Physiognomonics
Member
It is a mistake. They are slowly going to lose about their appeal. At some point it'll show on their revenues.
How? tell me, are you going to stop playing videogames? Or are you going to buy a PC which you can't afford like 90% of the PS players? No. You'll keep buying your playstation/xbox and buying the games there.It is a mistake. They are slowly going to lose about their appeal. At some point it'll show on their revenues.
People think Sony is going to start releasing their games on Xbox. LOL.
When Naughty Dog make a game they literally make it on a PC that emulates the PS4/PS5 specs.I dont think so, and at the end of the day Sony bought Nixes for port duties, so don't expect Naughty Dog for example to develop for PC.
It's the best of both worlds, having a dedicated studio for ports.
They are, little by little, removing the incentive to buy a PlayStation. Why would they be doing that if they still thought the console was important for them? Selling consoles isn't how they make money, it's from what people then spend on those consoles. If they wanted to keep it that way, why would they be working so hard at making it irrelevant? Seems to me like the plan is something completely different, something closer to them actually going "3rd party". And it might be caused by them realizing they simply cannot outspend MS on stuff like Game Pass and acquisitions. So they buy Bungie to get some GaaS expertise in-house, and that's the future we're heading towards. A future where Sony is just another Ubisoft. *shudders*
Sony doesn't own MLB.
When Naughty Dog make a game they literally make it on a PC that emulates the PS4/PS5 specs.
With the studios doing the bulk of the work and Nixies only needing to do a small percentage though I can definitely see day 1 releases on PC being possible, and failing that maybe a 6 month gap between releases? I definitely don’t think it’ll be a long time in between.Yeah, because the only thing that matters for most people working in game dev are tools. Point is Naughty Dog won't be optimizing the game for PC, they will optimize it for the PS4/Ps5 devkits. Then Nixies comes in and starts working on a port, optimizing it for DX etc
theres plenty of examples that contradict that.Pc day one will kill all the secret sauce console only optimisation because games have to be made with weak hardware in mind without even any direct io storage
It's a Sony game no?Sony doesn't own MLB.
If anyone buys EA, Madden and FIFA would stay multiplat.
Next.
With the studios doing the bulk of the work and Nixies only needing to do a small percentage though I can definitely see day 1 releases on PC being possible, and failing that maybe a 6 month gap between releases? I definitely don’t think it’ll be a long time in between.
With the studios doing the bulk of the work and Nixies only needing to do a small percentage though I can definitely see day 1 releases on PC being possible, and failing that maybe a 6 month gap between releases? I definitely don’t think it’ll be a long time in between.
They developed it, but they don't own the IP.It's a Sony game no?
NBA2K is a Take2 game no? Fifa is an EA game no? But MLB the Show isn't a Sony game...ok.They developed it, but they don't own the IP.
That means it wasn't Sony's decision. You're just going to play word games instead of listening to facts. lol
Sony signed a new deal with MLB, and MLB wanted the game on other platforms. Period.
NBA2K is a Take2 game no? Fifa is an EA game no? But MLB the Show isn't a Sony game...ok.
What you're saying doesn't change the fact that Sony, Take2, EA can't make sports games exclusive to a platform unless it's approved by the league.NBA2K is a Take2 game no? Fifa is an EA game no? But MLB the Show isn't a Sony game...ok.
NBA2K is a Take2 game no? Fifa is an EA game no? But MLB the Show isn't a Sony game...ok.
What are you talking about?What you're saying doesn't change the fact that Sony, Take2, EA can't make sports games exclusive to a platform unless it's approved by the league.
They don't own the MLB name but The Show... Pretty sure they have that trademarked as well as the underlining assets to the game.They developed it, but they don't own the IP.
That means it wasn't Sony's decision. You're just going to play word games instead of listening to facts. lol
Sony signed a new deal with MLB, and MLB wanted the game on other platforms. Period.
Dude was saying a thing that simply wasn't true. I know how it works but his quote wasn't true.Licensed properties are a completely different thing from a general first-party release. God of War, or Horizon will appear on Xbox the day hell freezes over, Sony is not going to put the ips they own on a competitors console. That would be a foolish thing to do.
I don't need to re-read anything. These IPs are not owned by the developers. They're owned by the league.What are you talking about?
Re-read what I quooted in the first place and then come say again that I was wrong with disproving your quote twice in a single post.
This was forced, bad example
This was forced, bad example
Sure, but does it make his original quote more true or less true?
I think like 20% of my reputation score is from laughing smilies when i used to say about why it would be good for Sony if they released their games on PC, and it happened.
I have also got endless smilies when i said numerous times that by the end of the gen Sony will be releasing their games on PC day and date. Well it seems i was wrong about that, its probably going to happen years before the end of the gen lol.
When he said "their games" he obviously meant games owned by Sony. MLB is not owned by Sony. Come on, dude.
Never say never. I could see a situation where Sony ports previous-gen games to Xbox. These budgets are insane. You really need to maximize your margins.Licensed properties are a completely different thing from a general first-party release. God of War, or Horizon will appear on Xbox the day hell freezes over, Sony is not going to put the ips they own on a competitors console. That would be a foolish thing to do.
