Support NeoGAF

[VFXVeteran]

Yeah, I was one of those people. In my defense, this was a complete 180' from Sony's part, so I couldn't see it happening. Not entirely sure if you were the one who said that HZD Forbidden West would come on PC first, then PS5. That was coo coo.

Still, you were right, and we the PS fanboys were wrong.

Never happier to be a Master Race cultist, tbh.

Nah. I never said that. But my contact did say PC was getting a LOT of 1st party games from Sony. He only was able to tell me about TLOU/Uncharted before. Now he just tells me "everything basically" - whatever that means.

 

[Javthusiast]

Obviously they are hiring a pc director. Have you seen their censoring?

 

[Hezekiah]

The stupidity of what you said, for the most part.

"30% is a lot to hand over" - stupidity.

Once again your tendency to flip out and go off on a tangent on anything PC-related rears itself. Imagine getting triggered and jumping into defense mode for Valve over the above statement

I think the point being made is that if Sony could sell on PC without having to use Steam then they absolutely would. Valve isn't robbing anyone with their fees as it is entirely voluntary. But paying 30 cents on the dollar is a significant chunk of cash. Is it worth it? Obviously. Otherwise Sony games wouldn't be on Steam.

Think it went over his head.

His giant-sized PCMR Steam shareholder head.

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

Nah. I never said that. But my contact did say PC was getting a LOT of 1st party games from Sony. He only was able to tell me about TLOU/Uncharted before. Now he just tells me "everything basically" - whatever that means.

I used the analogy awhile back what Sony was doing was like the frog to a boiling pot of water.

Drop him in an already hot pot of water he will jump right out.

Put him in cool water and slowly turn up the heat and he will boil to death.

Sony has been slowly turning that heat up awhile now to acclimate the hardcore PS fans

 

[Hezekiah]

Have been warning people it was coming

Jim Ryan publicly stated Playstation games were coming to PC.

You didn't warn anybody anything

 

[ReBurn]

Sony profits from console hardware (not during the first months) and accesories too. Directly (profit they get from selling them) and indirectly (for the games and services sold for them, specially the 3rd party ones).

Most of their revenue comes from 3rd party games sold for their consoles. So without a lot of consoles sold they wouldn't sell all these 3rd party games.

Sales of their 1st party games is a small part of their business. And inside them, PC sales are a small part of them. Hardware sales are ok, until they got severy impacted by the chips shortages they were breaking gaming history records, and the demand is there. Once they get rid of these shortages will continue to sell at a great pace.

Yes, they made the investement to port several years old games. They even bought a studio who will be doing this to make sure their main gamedev teams don't need to worry about pc. To port 4 or 6 games per year to PC will be good for them. Ports are cheap and so far seems something pretty profitable.

Sony's PC strategy doesn't have anything to do with third party games unless their goal is to be a publisher of third party games on PC, but maybe it does.

The whole idea that "they make most of their revenue on third party games" could very well be the reason for investing more heavily in PC. It's not good practice to have most of your revenue coming from a pipeline primarily consisting of other company's products.

Supply constraints that reduce Sony's ability to sell their own games also reduce their ability to sell other company's games. All I'm saying is that it would make good sense for them to shore up the revenue pipeline by expanding their ability to sell more of their own software on PC. Holding out hope that people who already bought your last gen games on PS4 will buy them again for $50 on PC just because God of War was popular isn't a strategy. Presumably that's why they're hiring someone to lead PC strategy.

Anyway, people wanting cross gen to end, Sony selling new releases on PC day 1 is a way to get there without as many cross gen sacrifices. I swear I don't understand why this is blasphemy to the die hards unless their sense of self worth is directly tied to who sells the most consoles.

 

[Shmunter]

Sony's PC strategy doesn't have anything to do with third party games unless their goal is to be a publisher of third party games on PC, but maybe it does.

The whole idea that "they make most of their revenue on third party games" could very well be the reason for investing more heavily in PC. It's not good practice to have most of your revenue coming from a pipeline primarily consisting of other company's products.

Supply constraints that reduce Sony's ability to sell their own games also reduce their ability to sell other company's games. All I'm saying is that it would make good sense for them to shore up the revenue pipeline by expanding their ability to sell more of their own software on PC. Holding out hope that people who already bought your last gen games on PS4 will buy them again for $50 on PC just because God of War was popular isn't a strategy. Presumably that's why they're hiring someone to lead PC strategy.

