• 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.

DO THE MATH.... Sony expanding first party development is a FAR better strategy than acquiring a big third party publishers

sinnergy

Member
For Sony fans it’s doing math … for me it’s entertainment , MS is grabbing headlines , Sony is getting side lines ..

In the end it’s business and they both bought stuff for years .. Sony even bought more over the years. ..

It’s just more news that MS does it in two big scoops .
 

ChiefDada

Gold Member
Im sorry, but pretty sure you bought a financial book on tuesday and your just spouting nonsense.. Im not an expert but i have a basic knowledge of the fundamentals of investing.

Your full of shit.

it has been fun thread again, ill be back to tomorrow if you fancy doing this again.
Lol and here I thought we were making progress. Yes, I purchased a financial book just in time to discuss the Activision acquisition. You're another one that apparently loves to argue.
 
What do you mean? You think it'll be bad if they made people pay for PS+ in order to play these new coming multiplayer games?
If the multiplayer games business model is F2P and it is dependent on selling MTs then the model of making people jump through a pay wall for the MP content is kind of backward. MS put out halo MP for free because their long term goals was to make money on MTs, right? Now, the MTs in Halo are kind of shitty right now, but we can still see that is their market strategy. If Sony's strategy is to sell their subscription they are limiting the potential sales of skins and cosmetics.
 
Last edited:

MonarchJT

Banned
What are you talking about. I’ve never bought a console because of call of duty. And I buy it every year. If call of duty goes away (and it probably won’t) I’m not buying a Xbox for it Sony will just bring back socom if that happens. I’m guessing..
and pls tell socom to replace cod? it was a great success that Sony had to stop to produce to give light to other products /s
 

DJ12

Member
I'm seriously OK with this. MS buy up some publishers that have fallen on difficult times, with some good IPs. Make them all Microsoft GamePass exclusive.

Sony, eventually, let MS in to the PlayStation ecosystem (Maybe after MS take Sony to dinner and buy her roses).

Everyone wins, apart from the poor xbox fans that currently see this as a massive win for them.

I'm not trolling here by asking this question, post Bethesda, has Phil ever said games will be xbox exclusive, or has he always said platform/gamepass exclusive?
 
Last edited:

mckmas8808

Banned
If the multiplayer games business model is F2P and it is dependent on selling MTs then the model of making people jump through a pay wall for the MP content is kind of backward. MS put out halo MP for free because their long term goals was to make money on MTs, right? Now, the MTs in Halo are kind of shitty right now, but we can still see that is their market strategy. If Sony's strategy is to sell their subscription they are limiting the potential sales of skins and cosmetics.

This is a good point. Hmmmm.....hopefully Jim can figure this out. If he does....the PS5 can sell over 120 million units and they could end up with over 70 million PS+ subs by the year 2026.
 

Zeroing

Banned
Well yeah, they now own a huge portfolio of games, patents and intellectual property which will promote via game pass to consoles, pc, cloud, androids, iphones etc. A portfolio which will most probably be further expanded in the near future with the next acquisitions.
It is also hard to keep up with the millions of reasons nonxbox fans make up to downplay xbox efforts for dominance. Whether we like it or not, xbox is making some bold decisions which will shape the future of gaming while the competition seems unable to follow.
I wasn’t downplaying, I was just pointing out how people cling to this idea that this time, Xbox will dominate.
We been hearing that for 20 years. Dude I’m from the time of “PS3 will be Sony last console”, “Nintendo is no competition” “the power of the cloud” “ we will kill Sony” etc…

yet things still remain much unchanged.

I will wait and see…
 
Do the Math. Gamepass is a much better value then $70 first party PS5 titles. This coming from a person who is looking forward to several PS5 titles.
 

Tschumi

Member
Spider Man and co only sold that many copies because people bought the console they are on because of games like Call of Duty. This argument falls flat on its face instantly.
Watching your posts is like going on a 100 mile rally lap and seeing a village burning increasingly violently every time i pass by...
 
Last edited:

Thirty7ven

Banned
For Sony fans it’s doing math … for me it’s entertainment , MS is grabbing headlines , Sony is getting side lines ..

In the end it’s business and they both bought stuff for years .. Sony even bought more over the years. ..

It’s just more news that MS does it in two big scoops .

This is basically a bunch of bull shite, and I wonder if you and the rest of the lost that post exactly the same bs here and in other places are simply ignorant on the matter or do it on purpose.

