment....

Whilst everybody is going the online streaming route now, Sony was there before all of them, they are not following suit they are leading and are putting everything in place to press it when all the piranhas hit the water and we can see what's left of the flesh.....Remember, Sony always make smart decisions......Do you need this, do you need this now? Just like they knew they didn't need UHD bluray this gen, but it's a forgone conclusion next gen...….Just like they knew they couldn't do quality PS3 BC this gen, but rumors has it they've been working with some contractors (most probably the RPCS3 guys since 2015 on a BC project)…..


It's like this, if you're going to do it, do it well, don't half-ass it....

Mmk.

Sony never did it right. That's the bottom line. They never gave PSNow the chance that Microsoft did with Game Pass and eventually Xcloud. It wasn't time. PSNow doesn't have the quality nor the accessibility that Xcloud is promoting. Not saying Xcloud is a shoe-in to be successful. All I'm saying is that Sony half assed it. It's why they started offering games for download now, instead of just streaming. It's why they are partnering with Azure. They are playing catch up because they didn't go hard at streaming in the first place. It's not because they don't have the money. The only logical explanation is because they didn't see the value in it. Like you said, probably was smart business back in 2014. Times are changing and Sony got slapped in the back of the head with that realization. There's still time to make it awesome, but they are behind right now. Fact.
 

thelastword

Banned
You say that game sub services (AKA Game Pass) will result in the diminishing quality of product, due to poor returns on investment. However, Microsoft is not just acquiring studios, but is increasing their funding to allow the hiring of fresh new talent for team expansion and budget increases so the scope of their games can grow and improve to meet their vision. In what world does larger budgets and freedom to hire additional talent = game quality "will go down." Microsoft wants GP to have the greatest gaming content in the world and are acting like it. Maybe they are the only console manufacturer that has the massive financial war chest to play this kind of game. In the meantime the Xbox hardcore will enjoy the ridiculous value as MS goes on a spending spree for subs. I think we will see at least one entire console generation (Scarlett) where MS fights hard to make this happen. I won't be surprised if we see an acquisition rate of 1(+)/year for a decade.
It's a sub service you can no longer wait on 3-5 years to develop a big game just to put it on gamepass day one......There's no logic and financial sense there, especially if you cant sell a sub at the $15 per month you're asking...MS themselves have said that they want their devs to churn out new gamepass content every 3 months...…...It's the only way the model can work, for their first parties....

The point is, with such a low dev cycle, quality will and funding of said games will go down massively...…..Just be aware that you had games like Crackdown 3, SOD2, SOT which had years of development and look how they turned out, just imagine if you give these devs 3 months....
 

thelastword

Banned
Mmk.

Sony never did it right. That's the bottom line. They never gave PSNow the chance that Microsoft did with Game Pass and eventually Xcloud. It wasn't time. PSNow doesn't have the quality nor the accessibility that Xcloud is promoting. Not saying Xcloud is a shoe-in to be successful. All I'm saying is that Sony half assed it. It's why they started offering games for download now, instead of just streaming. It's why they are partnering with Azure. They are playing catch up because they didn't go hard at streaming in the first place. It's not because they don't have the money. The only logical explanation is because they didn't see the value in it. Like you said, probably was smart business back in 2014. Times are changing and Sony got slapped in the back of the head with that realization. There's still time to make it awesome, but they are behind right now. Fact.
No, opinion, actually far from a fact.....Your opinion that XCLOUD is more ahead of the game and will position itself as the perfect sub service business model is naïve at best...….You are simply promoting a service that does not exist as superior to a service which does exist......

In essence, you believe in MS's hype for this un-launched service over what exists...….Even history is not on your side tow hat MS hypes vs what they deliver...…..Yet I would love to see what XCLOUD delivers, I really hope you don't backtrack when it's not the gold service you anticipate that will trump all in it's path......
 

VAL0R

Banned
It's a sub service you can no longer wait on 3-5 years to develop a big game just to put it on gamepass day one......There's no logic and financial sense there, especially if you cant sell a sub at the $15 per month you're asking...MS themselves have said that they want their devs to churn out new gamepass content every 3 months...…...It's the only way the model can work, for their first parties....

