• 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.

PlayStation Will Keep Making Single-Player Games as Live-Service Ambitions Expand

EDMIX

Member
But what do you do with all that spare time in between those single player games?

Oh trust me, even those that just play single player games still have a long list of titles they either play for the first time, replay etc.

I get that the hours will differ from single player to MP titles, like its nothing for someone to put like 100 hours in Battlefield and its just the first few weeks or something, but they are playing in bites. So its an easy hour here and there, where with a single player game those sessions need to be different as it still has a story, narrative, lore and so many aspects that you need to play for a good chunk each time.

So someone can finish a single player title, jump into the sequel, play a backlogged game or play a new title.

As in, they might spend that 100 hours for those weeks playing 5 games 20 hours each.

The time in between for them might very well be...another single player game lol Or a smaller game as I put lots of hours in Lumines still lol

But as a person that plays both single player and multiplayer, I enjoy the combo of playing a single player game for a long session and on off days playing a MP game for an hour or 2, but I don't really juggle MP titles like I use to years ago, BF might be the only MP series I have on rotation now days tbh.

I do agree with you though Kagey. I'm sure many are like me that play more single player then MP, but have a few titles on rotation as its not like Call Of Duty, BF, Fortnite etc sell zero on PS or something.

FunkMiller FunkMiller "... if we all stop buying fucking GaaS games, then they'll have to make even more single player games." Who the fuck is "we" lol Love ya Funk, but even with me liking SP more, we don't speak for the majority. For all you know "we" have been doing that shit for years and lots of us likely really do just play single player games, as in...we voted with our wallets already.


What is being done is not a suggestion or a testing of waters to see if people like those games, its in support of an existing market that already has proven its desire to play that genre. Maybe you need to concede this election when the vote has been in for generations.
 
Last edited:

Rayderism

Member
Good to know, and this is very relieving to hear, because I don't want, and won't be buying, any MP games.

To be clear, I have nothing against anyone who enjoys MP games, but those sorts of games are just not for me.
 

Markio128

Gold Member
I call it having a life. I know this is a gaming forum but is it so bizarre that someone could spend their time inbetween 30-40 hour game releases doing literally anything else but looking for the next game to play?

If you’re an actual busy and productive person elden ring and horizon should be enough to last someone months
I literally get in an average of 1-2 hours a day of gaming and then I’ll have a late night or 2 over the weekend, if I’m not ’out out’. Elden Ring and GT7 will keep me going until Xmas at this rate 😂
 
I call it having a life. I know this is a gaming forum but is it so bizarre that someone could spend their time inbetween 30-40 hour game releases doing literally anything else but looking for the next game to play?

If you’re an actual busy and productive person elden ring and horizon should be enough to last someone months

You can be very gainfully employed, productive and also have time to play all the games you want. Depends entirely on what other responsibilities besides work you have.

Not everyone is married with three kids and a full-time job that demands 50 hour working weeks.
 

SSfox

Lies about why mods reply ban and warn me.
I love PS5 and it's the best piece of hardware ever with best pad ever, but personally I'm not excited about Sony 1st party no more, now with gt7 and soon Ragnarok I'm not looking much forward for anything from Sony 1st party. Thankfully there are a lot of others great companies that know how to make great games like FS Square or Capcom to name just those.
 

EverydayBeast

thinks Halo Infinite is a new graphical benchmark
Long time Sony fan you never had a generation like the ps4s they are willing to make sure we have quality games I can’t wait for god of war and spider man 2.
 
I love PS5 and it's the best piece of hardware ever with best pad ever, but personally I'm not excited about Sony 1st party no more, now with gt7 and soon Ragnarok I'm not looking much forward for anything from Sony 1st party. Thankfully there are a lot of others great companies that know how to make great games like FS Square or Capcom to name just those.

I mean, theres only like three games announced outside of the two you mentioned.
 
They are right by saying it’s exciting. It is for the shareholders.

Sony is a business and not a charity and as such they have a duty to optimize the profit as much as possible and ignoring live service games would be ignoring this duty and could be even lead to a legal battle with the shareholders.