Oh obviously, since MLB The Show is a Sony game, not the MLB license but the game itself is a Sony game, twist and turn how much you want doesn't change the fact that a Sony game released day one on Game Pass and it's sequel will too.When he said "their games" he obviously meant games owned by Sony. MLB is not owned by Sony. Come on, dude.
It is a mistake. They are slowly going to lose about their appeal. At some point it'll show on their revenues.
Oh obviously, since MLB The Show is a Sony game, not the MLB license but the game itself is a Sony game, twist and turn how much you want doesn't change the fact that a Sony game released day one on Game Pass and it's sequel will too.
Never say never. I could see a situation where Sony ports previous-gen games to Xbox. These budgets are insane. You really need to maximize your margins.
An argument could be made within Sony that putting PS4 and PS3 games on Xbox is not a serious driver of their hardware sales and that the margins could justify it. If anything it could bring more owners over to PS5 and PS6.
Imagine selling an extra 5-10 million copies of Spider-Man 1 at 50 dollars a pop. That's 250-500 million dollars... minus royalties to Microsoft and Marvel and porting cost, I'm not sure how you turn your nose at that much money.
Porting PS4 games to XSX/S/PC would probably pay for what they just spent on Bungie.
There are many big PC only games. And now PC is also getting basically all the console games (excluding Nintendo). It's easy to see why PC gamers see this as a win.PC WINS comments are getting out of hand and sound strange to me.
PC hasn't been getting any real PC centric games for a long, long time in AAA space (and we're talkng about that here). Not a single game since Crysis from 2007 (15 years ago) was made to be PC only/pc first. Don't mention indies, that's a different game entirely.
It is nice to be able to play more console games on PC, but as an old school PC gamer, I wouldn't celebrate that too much. Just a glance over famous successful pc years tells a lot. Today you can't even imagine playing most of the games you're talking about without a controller, that's how pc centric they are.
Getting very expensive PC to play games designed for console hardware and controllers isn't that hot IMO. Playing some true PC classics like we had in the past would be.
PS and then PC a few months / years later.
Day one for both for multiplayer games.
Oh obviously, since MLB The Show is a Sony game, not the MLB license but the game itself is a Sony game, twist and turn how much you want doesn't change the fact that a Sony game released day one on Game Pass and it's sequel will too.
There are NO big pc only games in category we're talking about. Name a few?There are many big PC only games. And now PC is also getting basically all the console games (excluding Nintendo). It's easy to see why PC gamers see this as a win.
I’m really wondering why you’re still here.That’s what he said. They are going multiplat eliminating the need for a PlayStation
Your picture is not fooling anyone anymore.This is so dumb. If they want to go multiplatform they can leave the console business.
Which is probably what they are planning to do.
And everyone who thinks he’s talking about pc is just in denial. Like come on guys how much more clearer can’t he be.
Maybe Phil just acquired take 2 and Sony realizes they can’t survive without cod and gta, and will exit the console business but it is a bad idea. Sony make great consoles and a world where only Microsoft is making consoles is going to be a grim one.
Regardless, this moron was hired to be the CEO of PlayStation and he’s hell bent on going multiplatform. Singlehandedly Killing the most successful console maker across the last five generations. I’ve never quite seen anything like this. They lost just one generation. Man Up and fight. Nintendo survived without cod and gta, so can You. Ffs.
I’m really wondering why you’re still here.
There are many big PC only games. And now PC is also getting basically all the console games (excluding Nintendo). It's easy to see why PC gamers see this as a win.
Problem is that game budgets are huge today, and PC is a 'free' platform, meaning no one owns it like Microsoft and Sony bankrolling games for their consoles.PC WINS comments are getting out of hand and sound strange to me.
PC hasn't been getting any real PC centric games for a long, long time in AAA space (and we're talkng about that here). Not a single game since Crysis from 2007 (15 years ago) was made to be PC only/pc first. Don't mention indies, that's a different game entirely.
It is nice to be able to play more console games on PC, but as an old school PC gamer, I wouldn't celebrate that too much. Just a glance over famous successful pc years tells a lot. Today you can't even imagine playing most of the games you're talking about without a controller, that's how pc centric they are.
Getting very expensive PC to play games designed for console hardware and controllers isn't that hot IMO. Playing some true PC classics like we had in the past would be.
There are NO big pc only games in category we're talking about. Name a few?
OK fine, but that’s mainly because Consoles nowadays are just budget gaming PCs in a box, and all games are using cross-platform engines that scale all the way from smartphones up to high-end PCs.PC WINS comments are getting out of hand and sound strange to me.
PC hasn't been getting any real PC centric games for a long, long time in AAA space (and we're talkng about that here). Not a single game since Crysis from 2007 (15 years ago) was made to be PC only/pc first. Don't mention indies, that's a different game entirely.
It is nice to be able to play more console games on PC, but as an old school PC gamer, I wouldn't celebrate that too much. Just a glance over famous successful pc years tells a lot. Today you can't even imagine playing most of the games you're talking about without a controller, that's how pc centric they are.
Getting very expensive PC to play games designed for console hardware and controllers isn't that hot IMO. Playing some true PC classics like we had in the past would be.