The point is, with such a low dev cycle, quality will and funding of said games will go down massively...…..Just be aware that you had games like Crackdown 3, SOD2, SOT which had years of development and look how they turned out, just imagine if you give these devs 3 months....
Nobody ever said dev time would be 3 months. That's just silly. Receipts?

Edit:

I also really liked all 3 of those games, lol. I'd give Crackdown 3 an 80ish, State of Decay 2 a 90ish (I have sunk many hours into that game) and Sea of Thieves 80-90ish.
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Banned
I believe the revenue from Plus will never cover a launch window sales.

That makes me think that after some time when MS had enough success with Gamepads they will stop to do that to get that revenue back... right they are losing revenue to build a ecosystem across Gamepads.
 

JohnnyFootball

GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
It's a sub service you can no longer wait on 3-5 years to develop a big game just to put it on gamepass day one......There's no logic and financial sense there, especially if you cant sell a sub at the $15 per month you're asking...MS themselves have said that they want their devs to churn out new gamepass content every 3 months...…...It's the only way the model can work, for their first parties....

The point is, with such a low dev cycle, quality will and funding of said games will go down massively...…..Just be aware that you had games like Crackdown 3, SOD2, SOT which had years of development and look how they turned out, just imagine if you give these devs 3 months....
I’ll gladly keep $60 games if they are quality that I expect.
Anyone expecting Gears 5, Outer Worlds quality day 1 games to continue is probably going to be disappointed.
Clearly MS thinks differently, but I suspect quite a few of the people who bought Gamepass at the crazy good deal of $1 will not resubscribe at the $15 per month price.
We are very much reaching (if not there already) a saturation point in subscription services and once the honeymoon period for Gamepass ends people have to start paying $15 per month my gut feeling is that MS going to be disappointed.
 

Otterz4Life

Member
Yes. Sony values God of War so much, they’re selling it for $20. Same for Uncharted, TLoU, HZD, etc...

All they’re doing here is assuring the failure of PSNow. Nothing more. If those valuable IPs aren’t on it, why subscribe?

Seriously, though, are we comparing Sony’s half hearted attempt at streaming, that’s an abject failure, to Xbox’s successful digital rental service?

Drop in quality? FH4 and Gears 5 scored very well, were of very high quality, and were on Game Pass day one.

As is so often pointed out, with Game Pass you don’t own anything. You have to stay subscribed at regular price, which is still a good deal, or BUY the game you want to keep playing.
 
I’ll gladly keep $60 games if they are quality that I expect.
Anyone expecting Gears 5, Outer Worlds quality day 1 games to continue is probably going to be disappointed.
Clearly MS thinks differently, but I suspect quite a few of the people who bought Gamepass at the crazy good deal of $1 will not resubscribe at the $15 per month price.
We are very much reaching (if not there already) a saturation point in subscription services and once the honeymoon period for Gamepass ends people have to start paying $15 per month my gut feeling is that MS going to be disappointed.

I got gamepass ultimate (pc and xbox) until 2022 for 85 usd. Was to good to pass up.
 
Yes. Sony values God of War so much, they’re selling it for $20. Same for Uncharted, TLoU, HZD, etc...

All they’re doing here is assuring the failure of PSNow. Nothing more. If those valuable IPs aren’t on it, why subscribe?

Seriously, though, are we comparing Sony’s half hearted attempt at streaming, that’s an abject failure, to Xbox’s successful digital rental service?

Drop in quality? FH4 and Gears 5 scored very well, were of very high quality, and were on Game Pass day one.

As is so often pointed out, with Game Pass you don’t own anything. You have to stay subscribed at regular price, which is still a good deal, or BUY the game you want to keep playing.

This isn't about years old games that now sell for 20 dollars being too valued to put on PS Plus, this is about brand new exclusive releases being too valued.
 

ethomaz

Banned
Yes. Sony values God of War so much, they’re selling it for $20. Same for Uncharted, TLoU, HZD, etc...

All they’re doing here is assuring the failure of PSNow. Nothing more. If those valuable IPs aren’t on it, why subscribe?

Seriously, though, are we comparing Sony’s half hearted attempt at streaming, that’s an abject failure, to Xbox’s successful digital rental service?

Drop in quality? FH4 and Gears 5 scored very well, were of very high quality, and were on Game Pass day one.