Sony has been out there actually making new IP. They buy studios they worked with for years. MS goes out there and buys IP, along with studios they didn’t even work with (not like Sony). Basically their brand is weak, they are ditching Xbox for Gamepass but they don’t have identity, legacy, IP, pipeline or culture, so they go out there like a rich white girl and buy it at the mall off a shopping list.
 
Last edited:

EDMIX

Member
Xbox failed last gen because of the launch not because of their IP
Greatly disagreed.

PS3 launched horribly, how did they outsell 360 in a gen where MS had a whole year head start?

Its not about how you start, its about how you finish and this is a marathon, its not a race. We can't fucking blame YEARS, based on a few weeks, foh.

What flopped XONE wasn't its launch, it was everything they continued to do after, as in a the launch bad, but their actions following continue that concept of "here is Gears, Halo, Forza" annnnnnnnd have a nice day, that was pretty much the majority of their big spending and I can't even blame Phil for that, he is in charge of something already set in motion and has to only make deep plans for next gen, he even stated in a interview on why some game wasn't coming to PC and he stated that it started development before he was in charge and if it was him, it would have been on PC and XB day and date, but that makes you question what else he would do differently and shows he is limited based on that, games take time to make and he has to bet on existing IP MORE then taking risk this late.

That being said, XONE didn't flop based on launch, all their actions year after year is what reminded people to ignore the platform. PS4 didn't fucking sell 100 million units in 1 year man, clearly something is happening EVERY YEAR to get those sales, thus we can see that something ISN"T happening at MS at that time to move the needle for XONE.
What are you talking about the major third party companies are pretty much known for their ip.
And? They are also known for new IP too bud, look at the fucking MOST hyped games coming this year, Starfield, Elden Ring, Gotham Knights, Hogwarts etc

You don't know what you don't know, which means yes people can be hype about IP they KNOW about, they also can be hype about a 100% brand new thing too, I don't even know why you made that sound like some either or lol
I just want a good jak and daxter game.
I just want that to happen when someone actually has a good idea for one...
The Wii U is just an all around failure
I know right, as in...those IP alone couldn't save it? =)
You are adding a lot to a small line. I didn't mention anything about quality or milking the ip to death.
You talked about them not "abandoning" IP as if they needed to always keep it relevant no matter what, you completely fucking disregarded WHY those IP are no longer coming out


So you can't ask to not do this or that and then ignore the results.
They know folks still love starfox cause it was added as dlc
lol oh enough still love it.....for DLC, clearly not enough considering the series of flops. I'm not saying NO ONE loves Star Fox, what I'm saying is what has that IP done for us lately? Read the post, understand what that phrase means and take off the nostalgia glasses.

Pacman was added as DLC too, go figure lol
It doesn't have to be naughty dog.I'd be completely okay if they kicked jak to insomniac or anyone that could
nah, I'm ok IF it comes back if someone has a good idea and it can work. Thats it.

We don't need this ironclad, milked, 100% always has to release mindset at that publisher.
I'm ok if it comes when it comes. I used to really wish it came and even wanted Ready At Dawn to do it........then Star Fox flops kept happening and I realized maybe it was for the best that Jak and Daxter as a IP was raped, milked, abused, murdered 2x AC130ed lol

Star Fox also flopped with that...ok I'll stop with Star Fox.
What is your deal with star fox. That is like your go to punching bag
^ I lied.

It flopped....like, a lot. Its a great example to use and sir, I only need 1 fucking example, they have tons of other flops of IPs they abused to death over the generations lol I'd rather not see that happen to Sony IPs if it can be helped. Its why I don't care that Media Molecule went from LBP to Dreams to Sackboy, if you have fucking idea, awesome, if you don't....leave the fucking ip alone and move on UNTIL you have a good idea. So Star Fox is a easily enough example of a known character that many know and love, that is recognizable, that also is more known, then trusted as a actual solid quality video game series.

Thus, just cause they have your attention, doesn't mean they have your respect.

You need to learn the difference or else you are going to always be under this impression that being know = sales profit. Not all the time bud lol You can be known and it can be more for a negative thing, by a majority that doesn't play games anymore etc. Stop getting so hung up on this "iconic" or "historic" crap, all major publishers that have been around over over 20 plus years all have that, factually by any fucking definition, ALL OF THEM have that regardless of how you are trying to define that term.

APEX came out of NO WHERE, from one of the oldest publishers in gaming in terms of EA, 100 million players later, keep telling us how "historic" or "iconic" EA prosperities are doing 100 million solely based on that shit. The new generation of consumers doesn't fucking care, I've seen ZERO evidence that any of that is of a significate relevance, even with Nintendo, a publisher I'm literally picking on for lolz, even they can't rely solely on that concept, the games MUST be of quality or they flop. Period. Its why Mario Kart can break a record and Star Fox can flop.