Anyway, people wanting cross gen to end, Sony selling new releases on PC day 1 is a way to get there without as many cross gen sacrifices. I swear I don't understand why this is blasphemy to the die hards unless their sense of self worth is directly tied to who sells the most consoles.

Nah, publisher of 3rd part? Own software?

The only overarching play is a PC storefront - PSN on PC basically. Get the 30% or whatever on each product sold, use own products to drive fanfare and interest. It's all about the store (+sub)

ON PC you cannot subscribe to online, it's blasphemy - but you can subscribe to PSN Pass with hundreds of games for a low fee per month.

 

[//DEVIL//]

"30% is a lot to hand over" - stupidity.

Once again your tendency to flip out and go off on a tangent on anything PC-related rears itself. Imagine getting triggered and jumping into defense mode for Valve over the above statement

Think it went over his head.

His giant-sized PCMR Steam shareholder head.

I do not understand where the 30% even came from. 30% was the reason why EA left Steam in the first place.

I believe After Epic, Steam did lower their profit with some sort of deal with EA ( and I am assuming Sony and MS ) to something way lower than that cut.

or that is what I read a couple of years ago. which is why EA went back to steam again.

 

[Shmunter]

I do not understand where the 30% even came from. 30% was the reason why EA left Steam in the first place.

I believe After Epic, Steam did lower their profit with some sort of deal with EA ( and I am assuming Sony and MS ) to something way lower than that cut.

or that is what I read a couple of years ago. which is why EA went back to steam again.

Steam charging 30% on an open platform just like hardware platform holders is a bit rich. Steam doesn't go through console refresh cycles and the billions it costs each time to launch.

Granted they tried Steam machines, VR and now steamdeck. I suspect they do this to show they are taking risks and are worth the 30% like the other guys, but it's all chicken shit in comparison to the mega corps.

 

[Hezekiah]

I do not understand where the 30% even came from. 30% was the reason why EA left Steam in the first place.

I believe After Epic, Steam did lower their profit with some sort of deal with EA ( and I am assuming Sony and MS ) to something way lower than that cut.

or that is what I read a couple of years ago. which is why EA went back to steam again.

I read that Epic had done something like that, haven't seen anything about Steam but perhaps they have a similar deal with Sony/MS/EA.

 

[Bulletbrain]

30% platform fee is undoubtedly on the high side, but that's the dominance that Valve holds on the PC market. They were the first into the space, and they have the most feature rich and user friendly platform out there. As a consumer I'd of course prefer all games to come out on the already well established and almost ubiquitous steam, but I could see Sony thinking about extending the PSN to PC. I'm sure they will explore the business viability of that option.

 

[reksveks]

You think they could save money by cutting out the biggest digital store and there userbase? Many have tried it and they pretty much all come back. Epic has a much smaller cut and their sales aren't even worth mentioning.

Who said it would have to be one or the other? Sony could do what MS is trying to do and have both and incentive users to use their store via GP/playanywhere features.

 

[kyliethicc]

I wonder if there is a ps store in the works at some point. That’s where the real bucks are.

Some kind of PSN / 1st party game launcher perhaps. I can’t see them doing a full Steam competitor.

Or they’ll just use Epic since they own a bit of them.

 

[ReBurn]

Nah, publisher of 3rd part? Own software?

The only overarching play is a PC storefront - PSN on PC basically. Get the 30% or whatever on each product sold, use own products to drive fanfare and interest. It's all about the store (+sub)

ON PC you cannot subscribe to online, it's blasphemy - but you can subscribe to PSN Pass with hundreds of games for a low fee per month.

Sony primarily makes single player games anyway so they wouldn't be able to sell online access for most of their first last gen PS4 stuff anyway. But since they're making a huge GAAS investment I'm guessing most of them on both console and PC will monetize with MTX and season passes and not require Plus to play.

 

[reksveks]

This can be said for any company. Obviously their main stockholders must want to sell.

It really does depend on the company set-up and stuff like dual class setups does put alot of power in very few people.

 

[yurinka]

Sony's PC strategy doesn't have anything to do with third party games unless their goal is to be a publisher of third party games on PC, but maybe it does.