As is so often pointed out, with Game Pass you don’t own anything. You have to stay subscribed at regular price, which is still a good deal, or BUY the game you want to keep playing.
If I'm not wrong all these games sold millions at $60.
These games you listed about $20 is the right time to put them on Plus.

Well TLOU was on Plus last month.
 
Last edited:
Its too pro consumer,basically. But to be fair,it cost a ton funding TLOU2,GOW,etc... I'm worried about the all streaming/digital future,which these subscriptions are designed to do.
 

thelastword

Banned
Nobody ever said dev time would be 3 months. That's just silly. Receipts?
The smaller the dev time, the more sense it makes for MS to deliver new first party games every 3 months on gamepass...…...Either they would need a lot of studios, which they are acquiring now or they would need to cut dev time and lower the quality of games by force to meet that requirement.....In either case, quality falls.....

The eternal question is, how do you sustain a sub service if the quality falls below titles like SOD2, CrackDown3, SOT......Quality will fall below these games because they will get much less time in development than those games did.....The pressure on these poor devs would be tremendous.......Some people thrive under pressure, most people fold....
 

BadBurger

Many “Whelps”! Handle It!
Sony would be foolish to leave all of that money on the table. They're in a position where they don't even need to explore what the impact of placing a new exclusive on PS Now would be. Meanwhile, Microsoft would benefit greatly by hooking as many users as they can on Games Pass as we slowly creep into the next generation. As we all know, new-gen consoles rarely have many exclusives at or even near launch. But if Microsoft can provide that Games Pass library to users right away on their new system, well, in my mind that would make their console the more attractive purchase at the outset of the new generation.

For what it's worth I think Games Pass is a great value. I liked the trial so much I bought six months of it. How effective is it from a gaming business perspective? I don't know, I'm just a guy who plays games. I couldn't care less how much money some faceless corporation either gains or loses, but I hope it works in some way so Microsoft can start giving the players better games. Because they did not show us many good titles this gen, while Sony has been dropping gem after gem after gem.
 
Last edited:

Otterz4Life

Member
The smaller the dev time, the more sense it makes for MS to deliver new first party games every 3 months on gamepass...…...Either they would need a lot of studios, which they are acquiring now or they would need to cut dev time and lower the quality of games by force to meet that requirement.....In either case, quality falls.....

The eternal question is, how do you sustain a sub service if the quality falls below titles like SOD2, CrackDown3, SOT......Quality will fall below these games because they will get much less time in development than those games did.....The pressure on these poor devs would be tremendous.......Some people thrive under pressure, most people fold....
They have, what, 18 studios already and are aiming for 20. Each studio can make only 1 game in 5 years, assuring quality, and they could release 1 first party game every 3 months.
 
It's a fair comment. There's a big question mark over subscription services for AAA games, especially single player ones which don't have prolonged revenue streams via microtrasactions and stuff.

I think MS are going to have to be careful to balance the books in the future, although i'm sure they have already thought about it.
 

FranXico

Member
Yes. Sony values God of War so much, they’re selling it for $20. Same for Uncharted, TLoU, HZD, etc...

All they’re doing here is assuring the failure of PSNow. Nothing more. If those valuable IPs aren’t on it, why subscribe?

Seriously, though, are we comparing Sony’s half hearted attempt at streaming, that’s an abject failure, to Xbox’s successful digital rental service?

Drop in quality? FH4 and Gears 5 scored very well, were of very high quality, and were on Game Pass day one.

As is so often pointed out, with Game Pass you don’t own anything. You have to stay subscribed at regular price, which is still a good deal, or BUY the game you want to keep playing.
They didn't release those games at $20, did they?
 
Its too pro consumer,basically. But to be fair,it cost a ton funding TLOU2,GOW,etc... I'm worried about the all streaming/digital future,which these subscriptions are designed to do.
people are throwing this "pro or anti-consumerism" too much nowadays, these services imo made people so much entitled to things to give for free or 1$ a month lmao
next time some of you will call out sony or nintendo anti-consumer because how dare they release a product a "normal" way for 60 bucks and not via fucking subscription service with discount
I don't know, maybe I've spent too much time reading cretinous rants on le reddit where people just throw this term "anti-consumer" every 3 words.
 