It’s an unfortunate a fact that enough people play live service games to make it so profitable. So we must applaud Sony that they are at least still make some single player games and not put all their resources in live service games.

Sony is not to blame here, the players of the live service games are to blame. And Microsoft is doing the same thing, because they also have a duty to optimize profits and not to make gamers happy.
 
They are right by saying it’s exciting. It is for the shareholders.

Sony is a business and not a charity and as such they have a duty to optimize the profit as much as possible and ignoring live service games would be ignoring this duty and could be even lead to a legal battle with the shareholders.

It’s an unfortunate a fact that enough people play live service games to make it so profitable. So we must applaud Sony that they are at least still make some single player games and not put all their resources in live service games.

Sony is not to blame here, the players of the live service games are to blame. And Microsoft is doing the same thing, because they also have a duty to optimize profits and not to make gamers happy.
Both Sony and Microsoft are working on big single player games. I don't see the reason for concern.
 

sn0man

Member
Just like they made a single player racing game recently...

Yeah see, you can have both single player AND GaaS, everyone's a winner (unless your the consumer).
This is exactly my fear. I really hope they don’t go down that road but assume they might.

God of War Essence. You have a crystal that you mine in between fights that gives you essence. Randomly you’ll find gems that turbocharge then crystal burn rate to get more experience out of the crystals. “Would you like to top off your gems?” prompts everywhere. Always online to ensure players will see the prompts and they can monitor which mines players go to for the best crystal drop rate.
 
Last edited:

Javthusiast

Gold Member

Gata Thiccness GIF by DAVE
 

Swift_Star

Gold Member
I said this once and I’m saying it again:
If gaming move away from SP to live services, I’m leaving this hobby… I have no desire in this type of game, regardless of who is doing.
 
I said this once and I’m saying it again:
If gaming move away from SP to live services, I’m leaving this hobby… I have no desire in this type of game, regardless of who is doing.
There is no "if" about it. It's happening. What does "live service ambitions are expanding" means? It means that Sony's product mix is gradually changing towards more GaaS and less traditional single player. Budgets which were prior allocated exclusively to traditional SP games will be funnelled towards GaaS. GaaS elements will begin to seep into SP experiences as well (see GT7).
 
The thought experiment gamers who prefer single player games should be doing is trying to understand how they can break their glass ceiling.

AAA games are getting way more expensive to make and we're not really seeing sales go up.

Perhaps it's time to start looking at Pokemon and Animal Crossing concepts (both have a multiplayer component) if you really enjoy single player.
 
There is no "if" about it. It's happening. What does "live service ambitions are expanding" means? It means that Sony's product mix is gradually changing towards more GaaS and less traditional single player. Budgets which were prior allocated exclusively to traditional SP games will be funnelled towards GaaS. GaaS elements will begin to seep into SP experiences as well (see GT7).

It means Sony is expanding their FP to support GaaS. It doesn't mean they're going to tell Cory to put down God of War and make Guardians of War.

Single player games will never be put on the back burner. Ubisoft learned this the hard way but at some point you have to stop bloating your lineup with live games that end up just competing with each other. Single Player games don't do that
 
Last edited:
It means Sony is expanding their FP to support GaaS. It doesn't mean they're going to tell Cory to put down God of War and make Guardians of War.

Single player games will never be put on the back burner. Ubisoft learned this the hard way but at some point you have to stop bloating your lineup with live games that end up just competing with each other. Single Player games don't do that
Whatever you say pal.
 

Swift_Star

Gold Member
There is no "if" about it. It's happening. What does "live service ambitions are expanding" means? It means that Sony's product mix is gradually changing towards more GaaS and less traditional single player. Budgets which were prior allocated exclusively to traditional SP games will be funnelled towards GaaS. GaaS elements will begin to seep into SP experiences as well (see GT7).
That just means I'll be leaving this gen... Let's just hope this backfires at them both (MS and Sony).
 
That just means I'll be leaving this gen... Let's just hope this backfires at them both (MS and Sony).
That's what we need. More people just saying no and voting with their wallets. Unfortunately, we have to face the fact that GaaS brings in the money. Recurring revenues, high margins as opposed to high cost prestige titles.
 