I meant that their consoles provide indirect profit via 3rd party games sold for them, which is their main business. To also explain why their own console is their main business for them and not PC.

The whole idea that "they make most of their revenue on third party games" could very well be the reason for investing more heavily in PC. It's not good practice to have most of your revenue coming from a pipeline primarily consisting of other company's products.

No. Their business with third parties comes with Sony getting 30% of the revenue generated by the 3rd party games on their digital store (+ extra from the retail ones). The players who come to their console to play them also give them extra profit via services, 1st party games and hardware sales.

In PC they don't own the store/platform, so they don't get the 30% of the 3rd party games sold there. In fact they're the ones who have to pay that fee to the PC store owners. Sony's priority is to sell in their own platform, which is PS and not PC.

Sony would work in the future with 3rd parties if they ever make their own PC store, which as of now isn't the case. Until now they only release a few PC ports of old games from time to time. What they seem to be doing now is that after realizing their first PC ports have been very successful and profitable, they acquiring a dedicated team to port old games to PC so may increase their output, I assume to 4 or 6 games per year (plus from time to time a new Bungie game which would be on PC day one).

Supply constraints that reduce Sony's ability to sell their own games also reduce their ability to sell other company's games. All I'm saying is that it would make good sense for them to shore up the revenue pipeline by expanding their ability to sell more of their own software on PC. Holding out hope that people who already bought your last gen games on PS4 will buy them again for $50 on PC just because God of War was popular isn't a strategy. Presumably that's why they're hiring someone to lead PC strategy.

Anyway, people wanting cross gen to end, Sony selling new releases on PC day 1 is a way to get there without as many cross gen sacrifices. I swear I don't understand why this is blasphemy to the die hards unless their sense of self worth is directly tied to who sells the most consoles.

Even with supply constrains they have been selling consoles and games at a record pace. Being able to ship more consoles they would make more money, but until now they have been making more revenue than any other platform in gaming history, and posting a great profit. Not only new players buy games: they have way over 100M monthly active users on their consoles playing and buying games.

Releasing old games on PC has been a profitable side revenue source, so they will expand there with Bungie games and with Nixxes porting more old games. Regarding day 1 games, I think outside Bungie and maybe some remaster or remake they won't be day one on PC because Sony will want to have (at least temporal) exclusive games on their console as unique selling point. Sony's main priority is to keep people buying consoles and games for them because it's their main business.

It really does depend on the company set-up and stuff like dual class setups does put alot of power in very few people.

I assume all depends on the willingness of stockholders to sell. Independently how a company is, if they all sell enough stocks to someone who offers them a good enough deal/offer, the new owner can rearrange the whole company. As I remember, Tim has 51% of Epic, Tencent 40% and Sony maybe 6-7%. I think it won't happen but let's say Tencent and Tim decide to sell it to Sony and they end getting 97-98%. Sony could do whatever they wanted with it.

At the end of the day companies do whatever their owners want and may morph accordingly. Tim is 52 years old, maybe in a few years decide to retire, changes his mind as happened to ABK, Double Fine, Ninja Theory and many other ones who didn't want to sell and decides to sell the company to some partner like Sony. Let's say Sony continues growing their revenue and profits as they did these years and in a few years end having more money than they do now. Maybe they could buy Tim's part and offer a good deal to Tencent that would have meant a big profit their investment on Epic. If the key stakeholders agree they could make any changes needed to make it happen and integrate the company inside the acquirer's structure before or after the acquisition.

I think it won't happen, and that it's very unlikely, but it's still possible.

 

[ReBurn]

Even with supply constrains they have been selling consoles and games at a record pace. Being able to ship more consoles they would make more money, but until now they have been making more revenue than any other platform in gaming history, and posting a great profit. Not only new players buy games: they have way over 100M monthly active users on their consoles playing and buying games.

This is the line of thinking people always fall back on. Sony has sold consoles faster than before, therefore if they could just get more consoles out they would make even more money. I'm not saying that's wrong. I'm saying it's myopic. At the end of the day Sony is pinning their primary revenue stream on their ability to sell enough console hardware to support it. It's a risky position.