Jtibh

Banned
LOLOLOLOLOLOL

yeah right, they're so special, I love all the different ways to hide in a bush in all those special 3rd person shooter-stealth games with some dumbed down climbing mechanics thrown in there...
and all the different special ways to slowly walk next to or behind an NPC while all your controls, except for walking, get taken from you...

so special! I can't wait for The Last of BushHidingWalkingSlowlyImmersionBreak 2!
Yeah man word.
I started yesterday death stranding . Now this is a walking simulator on a whole new level.
No fucking bush to hide in man. Sonys getting fucking lazy.
Like no bushes anywhere i tell you.
 
Anyone that expects huge AAA single player only games to appear day 1 on a subscription service is an idiot. Plain and simple, the entire strategy of the subscription service is made around multiplayer and GAAS games.
 

JohnnyFootball

GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
You don’t get Game Pass for free in perpetuity, do you?
Dude, what the fuck are you trying to argue? Are you trying to argue that because Sony's older games are now selling for $20 that somehow they don't value them? Nevermind the fact that many of them sold millions of copies during their first week at a full $60 price.

tenor.gif
 

JohnnyFootball

GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
I got gamepass ultimate (pc and xbox) until 2022 for 85 usd. Was to good to pass up.
I bought it too. Bought two years of live and paid $1 to get an upgrade. I am not arguing that it's not giving me a lot of good in the moment.
I am arguing that I am concerned about the long term viability of it. I simply do not believe that MS will be able to afford to give us quality first party titles and simply drop them on gamepass day 1.
I see what others see is that developers will be forced into unreasonably short development windows and the quality of games will suffer.
 

The Alien

Banned
That's funny. That's exactly how I feel about the Xbox GHF trifecta. Always the same, one of each series out every two years, like clockwork.

But then I remember how the fans of those hook... series just like them that way and expect exactly the same old shit every couple of years.

There's just no accounting to taste.
Then I'm ok with it.

It's better than being childishly pissed at them or the company making money from them, right?
I think the point was that regardless of games, the gameplay is all samey (sony = 3rd person etc.).

The GHF trifecta, in this example, is actually more diverse than the Sonys offerings.
 

The Alien

Banned
If the recent and upcoming releases are an indication of what to expect from XBox GamePass (Gears 5, Outer Worlds, Ori 2, Bleeding Esge, Halo Infinite), the value will increase and the games "will be there".

I think Sony day and date for its exclusives are inevitable. However, right now, they have no business reason to do so.
 

TexMex

Member
They’re right and the Microsoft comparison doesn’t hold water. They’re giving away their big games because they have to, not because they want to. They’re trying to catch up, and they’re making great strides at doing it, but it’s not because they’re being charitable with their audience.
 
Interesting they use the term "exclusives" and not "games", 'cuz of what I've seen of Death Stranding so far......yeah.....

That damn thing was better off as a film. Just hook Kojima up with Sony Pictures already and be done with it.

I consider 720p and 30 FPS a form of censorship.

Chief? Does this mean PS5 and Scarlet are actually being built by Tencent?
 
Last edited:

McCheese

Member
Sony is completely right.

Microsoft is moving more towards software as a service, so the fact you get these big games "included day one" is deceptive, as they'll make more money from in-game purchases, and space out the expansions and DLC to encourage you to keep that subscription going, They also lost this generation, so by throwing 12-month deals at you which seem too good to be true, is so that when the next generation lands you'll be swayed to stick with them due to having a subscription still.

Sony is one of the last bastions of great single-player content, this pricing structure would completely not work for them as folks would subscribe for a month, whizz through the game, then cancel until the next big release. The only way they could make this work is if they change the types of games they are producing, which would be a huge loss for gamers, can you imagine a God of War battle pass and other shit?
 
Last edited:
Which is why I won't sub to PS Now.
Why? Do you need to have brand new titles right away? They need to make money too. I have had psplus since ps3 when it came out its offered 100s of games and discounts to games I wouldn't of tried or wanted but didn't want to put down the cash. I love it. Then again I play older games and don't shun them like some people who need the newest shit all the time. Also what does psnow have to do with this? That's the streaming service not the one that gives games every month. Two different services. Or was that what they were referring to?
 

junguler

Banned
everyone who really wanted to play those exclusives already has a ps4 and i don't see pc gamers being happy with lag, video compression and lower framerate of streaming. so when you think about it there isn't really much audience for sony's streaming service to care about not having day 1 exclusives on there.
most of those ps now users are people who had a ps3/x360 and want to play those single player games they loved/didn't get to play.
 