In the defense of even Nintendo gamers, stop forcing this insulting shit that they are buying games solely based on this, the publisher has enough flops to show that image ALONE is not selling those games, some do well, some flop, but the games must be of great quality first before we ever factor "icons" sir. Stop insulting that base in insinuating that.

That being said, too many publishers have broken too many records with new IP to pretend as if a requirement is needed to fit some nostalgic neck beard bullshit.
The kids playing MP these days don't care about nostalgia. the most popular online games today are new. Sony just needs good formulas that work
^^^^

Agreed 1000x. Too much evidence shows that barely factors into what why gamers buy a MP game. I love Socom and Warhawk as much as the next guy, but Sony's focus needs to be on something new, solid, by a new team and something of great quality.

Many of their teams have taken a crack at MP shooters and I feel enough have shown they simply can't do it to the degree of other developers.
 

GigaBowser

The bear of bad news
This is basically a bunch of bull shite, and I wonder if you and the rest of the lost that post exactly the same bs here and in other places are simply ignorant on the matter or do it on purpose.

Sony has been out there actually making new IP. They buy studios they worked with for years. MS goes out there and buys IP, along with studios they didn’t even work with (not like Sony). Basically their brand is weak, they are ditching Xbox for Gamepass but they don’t have identity, legacy, IP, pipeline or culture, so they go out there like a rich white girl and buy it at the mall off a shopping list.
Well said.

We'll see if this actually translates to sales.
 

EDMIX

Member
Well said.

We'll see if this actually translates to sales.

I think it will translate greatly for them.

I agree with what that person is saying on how Sony buys vs MS and I even agree with you on that Sony got a good ass deal on Insomniac and maybe looking for those diamonds in the dirt make sense, they have a game moving fucking 20 million from a 200 million buy, MS on the other hand has a game that can move 20 million or more yearly, but 70 billion, massive difference so I give you credit. You are making a sound point that can and should be debated as for all we know, Sony still moves more units this gen then MS based on those key studios. Maybe that identity issue is enough to have people not jump on board XB, who knows, but I personally feel its simply not important enough to stake a whole generation on in terms of if they do well or not. I think they can be a jack of all trades and have no identity and still break records with sales.

I do agree that its.....its kinda cheap that they can't really create those concepts so want to be known for just buying them from other publishers, but how much consumers really care about this? So I don't disagree with the statement you are making or the person you are replying to, simply I have doubts on how many really care enough to forgo buying COD or Doom or Elder Scrolls because of this. Ironically, the very IP and teams I named, also started at different publishers, before being bought by different publishers lol

Infinity Ward used to work under EA doing Medal Of Honor, bought by Activision, heads leave to go back to EA, make ReSpawn, the rest stay at Activision, get bought by MS.
From ID to Zenimax, now owned by MS
From Media Technology Limited to Zenimax, now owned by MS.

Those moves didn't stop those IP and teams from moving monster units, I don't really know how much of this idea will truly effect sales if at all.

I don't know how much consumers really care or value organic growth, I don't even believe the majority knows who makes their games, I've caught even people on this very forum make statements that expose that they don't even know who makes their games, let alone truly care HOW that IP or studio came about.





Example. I've literally seen someone state they hate how woke BFV was and hated how the developer spoke to fans.....they are now hype about that free to play game coming out, by the exact team of people that said those statements. Why? Oh the team isn't named DICE, they completely disregarded WHO made those statements and are staying stuff like "Day 1" and or "hype" and now suddenly that female lead is hip and innovative lol It tells me MOST gamers, even on here, may not REALLY know who makes their games and even in a situation that is controversial, they still don't know. You can't make this wild shit up.

Think about it like this, Kevin Spacey, massive outrage. Imagine if someone stated "WHAT, get that pedo off TV, no more House Of Cards, we don't want that around here" and then HBO picked up a show by Spacey and that same person states "FINALLY a good political drama, not made by pedos like that nasty House Of Cards". You likely won't see MOST tv goers staying that, you likely might see gamers do this as they generally don't know who makes their games. They hear about a remaster and instantly think no more GTA6 cause remaster lol.

Thus, how can we really believe consumers REALLY care about this "who bought this" and or "how did this team get formed" and "Was it organic" and "was it a pure buyout" etc. I just don't now if I can honestly say consumer put that much stock into any of this like we do, cause I can't even say for sure 100% "we" even put that much stock into this when you have lots not even know who makes their game, let alone owns the IP or how those deals were made etc.