A world with Covid has opened our eyes to the reality thay fabrication lines and factories for critical components can go offline for weeks or months, shipping lines can stop, and plans and projections can go up in flames. Car dealerships with empty lots, planes with no passengers, and grocery stores with empty shelves in countries where that hasn't happened in nearly a decade happened practically overnight. Sony no longer has comfort that they have a lock on their supply chain and currently their hardware is the only way they have to sell their software. They need a way to try to maintain business continuity in the event another global pandemic lands.

One way to do that is to release their games on PC alongside PS5. Another way is to invest in GaaS. People already want Sony to kill PS4 support. But Sony hasn't been able to because PS4 is the foundation that's been carrying them during the supply crunch. PC and GaaS opens up a revenue safety net for them because they know releasing $250 million single player games in a walled garden isn't something they can sustain forever, not at $70 per copy. Making games available to hundreds of millions of PC gamers alongside PS5 gamers makes good financial sense, even if it makes a few people feel a little less special because their entire self worth is based on exclusives.

 

[Midn1ght]

Steam charging 30% on an open platform just like hardware platform holders is a bit rich. Steam doesn't go through console refresh cycles and the billions it costs each time to launch.

Granted they tried Steam machines, VR and now steamdeck. I suspect they do this to show they are taking risks and are worth the 30% like the other guys, but it's all chicken shit in comparison to the mega corps.

Thinking Valve released the Steam Deck to justify the 30% cut is fairly rich as well to be honest.
The mental gymnastic you went through to explain why some companies deserve 30% over Valve because CONSOLE™ is admirable tough.

I do not understand where the 30% even came from. 30% was the reason why EA left Steam in the first place.

I believe After Epic, Steam did lower their profit with some sort of deal with EA ( and I am assuming Sony and MS ) to something way lower than that cut.

or that is what I read a couple of years ago. which is why EA went back to steam again.

Steam has indeed introduced a new system in 2018.

For all sales between $10 million and $50 million, the split goes to 25 percent. And for every sale after the initial $50 million, Steam will take just a 20 percent cut.

I thought Valve did not make special deal for large companies but a quick search on google shows they have a partnership with EA at least for EA Access.
EA and Valve Partnership
Seems like they're definitely open to discussions.
I think they should lower their cut to 20% across board, their system only works for big sellers.

 

[yurinka]

This is the line of thinking people always fall back on. Sony has sold consoles faster than before, therefore if they could just get more consoles out they would make even more money. I'm not saying that's wrong. I'm saying it's myopic. At the end of the day Sony is pinning their primary revenue stream on their ability to sell enough console hardware to support it. It's a risky position.

A world with Covid has opened our eyes to the reality thay fabrication lines and factories for critical components can go offline for weeks or months, shipping lines can stop, and plans and projections can go up in flames. Car dealerships with empty lots, planes with no passengers, and grocery stores with empty shelves in countries where that hasn't happened in nearly a decade happened practically overnight. Sony no longer has comfort that they have a lock on their supply chain and currently their hardware is the only way they have to sell their software. They need a way to try to maintain business continuity in the event another global pandemic lands.

One way to do that is to release their games on PC alongside PS5. Another way is to invest in GaaS. People already want Sony to kill PS4 support. But Sony hasn't been able to because PS4 is the foundation that's been carrying them during the supply crunch. PC and GaaS opens up a revenue safety net for them because they know releasing $250 million single player games in a walled garden isn't something they can sustain forever, not at $70 per copy. Making games available to hundreds of millions of PC gamers alongside PS5 gamers makes good financial sense, even if it makes a few people feel a little less special because their entire self worth is based on exclusives.

Sony's PC strategy doesn't have anything to do with third party games unless their goal is to be a publisher of third party games on PC, but maybe it does.

The whole idea that "they make most of their revenue on third party games" could very well be the reason for investing more heavily in PC. It's not good practice to have most of your revenue coming from a pipeline primarily consisting of other company's products.

Supply constraints that reduce Sony's ability to sell their own games also reduce their ability to sell other company's games. All I'm saying is that it would make good sense for them to shore up the revenue pipeline by expanding their ability to sell more of their own software on PC. Holding out hope that people who already bought your last gen games on PS4 will buy them again for $50 on PC just because God of War was popular isn't a strategy. Presumably that's why they're hiring someone to lead PC strategy.