VAL0R

Banned
The smaller the dev time, the more sense it makes for MS to deliver new first party games every 3 months on gamepass...…...Either they would need a lot of studios, which they are acquiring now or they would need to cut dev time and lower the quality of games by force to meet that requirement.....In either case, quality falls.....

The eternal question is, how do you sustain a sub service if the quality falls below titles like SOD2, CrackDown3, SOT......Quality will fall below these games because they will get much less time in development than those games did.....The pressure on these poor devs would be tremendous.......Some people thrive under pressure, most people fold....

Let's look at the math. Xbox Game Studios has 15 studios (and growing), some of which are composed of multiple teams working on multiple games. Let's also say, for simplicity, that each of those 15 studios makes 1 major game (e.g. Gears 5) and 1 minor game (e.g. Gears Tactics) every 3 years. That's 30 games (1/2 AAA, 1/2 AA) every 3 years. That's 10 games a year or nearly 1 game/month. That still gives each studio 3 full years for major AAA releases.

Edit:

I'm sure these numbers are high (not every studio will make 2 games every 3 years). But MS also will hire outside studios to use their IP (see Moon with Ori, Dlala with Battletoads, Iron Galaxy with Killer Instinct, etc.) to fill gaps. Anyway, it's not so hard to imagine an Xbox Game Studios title on Game Pass every 3 months, while the studios maintain very healthy and "normal" dev cycles.
 
Last edited:

Gamernyc78

Banned
Mmk.

Sony never did it right. That's the bottom line. They never gave PSNow the chance that Microsoft did with Game Pass and eventually Xcloud. It wasn't time. PSNow doesn't have the quality nor the accessibility that Xcloud is promoting. Not saying Xcloud is a shoe-in to be successful. All I'm saying is that Sony half assed it. It's why they started offering games for download now, instead of just streaming. It's why they are partnering with Azure. They are playing catch up because they didn't go hard at streaming in the first place. It's not because they don't have the money. The only logical explanation is because they didn't see the value in it. Like you said, probably was smart business back in 2014. Times are changing and Sony got slapped in the back of the head with that realization. There's still time to make it awesome, but they are behind right now. Fact.

This is fanboy talk and alot of hyperbole which I see you love. Microsoft is copying Sony's steps and adding as thy all do. Whether it is better or not is yet to be seen. Previews aren't talking anything tht Sony Psnow doesn't already do.

This is equivalent to me saying "oh its from Sony so it has to be the best" bcus I happen to believe thy make overall quality stuff but I know not everything is going to be the best. If anything with all the failed realizations, promises and constant bs they have talked in the past from milo, to kinect, to cloud bs in crackdown, rrod etc you should be very cautious and not give them the benefit of the doubt, they are the last console company tht gets tht benefit.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 471617

Unconfirmed Member
I agree 100% with Sony because only Nintendo has more valuable IP that sell more. Sony has several exclusives that are past 10m+ if not 15m+ and will continue to increase while also having new IP's that go past the 10m+ mark. TLOUP2 alone will go past 20m+ and Ghost of Tsushima will definitely go past 10m+.

Putting your exclusives on PS Now day one lessens their value and worth because what happens if they ever need to sell one or two off in the future? Having them available day one for a cheap $10 rental makes them almost worthless.

For Microsoft, it makes perfect sense. Their brand is at an all time low or close to it, Spencer put exclusives on Game Pass because look at the first three out of four exclusives - Sea of Thieves, State of Decay 2, Forza Horizon 4 and Crackdown 3. Three above average games at best and two of those three would barely hit 5m if they're lucky let alone 10m+. Maybe SOD 2 because it was $30 at launch but no one was spending $60 on Sea of Thieves or Crackdown 3.