^ didn't mean to make a baby forest lol
 

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
Sony, eventually, let MS in to the PlayStation ecosystem (Maybe after MS take Sony to dinner and buy her roses).

Everyone wins, apart from the poor xbox fans that currently see this as a massive win for them.
Yeah, I dont know if everyone wins in case gamepass goes on PS by virtue of CoD being held hostage. The moment you give in is the moment you lose any kind of leverage. Whats next after CoD is allowed to go to PS in exchange for gamepass?

Does Sony have to allow Halo on Playstation?
Does Sony have to allow MLB The Show for free on Playstation Gamepass?
Would Sony be forced to port TLOU and GOW to Xbox in exchange for CoD?
Starfield on PS is great for PS gamers, but if its tied to Gamepass, is it really worth the $3 they might get from every gamepass sub? It's a fraction of the $18 they might have gotten from every PSN sale of the game.
Would Sony's own subscription service struggle to compete with Gamepass?
Would Sony have to allow Xbox Live Gold on Playstation?

It's not as simple as letting MS in their walled garden. The day Sony gives in is the day they hand the keys to their kingdom. It's why Apple went to court against Epic and Microsoft. You just know MS will want a cut of all PSN microtransactions too for all gamepass games.
 

EDMIX

Member
Yeah, I dont know if everyone wins in case gamepass goes on PS by virtue of CoD being held hostage. The moment you give in is the moment you lose any kind of leverage. Whats next after CoD is allowed to go to PS in exchange for gamepass?

Does Sony have to allow Halo on Playstation?
Does Sony have to allow MLB The Show for free on Playstation Gamepass?
Would Sony be forced to port TLOU and GOW to Xbox in exchange for CoD?
Starfield on PS is great for PS gamers, but if its tied to Gamepass, is it really worth the $3 they might get from every gamepass sub? It's a fraction of the $18 they might have gotten from every PSN sale of the game.
Would Sony's own subscription service struggle to compete with Gamepass?
Would Sony have to allow Xbox Live Gold on Playstation?

It's not as simple as letting MS in their walled garden. The day Sony gives in is the day they hand the keys to their kingdom. It's why Apple went to court against Epic and Microsoft. You just know MS will want a cut of all PSN microtransactions too for all gamepass games.

Agreed. Based on the whole open source vs closed source concepts and walled garden stuff, those companies take that seriously and I don't know if even COD is enough for them to allow all that. I'd argue COD needs that install base for sales, more then Sony NEEDS that IP to move units.
 

sinnergy

Member
This is basically a bunch of bull shite, and I wonder if you and the rest of the lost that post exactly the same bs here and in other places are simply ignorant on the matter or do it on purpose.

Sony has been out there actually making new IP. They buy studios they worked with for years. MS goes out there and buys IP, along with studios they didn’t even work with (not like Sony). Basically their brand is weak, they are ditching Xbox for Gamepass but they don’t have identity, legacy, IP, pipeline or culture, so they go out there like a rich white girl and buy it at the mall off a shopping list.
And now rich while girls are bad ? Because of your opinion and standards .. great going man 🤡
 
Last edited:

NahaNago

Member
Greatly disagreed.

PS3 launched horribly, how did they outsell 360 in a gen where MS had a whole year head start?

Its not about how you start, its about how you finish and this is a marathon, its not a race. We can't fucking blame YEARS, based on a few weeks, foh.

What flopped XONE wasn't its launch, it was everything they continued to do after, as in a the launch bad, but their actions following continue that concept of "here is Gears, Halo, Forza" annnnnnnnd have a nice day, that was pretty much the majority of their big spending and I can't even blame Phil for that, he is in charge of something already set in motion and has to only make deep plans for next gen, he even stated in a interview on why some game wasn't coming to PC and he stated that it started development before he was in charge and if it was him, it would have been on PC and XB day and date, but that makes you question what else he would do differently and shows he is limited based on that, games take time to make and he has to bet on existing IP MORE then taking risk this late.

That being said, XONE didn't flop based on launch, all their actions year after year is what reminded people to ignore the platform. PS4 didn't fucking sell 100 million units in 1 year man, clearly something is happening EVERY YEAR to get those sales, thus we can see that something ISN"T happening at MS at that time to move the needle for XONE.
The ps3 just came out after I think the best selling console of all time versus the only 24 million that the xbox sold. Even if they came out a year earlier all of the customers who were fans of the original console should have bought it before the ps3 even came out.