Anyway, people wanting cross gen to end, Sony selling new releases on PC day 1 is a way to get there without as many cross gen sacrifices. I swear I don't understand why this is blasphemy to the die hards unless their sense of self worth is directly tied to who sells the most consoles.

Sony is not only more successful than ever with their current strategy: they are growing in all areas. They don't need to change their strategy: they should continue what they do and to continue growing in all fronts (not only in PC).

Sony focus mainly on selling (mostly 3rd party) games for their console, but is also expanding their internal development of games by expanding all their teams and acquiring more, improving and expanding their services like PS+ which after the overhaul will be released on mobile and smart tvs, is bringing a new generation of VR, it's also releasing on PC and via Bungie or MLB on other consoles, they are also investing on eSports with EVO acquisition/PS Tournaments/funding and hosting tournaments, plans to grow on mobile to bring their IPs there and bought a gamedev studio that already generates them over a Billion per year, they are bringing their PlayStation IPs to movies and tv shows, they partnered/hired/bought talent from Destiny/CoD BO/Apex Legends/Rainbow Six Siege/AC/etc to expand on GaaS while at the same continue doing both big and small not GaaS games. They also partner with more big and small, both AAA and indie stablished and new 3rd party talent.

Sony is growing in all fronts investing hard.

But it's better for them to have these players on PS than in PC because they monetize them way bettter: instead of having to pay the 30% to Valve they get the 100% of their games on PS, and to keep them -at least temporally- exclusive their 1st party games act as USP to sell more consoles and bring more players who will buy 1st and 3rd party games plus will spend on services and accesories where Sony also profits from. Once they monetized these games during some years and after discounting, price cutting them and including them on subscriptions, these games no longer produce almost revenue, so at that point and not day one it's when it's the best point for them to release them on PC to get extra profits without negatively affecting PS hardware and software sales.

3rd party games for their console is their main revenue source but they don't rely on it since they have many more and are growing in all of them. It obviously affects their PC strategy: their console and its 3rd party games are way more important for Sony than PC because generate way more money for them than PC. It's ok for them to increase their output of old games ported to PC, but doesn't make sense to sacrifice their main business to grow a very secondary, way less profitable business. They earn more money directly and indirectly from a console game sale than from a PC game sale, so they priority for them is to sell it -when possible- on console.

Sony isn't a platform holder in PC, doesn't own a PC store so they have nothing to do with 3rd party sales in PC.

 

[Larogue]

I would love for them to have a PlayStation Launcher, until then I'll keep buying single player games and their exclusives on the PS5. Everything else, PC.

Not another PC crapware launcher please.

 

[Shmunter]

Thinking Valve released the Steam Deck to justify the 30% cut is fairly rich as well to be honest.
The mental gymnastic you went through to explain why some companies deserve 30% over Valve because CONSOLE™ is admirable tough.



Steam has indeed introduced a new system in 2018.


I thought Valve did not make special deal for large companies but a quick search on google shows they have a partnership with EA at least for EA Access.
EA and Valve Partnership
Seems like they're definitely open to discussions.
I think they should lower their cut to 20% across board, their system only works for big sellers.

Sharpen your reading & comprehension, I never justified anyones prices. Derppp

 

[Roronoa Zoro]

Release ports after 6-12 months. I’ll take my six figure salary and stock options Sony thanks

Yep. Theatrical window to sell the console

 

[Bo_Hazem]

Playstation games coming exclusively for Macs.

If they actually do that, man, it'll be a massive hit for Mac. I would 100% support that.

 

[Roronoa Zoro]

Not another PC crapware launcher please.

But mah trophies and cross saves and purchases

 

[Zeroing]

If they actually do that, man, it'll be a massive hit for Mac. I would 100% support that.

Macs are overlooked, untapped territory. Since Sony is making a mobile division, why not? Apple's Metal works also on macs and it is easier to scale.
If Apple having a PS5 controller on their conference peaked people's attention, imagine what would be showcasing a Playstation game running natively on a M1 chip to showcase its power.

 

[Hari Seldon]

Not another PC crapware launcher please.

As others have said, the most it would be is some thin client that launches from steam just to suck up the user data and sync shit with PSN. They would be absolutely insane to attempt to launch an exclusive PSN store on PC with no multiplayer games and just old single player ports. That shit would fail faster than CNN+. EGS has fortnite and no one buys shit off of that. PS has nothing close to the appeal of fortnite to be the pillar of a new store.