Forza Horizon 4 was the only quality title out of the four and actually worth $60 even though that's also debatable because it's just another annual/bi-annual sports game. Same shit as Madden and all the rest. Gears 5 was the first true great exclusive and even then, if it wasn't for Game Pass, would it even have the millions of players that it has? Probably not simply because it's not Epic with Gears anymore, it's not Bungie with Halo anymore, it's the second class developers that are making those franchises and vast majority simply don't care anymore. When Forza Horizon becomes your top franchise and IP this generation, that should probably tell them something.

Look at Nintendo. BOTW is STILL $60 30+ months later and the trade value is still at least $30+. Nintendo never ever devalues their IP's and why should they? That would be stupid when they know the vast majority of gamers will pay the $60 even for remastered last generation ports because at the end of the day, like Sony, the quality is there and is worth your $60. Microsoft's on the other hand, not so much.

Game Pass is excellent value for consumers and gamers but at the same time, I look at the studios that Microsoft has acquired and while they all seem to be getting elevated to the AAA level as they should be, until that's proven with their next gen releases, I see them all as quantity over quality and just wanting to fill a quota on Game Pass.

Also, unlike PlayStation, Microsoft doesn't actually need Xbox. Microsoft could shutdown Xbox tomorrow and over the long run, they would probably make more money because all that operating costs are gone. It simply wouldn't hurt them plus Spencer's vision of allowing you to play their games anywhere and everywhere means that it's not if but when their exclusives go on the competition's consoles.

For Microsoft, exclusives on Game Pass makes sense and is more of a positive than a negative for them for so many reasons where as for Sony, it would be a major negative to put their exclusives on PS Now day one. At best, I can see Sony putting their exclusives on PS Now when they hit that $20 greatest hits lineup. By then, they would already be well past 10m+ in sales and wouldn't matter anymore as everything past that is a bonus and bragging rights.

For me personally, it's all about console exclusives because if I don't have exclusives that I want to buy and play, why would I buy your console and become invested in your eco-system? That to me defeats the entire purpose. Every brand and hardware manufacturer MUST have exclusives that you can't play on the other consoles. Otherwise, all I need is one console and the other two could fuck off.

With that said, if Sony did put their exclusives on PS Now day one AND I can download them like Game Pass, then I obviously would play them all that way because well, why wouldn't I? But at the same time, im not begging or wanting them to even do that. I want franchises especially new IP's to sell 10m+ and do great because if im into them, I want my sequels and for them to become franchises. That can't happen if no one is buying them and continuing the series.

Back to Microsoft, personally, I don't believe that they even have more than maybe 2-3m Game Pass subscribers, if that because if it's so fucking successful like they keep touting that it is, why wouldn't you release the numbers especially when that would put more pressure on Sony to do the same? My guess is that they're losing money between exclusives and paying third parties to put their games on Game Pass. The difference is that Microsoft as a whole can easily absorb the loss but if there was no Microsoft and it was just Xbox, would they really be doing the same? Nope. They wouldn't because they wouldn't be able to afford it.

The main difference is that the Xbox brand has the luxury of Microsoft's zillions backing them up. PlayStation doesn't have that. If anything, Sony IS PlayStation and you can't just give shit away for the hell of it and devalue your entire brand name and IP's.

Again, for me personally, im all in with XBOX 4 and PLAYSTATION 5 day one but Halo Infinite is a $10 rental on Game Pass simply because I have never played Halo, getting tired of First Person perspective games in general and im simply not going to risk $60 on it but Ghost of Tsushima day one cross-gen, because their quality is top tier, they give me game of the year winners, contenders, game of the generation and so forth which is why Sony earned my $60 a long time ago. Plus most importantly, Sony gives me the games that cater to ME, what I want the most which is single player third person story driven games. And as long as they keep doing that, I will stick with Sony and PlayStation as my primary console every generation because at the end of the day, all the services and features you have mean less than nothing to me if you're not giving me games that I want to buy and play day one.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Gerdav

Member
I highly doubt that MS first party exclusives will be day one on game pass come Project Scarlett, it’s a marketing ploy at the end of current gen to get subscriber numbers that they hope will carry over into next gen.
 
Basically business talk for "We want to sell the products for as much profit as possible".
And there is nothing wrong with that unless you are socialist/commie who thinks profit and private ownership is bad. It's smart business. Products have value.

I personally can't stand games as a service and love old school and single player model with some games having multi-player modes.
 
Top Bottom