Hezekiah

Member
The thought experiment gamers who prefer single player games should be doing is trying to understand how they can break their glass ceiling.

AAA games are getting way more expensive to make and we're not really seeing sales go up.

Perhaps it's time to start looking at Pokemon and Animal Crossing concepts (both have a multiplayer component) if you really enjoy single player.
No thanks, not if it means low budget games designed for kids.
 

Hezekiah

Member
More from a design point of view. What types of single player games can sell north of 20, 30+ million copies.
Those games just don't have the scope or production values to interest me.

I think they're fine for Nintendo, but I don't think they'd do aswell on Playstation where expectations are different.
 
Those games just don't have the scope or production values to interest me.

I think they're fine for Nintendo, but I don't think they'd do aswell on Playstation where expectations are different.

Sony Santa Monica and Naughty Dog are working on big AAA single player games right now. Those games are likely the most expensive games in studio history.

If you like the idea of PlayStation being a single player focused company, those games need to...

A. Do better than any game in each studios history. That means north of 20, 30 million copies sold.

B. Do better than most of PlayStations 12+ GAAS titles currently in development.

The Last of Us 3 probably won't do it.
An Egyptian reskin of God of War probably won't do it. So we should be asking what type of game will.
 
Last edited:
GT7 on the homescreen is advertising mtx, got an invite in game from a dealership. Turns out it’s a time limited offer to buy a multimillion Lamborghini for a couple mill. When I try to get it, it says that I have insufficient funds but I could top things up on the PlayStation store.

It’s such a fucking shame that they did this to a sp game while selling it full price. I’m now gonna be buying ,even sony games from IP I love, weeks after release and after checking if they continue with this.
 
Last edited:

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Whatever you say pal.
They just bought two studios to work on that (one of the was created from the start for GaaS games / live services and the other one is Bungie who now have a LOT of experience there). So his argument had logic, you replied to him addressing your concern by blowing raspberries essentially…

homer simpson tongue out GIF


Which one makes the most sense… “concern defiant of logic” or logic? 🤔.
 
They just bought two studios to work on that (one of the was created from the start for GaaS games / live services and the other one is Bungie who now have a LOT of experience there). So his argument had logic, you replied to him addressing your concern by blowing raspberries essentially…

homer simpson tongue out GIF


Which one makes the most sense… “concern defiant of logic” or logic? 🤔.
Not sure you quoted correctly here. Like you correctly said, SONY is investing in studios geared towards GaaS. This is the clear path. Ambitions to grow towards live-service. That automatically means the portfolio mix is shifting from traditional to live-service. However you cut it, it means allocation of resources towards live-service studios which previously could have gone towards traditional prestige game development. Resource pie is the same; how it's divided is now different. Doesn't take a genius to see the corporate direction in my view.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Not sure you quoted correctly here. Like you correctly said, SONY is investing in studios geared towards GaaS. This is the clear path. Ambitions to grow towards live-service. That automatically means the portfolio mix is shifting from traditional to live-service. However you cut it, it means allocation of resources towards live-service studios which previously could have gone towards traditional prestige game development. Resource pie is the same; how it's divided is now different. Doesn't take a genius to see the corporate direction in my view.

You are mixing many things in the same pot. The corporate direction is to grow in the GaaS space, but your understanding of portfolio allocation there goes beyond the obvious (buying additional studios dedicated to GaaS increases the percentage of teams dedicated to GaaS products) and somehow mixes with a concern for studios that were not doing GaaS optimised offerings being also dedicated to GaaS which they say they are not.

They did say they are expanding on GaaS and that they are not stopping investing in traditional core “Sony games” and you can see how over the years they have invested in both. Bungie and Haven for the former, Bluepoint and HouseMarque (and Nixxes to an extent) as well as expansions within their studios (who ramped up in hiring) for the latter.
 