 

[yurinka]

It can't be said for any company. Sweeney owns Epic. Its his personal toy, you can say. It doesnt matter what the shareholders want or say, because he owns the controlling part. Sony can't buy Epic unless Sweeney wants to. It doesnt matter what tencent or any other shareholder says or wants. They dont own enough shares to have a say in the matter.

I mentioned it can be said for any company and when mentioned main shareholders he's included as one of them. So what he want or says matters. Tencent owns 40% of the company, which combined with what Sweeney owns it's almost the totality of the company. Tencent doesn't own the controlling stake but they can block others from acquiring the totality of the company or at least a big chunk of it.

 

[BusierDonkey]

If they release GT7 on Steam I'll buy it. I'm sure as shit not going to pay $650 for a console just to play it.

 

[Lillie]

PC gaming going to be eating well

 

[ArtHands]

I do not understand where the 30% even came from. 30% was the reason why EA left Steam in the first place.

I believe After Epic, Steam did lower their profit with some sort of deal with EA ( and I am assuming Sony and MS ) to something way lower than that cut.

or that is what I read a couple of years ago. which is why EA went back to steam again.

Steam certainly doesn't need to make any deal with Sony and MS, considering they need PC sales more than Steam needs them.

 

[ArtHands]

If they release GT7 on Steam I'll buy it. I'm sure as shit not going to pay $650 for a console just to play it.

That's the sentiment a LOT of PC players share. Sony only realized in recent years that releasing games on PC will not have negative effect on their consoles side.

Only a matter of time until Sony 1st party games get released concurrently on PS5 and Steam.

 

[Dream-Knife]

After Tarkov, I'm never buying another non-Steam game. Good luck Sony.

 

[SNG32]

Sony going all in on PC doesn't mean another PC launcher. Why do people think this? Even the link mentions Steam and EGS, which they already have gone all in on. They have even invested heavily into Epic. Releasing games exclusively on unpopular stores at this point isn't very beneficial. Microsoft and EA are perfect examples of that.

It does matter when your a game company whos known for there exclusives. If Sony releases exclusives day and date on there launcher there will be a lot of people who will download off there platform.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

It does matter when your a game company whos known for there exclusives. If Sony releases exclusives day and date on there launcher there will be a lot of people who will download off there platform.

A Sony branded launcher only works if there's a ton of first party exclusives and theres enough draw. As of right now, the games go through Steam.

So many exclusives that it makes Steam gamers split their gaming into two launchers - Steam and Sony. And a gamer goes Sony because it has tons of first party AND third party games to make it worth it.

As we've seen some third party companies have bailed ship on their own dedicated launcher even though you'd think it would be worth it to force PC gamers into using their launcher for their games ad hoarding sales, and they use Steam for everything else. Hasnt worked out. Steam is so powerful, it's worth ditching the hassle and losing 30% cuts to Steam for sake of 200 million Steam users.

At current situation. Sony going dedicated launcher assumes the PC gamer is willing to do that for 4 year old ports of console games. Would tons of gamers do a Sony launcher if it has tons of exclusives ONLY, or do a holistic store like EGS and Steam where it's first party and lots of third party games, who knows.

 

[OZ9000]

The sooner console exclusivity dies the better. I want Sony to adopt the same strategy as Microsoft and release all AAA titles on the same time on the PC.

 

[Shmunter]

The sooner console exclusivity dies the better. I want Sony to adopt the same strategy as Microsoft and release all AAA titles on the same time on the PC.

Those titles exist and are funded by the concept of capturing the customer into an eco system however. Remove the eco system and risk the games no longer being quite the same.

 

[MonarchJT]

That's the sentiment a LOT of PC players share. Sony only realized in recent years that releasing games on PC will not have negative effect on their consoles side.

Only a matter of time until Sony 1st party games get released concurrently on PS5 and Steam.

Sony is a Japanese Company as such at it ...the changes are slow, sometimes too slow ... it is a behavior that reflects the neponic companies

 

[remember_spinal]

Those titles exist and are funded by the concept of capturing the customer into an eco system however. Remove the eco system and risk the games no longer being quite the same.

Yeah people don’t understand, sony can justify the budget of these games because they are meant to sell consoles and further lock people into using playstation store for their purchases along with MTX.