The launch hurt the xone quite a bit and slowed down the momentum of the xone. Plus the halo collections had issues when launched. So that didn't help renew a lot of interest in the xboxone. Even with just those 3 ip and the terrible launch they still sold somewhere between 50-60 million xbox ones.
And? They are also known for new IP too bud, look at the fucking MOST hyped games coming this year, Starfield, Elden Ring, Gotham Knights, Hogwarts etc

You don't know what you don't know, which means yes people can be hype about IP they KNOW about, they also can be hype about a 100% brand new thing too, I don't even know why you made that sound like some either or lol

I just want that to happen when someone actually has a good idea for one...
It took them forever for them to decide to make a new ip like starfield. Everyone has been calling elden ring just open world souls, and gotham knights plus hogwarts are from very popular ips even if it is technically new game ip.

Those third party publishers are pretty much know for their ips and not for the most part because they created a new ip. How do you not know this.

I just want a great game whether they have a some new good idea for one or not.
I know right, as in...those IP alone couldn't save it? =)

You talked about them not "abandoning" IP as if they needed to always keep it relevant no matter what, you completely fucking disregarded WHY those IP are no longer coming out


So you can't ask to not do this or that and then ignore the results.

lol oh enough still love it.....for DLC, clearly not enough considering the series of flops. I'm not saying NO ONE loves Star Fox, what I'm saying is what has that IP done for us lately? Read the post, understand what that phrase means and take off the nostalgia glasses.

Pacman was added as DLC too, go figure lol
Nothing could have saved that the wii u, IP is included in that nothing.

I still want a new jak game,just not for Naughty Dog to make it now.

I don't have nostalgia glasses for star fox. I'm just of the opinion that if they gave it a decent budget and had Nintendo themselves make it without some new crazy gimmick then it would sell okay.
Star Fox also flopped with that...ok I'll stop with Star Fox.

^ I lied.
and like I said but Nintendo has a new mario, mario kart, and zelda that sold like crazy. The new metroid game also sold well so Nintendo just mishandled the star fox game. You can keep using it as your example but when the majority of third party publishers create sequels after sequels every year then it seems to be mostly okay.

It is so weird how dismissive your are of ips when nearly every major third party, Nintendo , and Xbox rely on older ip. Sony pretty much also had some effective marketing using nostalgia for those launch trailers for the ps4.

You always add some extra stuff to things I never said. I'm pretty sure the majority of folk who bought mario kart never new that the game was quality but simply bought it off the name. Thankfully the game was quality so folks would continue having a positive view of those games in the future. You can say star fox all day long but Nintendo is still selling tons of games on many of their old ip. New ip games can of course come out, do well, and even break records but is also a bigger risk to the publisher since this is a new ip versus the already made install base for older games. We are pretty much going around in circles.
 
Last edited:

dano1

A Sheep
That's interesting that you wouldn't buy an Xbox for Call of Duty when you buy the game every year. Will you play COD on PC instead? Or just write it off entirely?

And funny that you would bring up socom as a replacement. I don't see much similarity between the two games. Socom feels closer to Ghost Recon to me. Surprised you wouldn't move to Battlefield instead.
Actually I’m more into battlefield but socom is more realistic and that’s what I prefer. COD is fun though
 
Last edited:

12Dannu123

Member
While Sony is considered the leader in traditional consoles, they are too far behind everywhere else. Right now they are very behind on game streaming and having a solid subscription service that can compete with Game Pass.

Microsoft is rumoured to allow people to stream purchased games on the Cloud and have the ability to stream their games on their own streaming stick this year. Compared to Sony, they don't even have PS5 support for their service and they are still capped at 5 million users, let alone being able to stream purchased games or have a solid subscription service that can compare to Game Pass and their IPs MS has purchased.

The reason is pretty clear on why MS is purchasing publishers at a aggressive rate, this is to ensure Game Pass is self sufficient and not totally reliant on third parties.

Sony has simply dropped the ball on long term strategic planning for the PS ecosystem.
 
Last edited:

Amiga

Member
Market testing and research for MP at Sony is just bad. Hardly anybody in charge gets it. it's like they gamble with projects and keep making bad bets like with those 2 games. and repeatedly losing the bets scared them.
Sony need people who "get" online MP to make decisions on projects. If they had decent people in charge of of MP investing they could have seen the potential in Warhawk, KZ and SOCOM and what went wrong and how to improve them instead of killing them.

Problem solved.
 
Top Bottom