You are mixing many things in the same pot. The corporate direction is to grow in the GaaS space, but your understanding of portfolio allocation there goes beyond the obvious (buying additional studios dedicated to GaaS increases the percentage of teams dedicated to GaaS products) and somehow mixes with a concern for studios that were not doing GaaS optimised offerings being also dedicated to GaaS which they say they are not.

They did say they are expanding on GaaS and that they are not stopping investing in traditional core “Sony games” and you can see how over the years they have invested in both. Bungie and Haven for the former, Bluepoint and HouseMarque (and Nixxes to an extent) as well as expansions within their studios (who ramped up in hiring) for the latter.
Ask yourself why Sony is investing into GaaS. Simply put, it's far more profitable, less resource intensive, and has a predictable return profile. Hence the reason why they are stepping into the space. If Sony is successful in creating some engaging live-service titles (which I'm sure they have the talent to do) don't you think they wouldn't just ramp up their drive towards live-service. You have to look at this decision not from a gamers point of view but from the management point of view. You could plug your ears and say "Sony will keep making the same amount of single player games which are super expensive" never mind the high margin cash cows in live service...but that would be an extremely naive point of view. Don't be mistaken I'm very much against the shift towards GaaS, but I have to concede that's where the growth and return is in the current gaming market.
 

Miles708

Member
Just to be sure we're all on the same page: does Gran Turismo 7 count as single player game?
Because if it does, we're screwed.
 
Ask yourself why Sony is investing into GaaS. Simply put, it's far more profitable, less resource intensive, and has a predictable return profile. Hence the reason why they are stepping into the space. If Sony is successful in creating some engaging live-service titles (which I'm sure they have the talent to do) don't you think they wouldn't just ramp up their drive towards live-service. You have to look at this decision not from a gamers point of view but from the management point of view. You could plug your ears and say "Sony will keep making the same amount of single player games which are super expensive" never mind the high margin cash cows in live service...but that would be an extremely naive point of view. Don't be mistaken I'm very much against the shift towards GaaS, but I have to concede that's where the growth and return is in the current gaming market.

No, GAAS is for Whales, sony still wants to produce single player games that will bring prestige to the platform and get people to buy consoles. GAAS are nice money but they don’t sell consoles and they won’t sell VR units

It wouldn’t make sense these days for any company to NOT want their own version of Roblox, apex, fortnite, or warzone, they make as much money per month as their single player games make per year but its not gonna drive people to playstation platform and it won’t result in IP they can use in other media sectors like movies and tv, which is their main business plan overall as a company now.
 
Last edited:

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Ask yourself why Sony is investing into GaaS. Simply put, it's far more profitable, less resource intensive, and has a predictable return profile. Hence the reason why they are stepping into the space. If Sony is successful in creating some engaging live-service titles (which I'm sure they have the talent to do) don't you think they wouldn't just ramp up their drive towards live-service. You have to look at this decision not from a gamers point of view but from the management point of view. You could plug your ears and say "Sony will keep making the same amount of single player games which are super expensive" never mind the high margin cash cows in live service...but that would be an extremely naive point of view. Don't be mistaken I'm very much against the shift towards GaaS, but I have to concede that's where the growth and return is in the current gaming market.

I am asking that and seeing that they are investing in that and still investing in their core strengths (they spent tons of money in growing their traditional studios and bought a few too, why should we just ignore it?). GaaS will burn a lot of players and publishers, I think Sony is smartly hedging their bets.
 
Last edited:
I am asking that and seeing that they are investing in that and still investing in their core strengths (they spent tons of money in growing their traditional studios and bought a few too, why should we just ignore it?). GaaS will burn a lot of players and publishers, I think Sony is smartly hedging their bets.
Obviously we have two stories for the company here. We will have to wait and see which one ends up being closer to reality a few years down the line.
 

Jemm

Member
The way I see it, both Sony and Microsoft will keep adding live-service games to fund also other kind of games, which are becoming increasingly more expensive to make.
Sony is investing in new studios and MS is in the process of buying Activision-Blizzard, which will add more GaaS -games (like COD) to their portfolio.

The GaaS games will be mostly multiplatform games to get a bigger audience. Some of the income will be funneled towards developing (exclusive) single-player games.
 
Top Bottom