1st party games exist as shiny bait, which is why 3rd party devs usually don’t match the budget of 1st party software, and if they do (like rockstar) it takes them years to put out just one game.

Also these games are built entirely to utilize playstation hardware which is why they usually run really well and look really good. Co-developing for PC will not only take longer but lead to more unoptimizable games

 

[MonarchJT]

Those titles exist and are funded by the concept of capturing the customer into an eco system however. Remove the eco system and risk the games no longer being quite the same.

well that concept was simply wrong and it has been proven multiple times that releasing titles on other platforms does not necessarily deteriorate your market.

 

[remember_spinal]

well that concept was simply wrong and it has been proven multiple times that releasing titles on other platforms does not necessarily deteriorate your market.

It hasn’t really been proven, the xbox one sold 50 million consoles, whos to say it couldn’t have sold 30m more if they didn’t release their games on pc?

 

[MonarchJT]

Macs are overlooked, untapped territory. Since Sony is making a mobile division, why not? Apple's Metal works also on macs and it is easier to scale.
If Apple having a PS5 controller on their conference peaked people's attention, imagine what would be showcasing a Playstation game running natively on a M1 chip to showcase its power.

M1 3d "power"? is certainly inferior to a PS5 .....M1 Max is 3/8% faster than a 3060. xbsx and PS5 obliterate normal vanilla M1 chip (for 3d games)

 

[Shmunter]

well that concept was simply wrong and it has been proven multiple times that releasing titles on other platforms does not necessarily deteriorate your market.

You drive customers through quality and unique products. I’m not sure how that’s been disproven? Price and a race to the bottom to acquire customers is a false economy and runs into the ground eventually.

 

[MonarchJT]

It hasn’t really been proven, the xbox one sold 50 million consoles, whos to say it couldn’t have sold 30m more if they didn’t release their games on pc?

the Xbox series it is living proof ...that is selling more than 360 the software also sells even if released on gamepass imagine

 

[MonarchJT]

You drive customers through quality and unique products. I’m not sure how that’s been disproven? Price and a race to the bottom to acquire customers is a false economy and runs into the ground eventually.

quality and unique products as if other using other method cannot boast quality (even higher) or unique products hw or sw. All so far-fetched

 

[Shmunter]

quality and unique products as if other using other method cannot boast quality (even higher) or unique products hw or sw. All so far-fetched

Errrrr

 

[remember_spinal]

the Xbox series it is living proof ...that is selling more than 360 the software also sells even if released on gamepass imagine

A console that has barely sold 13m consoles isn’t proof of anything. The ceiling for xbox will continually get lower with the pc split.

i doubt an xbox console wil lever sell over 80m units again

 

[MonarchJT]

Errrrr

do you see where the short circuit comes from? Probably in your opinion Flight Simulator, Forza horizon, Halo and all the rest are not High quality product ... but you have to understand that it is objectively yours personal opinion. Maybe the games produced by Sony are more on your strings but they are certainly not all incredible productions nor that clearly separate them from the competition so much to say that if market models change, games will drop in quality.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Errrrr

I think he is sneakily trying to say the word that rhymes with PameGass… edit: oh he bested me and went full on Xbox and GamePass in a Sony thread.

.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

A console that has barely sold 13m consoles isn’t proof of anything. The ceiling for xbox will continually get lower with the pc split.

i doubt an xbox console wil lever sell over 80m units again

I wouldnt put any traditional console as beating an old high score. I dont think PS5 will beat PS4 (120M) or PS2 (150 M) either.

Times have changed and a lot of gamers seem shifted to PC or mobile. Console hardware sales peaked during the 360/Wii/PS3 era.

Nintendo might not even beat DS's 150M sales with Switch even though Switch captures both a Nintendo console or handheld gamer in one swoop.

 

[MonarchJT]

A console that has barely sold 13m consoles isn’t proof of anything. The ceiling for xbox will continually get lower with the pc split.

i doubt an xbox console wil lever sell over 80m units again

well, till now data and projections are showing the opposite ...your opinion leave the time it finds. We will see at the end of gen. And anyway the real question is the money earned over the entire gen by releasing games on PC from day one of the console's launch ....will make up for the lack of users from the 4th or 5th year onwards?